Eleusinian mysteries, which were first instituted in Egypt, and which were designed to maintain the immortality of the soul and a future judgment after death, by the infernal deities Ceres and Bacchus. This supposition is founded on another romantic tale, which states that Rhampsinitus descended into the infernal regions, and played at dice with the goddess Ceres, and alternately won and lost. The Eleusinian mysteries, which were an allegory kept secret from the multitude in all ages, and of which nothing is known, passed from Egypt into Greece. Why they were kept secret, we are told by Synesius. "The ignorance of the mysteries," he says, "preserves their veneration for which reason they are entrusted only to the cover of the night." Clemens Alexandrinus, also, says, that the veil or mist through which things are only permitted to be seen renders the truths contained under it more venerable and majestic. The learned Varro, moreover, in a fragment of his book, "Of Religions," preserved by St. Augustin, relates, that there were many truths which it was inconvenient for the state to be generally known; and many things which, though false, it was expedient the people should believe; and that, therefore, the Greeks shut up their mysteries in the silence of their sacred enclosures.

How different from all this is the promulgation of the doctrines of the Bible among mankind. By a stated ministry, charged to declare the whole counsel of God, we are taught the precious truths contained therein; and, if the meaning of any passage appears hidden from sight, we are encouraged to ask of God, and he, by his Holy Spirit, will guide us all truth." Truly these are proofs of the Divine origin and authority of the Holy Scriptures.

"into

Till the reign of Rhampsinitus, Egypt was remarkable for its excellent laws, its strict justice, and moderation; but, according to Herodotus, in the two next reigns, oppression and cruelty usurped their place.

CHEOPS.

On the authority of the Egyptian priests, it is stated by Herodotus, that this prince was the builder of the first pyramid, and that he shut up the temples, and prohibited the national sacrifices. This it is not probable a native king would either desire or dare to do; and, therefore, the report may have been made, as is supposed by some, to conceal the disgrace of their former slavery and oppression under the shepherd kings, and

to enhance the power and grandeur of their native kings. It would appear, however, that Cheops disregarded justice, and bare an iron rule compared with his predecessors.

According to Dr. Hales, Cheops was the father of that princess of Egypt whom Solomon, king of Israel, married. See 1 Kings iii. 1. If such was the case, Cheops was a warlike prince; for it is recorded of him in the sacred writings, under the name of Pharaoh, that he took Gezer, and burned it with fire, and slew the Canaanites that dwelt in the city, and gave it for a present unto his daughter, Solomon's wife, 1 Kings ix. 16. It is not recorded how the king of Egypt came to be engaged in this undertaking: perhaps he had a quarrel of his own with the inhabitants of Gezer; or, his son-in-law, Solomon, who did not himself engage in any military undertaking, might have requested him to render him this service. By this king, also, Solomon was supplied with horses, chariots, etc., out of Egypt, 1 Kings x. 28, 29.

But it must not be forgotten, that the placing of Cheops, by Herodotus and chronologers, after the Trojan war, is considered by some to be a gross anachronism. Manetho places him among the earliest of the Pharaohs, under the name of Suphis, and the monuments would seem to testify that he is correct. Be this as it may, Cheops, it would appear, reigned fifty years, and was succeeded by

CEPHRENES,

his brother, who, by the same ancient writer, Herodotus, and on the same authority, the priests, is said to have built the second pyramid, and to have adopted the policy of his predecessor. Of this pyramid, Herodotus remarks, that this had no subterraneous chambers, nor any channel for the admission of the Nile, like the former, near which it stood; from which it would appear that the first was a water temple.

Most writers of ancient history, as stated in the article Sesostris, have identified that restless conqueror with the Sesac or Shishak* of Scripture; but Dr. Russel, in the third volume of his "Connexion," and Dr. Hales, in his "Analysis of Chronology," have shown that Sesostris lived anterior to this event. The latter writer, who identifies Cephrenes with Shishak,

The work Shishak means a hard drinker, and is equivalent to his other title, Bacchus, a bottle companion; titles which were considered by the ancients as very honourable. To be able to drink more wine than other men, was considered by them as part of the character of a hero.

says, "The reign of Cephrenes, so late as B.C. 1032, is corrected from a rectification of Syncellus's Catalogue, explained before. This date, combined with his long reign of fifty-six years, according to Herodotus, intimates, that he could be no other than the Sesac, or Shishak of Scripture, now, for the first time, determined in the present system of chronology, after having been so long misunderstood, from the days of Josephus to those of Marsham and Newton."

One circumstance, namely, that Herodotus did not identify Sesostris with Shishak, is greatly in favour of this conclusion; but there is a great degree of uncertainty in the identification of Cephrenes with Shishak, inasmuch as Manetho places him, like Cheops, among the earliest of the Pharaohs. Without, therefore, identifying Shishak with either Sesostris or Cephrenes, here may be presented to the reader what is found in the sacred page concerning that monarch, under his scripture name of

-SHISHAK.

It is said, 2 Chron. xii. 2-12, "And it came to pass, that in the fifth year of king Rehoboam Shishak king of Egypt came up against Jerusalem, because they had transgressed against the Lord, with twelve hundred chariots, and threescore thousand horsemen and the people were without number that came with him out of Egypt; the Lubims," (probably the Libyans,) "the Sukkiims, and the Ethiopians. And he took the fenced cities which pertained to Judah, and came to Jerusalem. Then came Shemaiah the prophet to Rehoboam, and to the princes of Judah, that were gathered together at Jerusalem because of Shishak, and said unto them, Thus saith the Lord, Ye have forsaken me, and therefore have I also left you in the hands of Shishak. Whereupon the princes of Israel and the king humbled themselves; and they said, The Lord is righteous. And when the Lord saw that they humbled themselves, the word of the Lord came to Shemaiah, saying, They have humbled themselves; therefore I will not destroy them, but I will grant them some deliverance; and my wrath shall not be poured out upon Jerusalem by the hand of Shishak. Nevertheless they shall be his servants; that they may know my service, and the service of the kingdoms of the countries. So Shishak king of Egypt came up against Jerusalem, and took away the treasures of the house of the Lord, and the treasures of the king's house; he took all he carried

away also the shields of gold which Solomon had made. Instead of which king Rehoboam made shields of brass, and committed them to the hands of the chief of the guard, that kept the entrance of the king's house. And when the king entered into the house of the Lord, the guard came and fetched them, and brought them again into the guard chamber. And when he humbled himself, the wrath of the Lord turned from him, that he would not destroy him altogether: and also in Judah things went well." See also 1 Kings xiv. 25-28.

It is thought by some, that the invasion of Judah by Shishak was at the instigation of Jeroboam, who had previously resided at the Egyptian monarch's court, and had married his daughter. It is probable, that this first king of Israel was immediately connected with the transaction; for the ten tribes over whom he reigned were in alliance with Shishak, and, at this date, in determined hostility towards the tribes of Judah and Benjamin, as appears from I Kings xii. The interest and security, therefore, of Jeroboam, seemed to require that the king of Judah, his rival, should be humbled by a foreign and superior power. The chastisement, however, as intimated by the sacred writer, came from the hands of the Almighty; and the narrative shows how jealous the Lord is of his own honour; how merciful he is to the repentant, and how kind in warning the creatures of his hands against straying from his fold. His design was, to restore Judah from the error of their ways; that effected, his anger ceased, and the Egyptians returned to their own land.

It may be mentioned, that the Shishak of Scripture is identified by Champollion and others with Sesonchis, according to Manetho, and Sheshonk, according to the Phonetic signs. The latter name, with the title, confirmed by Ammon, appears on one of the columns of the first grand peristyle in the palace of Karnac. Among the sculptured ornaments of this palace, the personage thus named is represented as dragging to the feet of his gods the chiefs of thirty conquered nations; and it is remarkable, that there is one whose distinguishing hieroglyphic inscription is equivalent in Phonetic value to Jouda-ha-melek, meaning the king of the Jews, or of Judah. The names of the kingdom of Judah, and of several towns on the Egyptian frontier of Judah, Megiddo, Beth-horon, etc., occur in the list of his conquests. It may be inferred, therefore, that the triumphant scene commemorates, among many others, that recorded in the sacred writings, and as such it is highly interesting.

MYCERINUS.

This monarch is represented as the son of Cheops, and, therefore, advanced in years when he ascended the throne. Mycerinus was reckoned the builder of the third pyramid, which is represented by Herodotus as superior to. the others in costliness of materials and excellence of workmanship, though inferior in size. But this structure could not possibly have been built within so short a period, which is a proof of the fallacy of the statements made by the priests of Egypt concerning the pyramids, and the monarchs during this period. Of Mycerinus they have reported that his character was the reverse of that of his father. So far from walking in his steps, he detested his conduct, and pursued opposite measures. He again opened the temples of the gods, restored the sacrifices, and did all that lay in his power to comfort his subjects, and make them forget their past miseries. He believed himself set over them for no other purpose but to exercise justice, and to administer to them the blessings of an equitable and peaceful administration. He heard their complaints, dried their tears, alleviated their misery, and considered himself the father of his people. This conduct procured for him the love and esteem of all his subjects; Egypt, it is said, resounded with his praises, and his name commanded veneration in distant lands.

This prudent and humane conduct did not exempt Mycerinus from calamity. Herodotus says, that his misfortunes commenced with the death of a beloved and only daughter, in whom his chief felicity consisted. He ordered extraordinary honours to be paid to her memory, which were continued in this historian's days; for he states, that in the city of Sais, exquisite odours were burned in the day time at the tomb of the princess, and that during the night a lamp was kept constantly burning. Her body is said to have been enclosed in a heifer, made of wood, and richly ornamented with gold.

After this, Mycerinus met with another calamity. He was informed by the oracle of Buto that his reign would continue but seven years, and upon complaining of this to the gods, and inquiring the reason why so long and prosperous a reign had been granted both to his uncle and father, who were equally cruel and impious, whilst his own, which he had endeavoured to render equitable and mild, should be so short and unhappy? he was answered, that these were the causes of it; it being the will of the gods to afflict Egypt during the space of one hun