The Pillar of Fire; or, Israel in Bondage

by J. H. Ingraham

APPENDIX.

A FEW WORDS TO THE EGYPTIAN STUDENT AND TO THE CRITIC.

There are necessary, perhaps, a few words to show that the author of the preceding book has not arbitrarily employed facts, and made use of traditions to suit a certain series of hypothetical events; but has been controlled strictly by authorities.

Scholars, versed in Egyptian archæology, will do the author justice in the plan and execution of his work; for minds, enriched with true erudition, upon the history of the land where his scenes are placed, will not only understand the difficulties which a writer has to contend with, but appreciate what he has done. Captious criticism will, of course hold itself wholly independent of facts; while hypercriticism must be suffered to show its quasi erudition. To fair and manly scholastic criticism, whether from theological scholars, or students in the "learning of the Egyptians," the work is open; and the author will be grateful to any judicious and respectable scholar who will kindly point out errors—proving them to be such.

The reader of Egyptian history is aware that but little reliance can be placed on the assigned length of periods, which furnish us with neither names nor facts, nor reliable monuments; because at this day we have no control over the fictions and errors of historians. To carry up to the first century of history a connected chain of authentic chronology is not yet possible.

We have given due credit to Manetho's statements, but have little confidence in many of his alleged facts, vouched as they are by Josephus and Herodotus. The late discoveries by Champollion le Jeune, Bunsen, Dr. Young, Lepsius, and others, with the revelations of actual historical inscriptions, have rendered the books of these hitherto universally quoted writers nearly obsolete. The traveller of to-day, who visits Egypt and can read hieroglyph, knows more of the history of Egypt than Manetho, Josephus, Diodorus, Herodotus, Strabo, or any of the cis-Pharaoic writers thereupon. As revelations are made from time to time, we have to change our dates, revise our "facts," and reform our whole history of the past of Egypt, both in its chronology and dynasties. In this work we have availed ourselves of the latest discoveries, down to those of last year, by the celebrated French savant, M. Auguste Mariette, whose discoveries have, until recently been made known only to the Academy of Sciences, France, in modest and unpretending reports of his scientific researches.

As we have very thoroughly gone over the ground of Egyptian archæology, both in its scientific and theological relations, we are aware from what quarters attacks will be likely to come, if this book is honored by the notice of scholars. But to such, we beg leave to say that, while we may not have formed our work on the plan their views would have suggested, we have done so on a plan which is defensible; for there are several schools of interpretation of chronology and dynasty; and as we have chosen to abide by one of them alone, we are ready to defend our position, so far as may be necessary to prove that we are not ignorant of the subject we have attempted to illustrate.

The impartial scholar will see that we have endeavored to combine the different, and often conflicting statements and opinions of the mythology of Egypt, and to present a system which should represent the belief of the Egyptian people at the time; and out of confusion to create order.

In writing a book, the time of which is placed anterior to the language in which it is written, and even to the Greek and Roman, there is of necessity the use of terms, which in one sense are anachronisms, unless one actually makes use of the vernacular of the Egyptians. For instance, the Greek form of names of gods and men, is often adopted instead of the Misric, the use of which would be unintelligible pedantry: therefore, Apollo, Hercules, Venus, Isis, and Mars, are often written in our pages instead of the Egyptian names.