ity of writers, after
fixing the date at which Dynasty III. closed by means of the synchronisms
and certain of the later chronological references, have accepted the
figures of the Kings' List for the earlier dynasties, ignoring their
apparent inconsistencies with the system of Berossus and with the
chronology of Nabonidus. Others have attempted to reconcile the conflicting
data by emendations of the figures and other ingenious devices. This will
explain the fact that while the difference between the earliest and latest
dates suggested for the close of Dynasty III. is only 144 years, the
difference between the earliest and latest dates suggested for the
beginning of Dynasty I. is no less than 622 years. A comparison of the
principal schemes of chronology that have been propounded may be made by
means of the preceding table. The first column gives the names of the
writers and the dates at which their schemes were published, while the
remaining columns give the dates they have suggested for Dynasties I., II.
and III. of the Kings' List.[6] The systems with the highest dates are
placed first in the list; where a writer has produced more than one system,
these are grouped together, the highest dates proposed by him determining
his place in the series.

Omitting that of Oppert, which to some extent stands in a category by
itself, the systems fall into three groups. The first group, comprising the
second to the sixth names, obtains its results by selecting the data on
which it relies and ignoring others. The second group, comprising the next
four names, attempts to reconcile the conflicting data by emending the
figures. The third group, consisting of the last two names, is
differentiated by its proposals with regard to Dynasty II. It will be noted
that the first group has obtained higher dates than the second, and the
second group higher dates on the whole than the third.

Oppert's system[7] represents the earliest dates that have been suggested.
He accepted the figures of the Kings' List and claimed that he reconciled
them with the figures of Berossus, though he ignored the later
chronological notices. But there is no evidence for his "cyclic date" of
2517 B.C., on which his system depended, and there is little doubt that the
beginning of the historical period of Berossus is to be set, not in 2506
B.C., but in 2232 B.C. The two systems of Sayce,[8] that of Rogers,[9] the
three systems of Winckler,[10] both those of Delitzsch,