In the British Museum will be found tablets, stelae, portraits, and sculptured remnants from Egypt which have been derived from those unsettled times. In the Egyptian collection of the British Museum, the exhibit numbered 1358 contains a portrait of Hophra. There are also a number of scarabs in Table Case “B” in the Fourth Egyptian Room, and a fragmentary sistrum in the Fifth Egyptian Room, all of which bear the name of Hophra and authenticate his record. Thus we have seen in a brief but accurate recapitulation of generations and centuries of history that dead men do tell tales! We have Hophra’s record together with the annalistic tablet of Amasis to aid us in our understanding of these stirring days. Added to that, the record of Nebuchadnezzar brings additional confirmation of the thesis that is maintained in this brief work. _The evidence of archeology as it bears upon the text of God’s Word is final and complete wherever men have delved into the records of those days._ It may not be exactly what was in the mind of the Lord Jesus Christ when He uttered the words, but we can certainly apply to the generation in which we live, His striking statement: “If men should hold their tongues, the very stones would cry out!” And if _living_ men will not speak the truth concerning the finality of the Bible—_dead men must!_ CHAPTER XI Vindication of Daniel Nowhere in all this long and profitable study has archeology more perfectly and thoroughly vindicated the accuracy of the Scripture than in those portions of the disputed record that are found in the Book of Daniel. A great deal remains to be discovered at Nineveh and Babylon, and it is highly probable that the excavations to the present hour have but scraped the surface of the marvelous treasure that remains to be uncovered. It is a happy circumstance, however, that in our present incomplete but numerous sources, a great deal of information has been brought to light in vindication of the prophet Daniel. In the heyday of its brief popularity, the school of higher criticism pounced with great glee on the alleged inaccuracies and historical errors in the Book of Daniel. The general argument against the integrity of this writing may be summed up in a simple resumé. In the Book of Daniel, there are supposed to be a number of outstanding philological anachronisms. The school of higher criticism, in its weird procedure, made great capital of the presumed cultural development of the people with whom the record dealt.