away with the more recent rights of their rivals. The revolt of the Theban princes put an end to the IXth dynasty, and, although supported by the feudal powers of Central and Northern Egypt, and more especially by the lords of the Terebinth nome, who viewed the sudden prosperity of the Thebans with a very evil eye, the Xth dynasty did not succeed in bringing them back to their allegiance.** * In the “Hall of Ancestors” the title of “Horus” is attributed to several Antûfs and Monthotpûs bearing the cartouche. This was probably the compiler’s ingenious device for marking the subordinate position of these personages as compared with that of the Heracleopolitan Pharaohs, who alone among their contemporaries had a right to be placed on such official lists, even when those lists were compiled under the great Theban dynasties. The place in the XIth dynasty of princes bearing the title of “Horus” was first determined by E. de Rougé. ** The history of the house of Thebes was restored at the same time as that of the Heracleopolitan dynasties, by Maspero, in the _Revue Critique_, 1889, vol. ii. p. 220. The difficulty arising from the number of the Theban kings according to Manetho, considered in connection with the forty-three years which made the total duration of the dynasty, has been solved by Barucchi, _Discord critici sojpra la Cronologia Egizia_, pp. 131-134. These forty-three years represent the length of time that the Theban dynasty reigned alone, and which are ascribed to it in the Royal Canon; but the number of its kings includes, besides the recognized Pharaohs of the line, those princes who were contemporary with the Heracleopolitan rulers and are officially reckoned as forming the Xth dynasty. The family which held the fief of Siût when the war broke out, had ruled there for three generations. Its first appearance on the scene of history coincided with the accession of Akhthoës, and its elevation was probably the reward of services rendered by its chief to the head of the Heracleopolitan family.* * By ascribing to the princes of Siut an average reign equal to that of the Pharaohs, and admitting with Lepsius that the IXth dynasty consisted of four or five kings, the accession of the first of these princes would practically coincide with the reign of Akhthoës. The name of Khîti, borne by two members of this little local dynasty, may have been given in memory of the Pharaoh Khiti Miribrî; there was also a second Khîti among the Heracleopolitan sovereigns, and one of the Khîtis of Siut may have been his contemporary. The family claimed a long descent, and said of itself that it was “an ancient litter”; but the higher rank and power of “prince” --hiqû--it owed to Khîti I. [Miribri?--Ed.] or some other king of the Heracleo-politian line.