To gods and demigods, men succeeded as rulers or kings in Egypt, of whom Manetho has left us thirty dynasties or principalities. This Manetho was an Egyptian high priest, and keeper of the sacred archives of Egypt, and had been instructed in the Grecian learning: he wrote a history of Egypt, which he pretended to have extracted from the writings of Mercurius, and other ancient memoirs, preserved in the archives of the Egyptian temples. He drew up this history under the reign, and at the command of Ptolemy Philadelphus. If his thirty dynasties are allowed to be successive, they make up a series of time, of more than five thousand three hundred years, to the reign of Alexander the Great; but this is a manifest forgery. Besides, we find in Eratosthenes,(401) who was invited to Alexandria by Ptolemy Euergetes, a catalogue of thirty-eight kings of Thebes, all different from those of Manetho. The clearing up of these difficulties has put the learned to a great deal of trouble and labour. The most effectual way to reconcile such contradictions, is to suppose, with almost all the modern writers upon this subject, that the kings of these different dynasties did not reign successively after one another, but many of them at the same time, and in different countries of Egypt. There were in Egypt four principal dynasties, that of Thebes, of Thin, of Memphis, and of Tanis. I shall not here give my readers a list of the kings who have reigned in Egypt, of most of whom we have only the names transmitted to us. I shall only take notice of what seems to me most proper, to give youth the necessary light into this part of history, for whose sake principally I engaged in this undertaking; and I shall confine myself chiefly to the memoirs left us by Herodotus and Diodorus Siculus, concerning the Egyptian kings, without even scrupulously preserving the exactness of succession, at least in the early part of the monarchy, which is very obscure; and without pretending to reconcile these two historians. Their design, especially that of Herodotus, was not to lay before us an exact series of the kings of Egypt, but only to point out those princes whose history appeared to them most important and instructive. I shall follow the same plan, and hope to be forgiven, for not having involved either myself or my readers in a labyrinth of almost inextricable difficulties, from which the most able can scarce disengage themselves, when they pretend to follow the series of history, and reduce it to fixed and certain dates. The curious may consult the learned pieces,(402) in which this subject is treated in all its extent. I am to premise, that Herodotus, upon the credit of the Egyptian priests, whom he had consulted, gives us a great number of oracles and singular incidents, all which, though he relates them as so many facts, the judicious reader will easily discover to be what they really are—I mean, fictions.