125-6 And 130-2
egypt egyptian king time dynasty reign country cairo called egyptians
125-6 and 130-2 of the same volume.
degenerates when removed into a city or a cultivated tract, that the former commonly becomes mangy, and the latter experiences a physical and moral degradation. The Egyptian camel is of the one-humped kind, which has been erroneously called the dromedary, whereas the dromedary is merely a swift camel standing in the same relation to the ordinary camel that our saddle-horse does to our cart-horse. Camel's flesh is for the most part eaten only by the peasants and the Arabs of the desert ; by the Copts it is considered unlawful food.
It is very remarkable that no representation of the camel has been found in the scnlptures and paintings of the Egyptian monuments, among the very numerous figures of the animals of Egypt both tame and wild, and of those brought from foreign lands as presents. It does not appear to have been introduced into other African countries until after the Christia.n F.ra, (comp. Desmoulins, Hem. lu a l'Instilut, 28 Juin 1823); but it was known to the Egyp-tians, although it is by no means certain that it was one of their domestic beasts. Two passages in the Bible which speak of camels in the possession of Pharaohs (Gen. xii. 16 ; Ex. ix. 3) refer to the time at which foreign tribes had been settled in Egypt ; and perhaps the camel was peculiarly the animal of one or all of those tribes, and, as they were hated by the Egyptians, it may have been omitted in the representations of the monuments.
To modern Egypt the camel is very- valuable, since the traffic with Syria, Arabia, Western Africa, and Ethiopia is to a great extent carried on by caravans. But the ancient Egyptians appear to have derived their wealth more from tributary presents than from commerce, to have allowed. their land commerce to be much in the hands of foreign merchants, like those who brought Joseph into Egypt, and to have left even their sea commerce partly a.t least to foreign ers.
The horse is not known to have ben] used in Egypt be-fore the time of the Empire. Thenceforward the horses of Egypt were famous, and the armies of the Pharaohs were noted for their war-chariots. From Egypt, Solomon, and in his time the kings of the Hittites and the kings of Syria, had horses and chariots (1 K. x. 28, 29). And long after, when first the kingdom of Israel and then that of Judah endeavoured to throw off' the yoke of tbe great kings of the East, and made alliance with Egypt, they put their trust in Pharaoh's horses (Isa.. xxxi. I). In the representations of battles fought by the kings of the Empire we see no Egyptian cavalry, but only chariots, called " horse" in the inscriptions. At later times they may have had cavalry, properly- speaking, of their own, and perhaps at all times among the mercenary or auxiliary forces.
In the present day the horses of Egypt are of a very indifferent breed, and the best that one sees in that country have been brought from Arabia and Sy-ria, but these are seldom of great excellence. It is indeed surprising to find few really good horses in a country bordering on Arabia; and not many years ago this was still more remark-able, though not during the existence of the Alemlooks. The finest Arabs, however, are kept in the background by- their possessors, partly for fear of the " evil eye," and partly, in the case of all but the highest dignitaries, to avoid their forcible seizure by those of greater rank and power.
The Egyptian ass holds a middle place between that of Great Britain and the wild ass, which is more swift of foot than the horse. It is tall and handsome, docile, and having excellent paces, particularly a (Flick and easy amble. Thus it is well suited to the narrow streets of the towns of Egypt, and is therefore commonly used for riding by persons of the middle and lower classes. The mules are handsome, but noted fur vice, and for not being sure-footed.
The cattle are short-horned, rather small, and, as of old, vcry beautiful, speaking artistically. They are ex-ceedingly quiet in disposition, and much valued for agri-cultural labour by the people, who therefore very rarely slaughter them for meat, and then only for the Franks. Buffaloes uf an uncouth appearance and of a dark slaty colour, strikingly- contrasting with the neat cattle, abound in Egypt. 1Vhen voyaging on the Nile, one often sees them standing or lying in the river by herds. They are very docile, and the little children of the villagers often ride them to or from the river. They are sometimes slaughtered, but theil flesh is tough and coarse. Sheep (of which the greatet number are black) and goats are abundant in Egypt, and mutton is the ordinary butcher's meat. Swine are very rarely kept, and then almost wholly for the Franks, the Copts generally abstaining from eating their meat. It appears that the ancient Egyptians, though not forbidden this flesh, rarely ate it, perhaps because it is extremely unwholesome in a, hot The Muslims consider dogs unclean, and therefore those of Cairo and most of the towns are half-wild and without masters, living upon offal, and upon food thrown to them by hninane persons. In the villages, however, and particularly in the Thebas, their case is better, for they are kept as guards to protect live stock from thieves, and from hy-enas and other wild animals, which come from the deserts by night in quest of prey. The common dog of Egypt is generally of a sandy colour and strong, though not remarkable for courage ; but in Upper Egypt, about Thebes, there is a fierce breed of dogs with wiry hair, generally black, and much esteemed for courage by their masters. Cats are as numerous in Cairo as dogs, and many of them are as homeless. They are, however, liked by the natives, who assign as their reason that Mohammad was fond of cats. This may perhaps be regarded as a relic of the veneration in which they were held by the ancient Egyptians. It is not a little curious, that there is at Cairo a royal foundation for the support of destitute cats. The author of this charity was the famous 3Iemlook sultan, Edh-Dhlthir Beybars, whose humane intentions have of late years been sadly neglected by the trustees.
The wolf, fox, jackal, and hyena chiefly inhabit the deserts and waste places of Egypt, and lurk iu the ancient tombs and deserted quarries. The wild cat is also found in that country, though it is not COMMOD. The weasel abounds in Cairo, and is proverbial for its mischievous and revengeful disposition, and rats and mice are not among the lea,st of the plagues. The ichneumon, jerboa, hare,. and hyrax are likewise natives of Egypt or its deserts, and the tame rabbit is kept for food.
The beasts of the chase of the Egyptian deserts are antelopes of various kinds, and the wild ass, esteemed by the Arabs and Persians to be the prince of gatue, which is found in the southern part of the Eastern Desert. The most beautif.il of the antelopes is the gazelle, which is often tamed and kept in the large courts of the houses of Cairo. In Lower Egypt, principally in the desolate marshes near the Mediterranean, the wild boar is found and occasionally hunted. It is, however, a timid animal, so that the sport is not, like boar-huntiug elsewhere, exciting and dangerous.
From the representations in the tombs we see that in old times the hippopotamus was one of the wild beasts of the country. It has now retreated above the First Cataract, the southern boundary of Egypt. The croco-dile. has retreated in the same manner, and instead of being found throughout tbe Nile in Egypt, is rarely seen even in Lower Nubia. The name of the island of Elephantine, situate a little to the north of the First Cataract, bearing the same signification in hieroglyphics aa in Greek, makes it probable that at some remote period elephants were found in Upper Egypt, though now they are not seen north of Abyssinia.
In exploring the tombs and dark parts of the temples the traveller is annoyed by crowds of bats, which extinguish his candle, fly into his face, aud cling to his clothes, some-times rendering examination impossible without a lantern. One species is very large, but the conunon one is small.
Birds of prey are numerous in Egypt, and of many kinds. Of the most remarkable are three species of large naked-necked vultures - the Arabian, the sociable, and the fulvous ; as well as the smaller species called the aquiline vulture, The aquiline vulture has a, feathered neck, and when standing is by no means a handsome bird, but it is much to be admired when on the wing from the contrast of the black and white of its plumage, and the steady manner in which it soars in circles. Perhaps the bearded vulture breeds in the most lofty parts of the desolate moun-tains of the Eastern Desert; for when the French army n as in Egypt, one of these birds was killed. It is said to have been of extraordinary size, measuring more than 14 Parisian feet, or more than 15 English, from point to point of its expanded wings. Several species of eagles and falcons, two kinds of hawks, the common buzzard, and the moor-harrier live in Egypt, or visit that country, according as they are migratory, erratic, or sedentary. The connuon kite abounds at Cairo, and is one of the chief scavengers of the city, the others being the crow, the aquiliue vulture, the half-wild dog, and the cat. The ruins aud tombs of Egypt, and the modern houses, scarcely ever in perfect repair, shelter owls of various kinds.
The Spanish sparrow, which differs little from that of Britain, the water-wagtail, linnets, and larks are among the birds of Egypt. The kind of kingfisher which is commonly seen on the Nile, perched on some eminence, and darting suddenly to seize a, fish, is very inferior in its plumage, which is speckled, black and. white, to the common king-fisher, which is also occasionally seen. The beautiful hoopoe is aniong the least rare birds, and there are also three species of bee-eaters. The hoopoe may be often seen iu Cairo, where it is regarded with some reverence, as the bird of Solomon. Crows of the kind which we call the .Royston crow are very nutnerous at Cairo. Birds of the swallow tribe, the wood pecker, and the cuckoo are also known in Egypt.
In the metropolis, in the towns and villages, and in the fields, no bird is more corm:ton than the pigeon, tame or wild. Pigeon-fancying is a favourite aninsement of all classes at Cairo, and it: the villages the pigeon-houses are often loftier than the huts upon which they are raised. Tourists on the Nile inflict great loss on the poor peasantry by recklessly shooting these tame birds. Wild turtie-doves build. in the courts of the houses of the capital. These courts often serve for the purpose of poultry-yards, iu which fowls wander about without any care being taken of them, except that food is occasionally thrown to them. They are consequently meagre, and. produce very small eggs. Turkeys, ducks, aud geese are kept iP the same manner.
Quails migrate to Egypt in great numbers ; and sand-grouse, called by the natives kata, from their cry, are common in the deserts. There also tle Arabs, like the ancient Egyptians, hunt the ostrich. A red-legged partridge is likewise found in Egypt.
The islands of the Nile, the sand-banks which appear when the river is low, the lakes and marshes, the sheets of water caused by the inundation, and the mountains near the river, are the favourite resorts of many kinds of wading and of web-footed birds.
Of the waders the most interesting would be the sacred ibis of Egypt, if that bird be now found there. But it does not appear certain that only one species was anciently held sacred, and if so that this is the Ibis religiosa Cuvier now known in Egypt. The Egyptian plover is famous on ' account of the story, which modern observation has con-firmed, related by Herodotus respecting it and the croco-dile. Among the most common waders are the spur-winged plover, the snow-white egret, which has been erroneously called the ibis, and the pelican. The cormorant, too, is often ! seen, as are wild geese and clucks, both of several kinds.
Of the many reptiles the crocodile occupies the first place. It is seldom observed in the present day in Upper Egypt. Some years ago it was usual south of Asyoot to see several crocodiles basking in the sun in the beat of the day on a sand-bank; at the approach of a boat they would quickly plutwe into the stream. They rarely attack a hutnan beimr, 1;tit it is unwise to bathe in the river at places where ley are reputed to be fierce, and to bathe at any distance from a boat in the part of Upper Egypt where they are found. It is said that the erocodile's common mode of attacking a, person on shore, who is near the river's edge, is to approach stealthily and sweep him into the stream by a blow of his tail, the great weapon of all the lizard-tribe. The smaller saurians are found in great numbers : of these. a species of chameleon may be mentioned.
Serpents and snakes are amang the most common reptiles, and are of various kinds, including the deadly cerastes and cobra di capello. The house snakes, however, which are numerous at Cairo, are harmless.
Fishes abound in the Nile and in the Lake Menzeleh. The modern inhabitants of the country are partial to fish as food, but they say that only those. fishes which have scales are wholesome. The fishes of the Nile are generally insipid in comparison to those of the sea ; though a few of them, particularly the bultee (Labrus niloticus, Linn.), the kishr (Perm nilotica), and the binnee (Cyprinus Arted.), are of a delicate flavour.
One of the commonest insects is the dangerous scorpion. Its sting is very painful, and, if no remedy is applied, sometimes fatal, particularly if a person is stung in the heel.' Large spiders are abundant, including more than one species of solpuga, incorrectly called tarantulas by the Europeans, and believed by the natives to be very venomous, but this is most likely an error Egynt has ev-r beeu famous for what may be termed insect-plagues, but not to the extent that has been asserted by sonie modern travellers. Caution will enable one partially to escape the attacks of fleas and bugs., and altouether to avoid the more dreaded insect usually spoken of with them. Beetles of various kinds are found, including that which was anciently held sacred, the scarabaeus. Locusts are seldom. seen, and very rarely in large numbers. When, however, such is tlae case, they commit great havoc in the fields and gardens, retnindimr one of the account of the plague of locusts which preceded the Exodus, and the re-markable passage in the book of Joel (ii. 1-11) describing an invading army as a destructive flight of locusts. Some-thnes they merely cross the valley of Upper Egypt, and leave the mark of their passage in desolated fields, entirely stripped of verdure; and at other thnes they spread them-selves for days, or even weeks, over the cultivated lands, committing far more extensive mischief.
Bees are kept in Egypt, and their honey is much prized by the inhabitants, who usually eat it in a clarified state. It is inferior to that of England, and also to the famous Greek honey. Butterflies and moths of -many kinds are observed in the fields. There are plantations of mulberry trees in the eastern part of Lower Egypt, for the rearing of silk-wortns. The manufacture of silks was a Governmeut monopoly, but has lately ceased to be so. The silks of Egypt are generally iuferior to those of Syria and other Eastern countries, though some have been produced of great excellence. Among the other insects may be men-tioned the common fly, rightly deserving a place among the plagues of Egypt, as doe:: also the mosquito, which, how-ever, is not found throughout the country.
Ancient Inhabitants. - In the following remarks on the ancient Egyptians great assistance has been-derived from the valuable work of Sir Gardner Wilkinson on their Manners and Customs, which has made us better acquainted with them than we are with any other people of antiquity. From the representations of their monuments, and from the mummies which have been unrolled, we can form an accurate idea of the personal characteristics of the ancient Egyptians. In consequence of a misconception of a passage in Herodotus (ii. 104), and confused notions respecting the inhabitants of Africa, it has been often sup-posed that the Egyptians were very nearly allied to the negro race. A careful examination of the most distinct data in our possession has, however, produced a, far different result; and it is now acknowledged that they were more related to the Caucasian than to the negro type. It has also been shown that most of the modern inhabitants have preserved many of the. characteristics of their ancient pre-decessors, and that it is, therefore, erroneous to suppose that they are chiefly of Arab origin, although the intermix-tun of Arab blood has so much changed the national type that it would not be safe to describe the earlier people from the appearance of the present. Neverthe-less, one is often struck, among the remains of ancient monuments, by the similarity of an early representation to some one of the natives standing by, priding himself upon an Arab origin, and repudiating the reproach that he is of the race of Pharaoh.
Judging from the monuments ancl mummies, the coun-tenance of the ancient Egyptians was oval, and narrower in the case of the men than of the women. The forehead was small and somewhat retiring, but well-shaped ; the eyes large, long, and generally black ; the nose rather dong, and with a slight bridge; the mouth expressive, with rather full lips, and white and regular teeth; the chin stnall and round, and the cheek-bones a little prominent. The hair was long, full, crisp, somewhat harsh, and alrnost always black. The beard was worn in so artificial a mode that one cannot judge whether it was full or not. The skin of the men was dark brown ; that of the women varied from olive to pink flesh-colour in different persons. The colour of the women was natural, and the darker hue of the men the result of exposure to the sun, and the scantiness of their clothing explains why their faces were not darker than the rest of their bodies.
The dress of the ancient Egyptians did not much vary at different periods. Under Dynasty IV. it was, however, shnpler than under the Empire. As most monuments re-main of the Empire, the dress of the inhabitants at that time will be described, and this description will apply, in its main particulars, to the earlier and later times of their ancient history.
The men of all classes either hsd shaven heads, with skull-caps, or wore their own hair, or wigs, very full, and in numerous plaits or curls, falling to the shoulders, but sometimes much shorter and in the form of a bag; there is, indeed, reason to suppose that the practice nf sharing, the head was universal, except among the soldiers. All the hair of the face was also shaven, except in the cases of kings and great persons, who had a small formal beard, possibly artificial, beneath the chin.
The king was distinguished from his subjects by the richness of his apparel. His head-dress was sometimes his own hair, or the wig, alone; and at others he wore the high crowns of Upper and Lower Egypt, the former being a, kind of conical helmet, and the latter a short cap with a tall point behind, worn outside the other. He is also occasionally represented with another form of high cap. The figure of an asp, the emblem of royalty, is often tied just above his forehead, His beard was about three inches long, and one inch broad and deep, and formally plaited, The simplest royal dress was a kilt, usually reaching nearly to the knees, rather full in front, having a girdle above, from which hung before a broad band, richly ornamented, and. peculiar to the king, like the lion's tail (natural or artificial) which was attached to it behind, and reached nearly to the ground. Sometimes a large and full shirt was worn over the kilt, descending almost to the ankles, and having wide sleeves reaching to the elbow : this outer dress is occasionally simply a skirt. Both these dresses were usually of white linen, and the outer dress was apparently very fine and transparent,. Sandals were worn on the feet, and the ornaments were armlets, bracelets, both flat and broad, and deep necklaces.
The ordinary costume of men of the upper and middle classes was the &IMO as that of the king, the short kilt, with sometimes the long shirt or skirt of fine linen above it, tied in various forms. Their beards were very short, scarcely exceeding an inch in length, and of a formal square shape, and they wore the full hair or wig, or a skull-cap. They generally went barefoot, but sometimes used sandals. The priest was occasionally clad in a leopard's skin, either tied or thrown over the shoulder, or worn as a shirt, the fore-legs forming sleeves, Military personages are often represented with helmets, and sometimes with short coats or corslets of plate-mail. The royal princes were dis-tinguished by a side lock apparently curiously plaited.
The men of the lower class wore the kilt and girdle alone, or, especially when engaged in laborious work, went altogether naked. They shaved the head and face, and had no head-covering but the skull-cap. The soldiem had kilts of different kinds, and coats or eorslets of plate-mail, and either wore full hair or helmets.
The dress of the queen consisted of a tight skirt, descend-ing to the ankles, supported by shoulder-straps, and bound at the waist by a girdle, with long ends falling in front. Over this was usually worn a full shirt of fine linen, with wide sleeves reaching below the elbows, and having a broad skirt falling to the ground. It much re.sembles the upper dress of the king, or of men of the richer classes. The queen was distinguished by her head-dress, which was in the form of a vulture with outspread wings, the bird's head projecting over the forehead, and the wings falling on either side, while the tail extended behind. Sometimes the queen is also known by the royal asp above her forehead, and at other times she is represented with various forms of bead-dress. The queen also wore sandals. (For illus-trations of royal dress see COSTUME, V01, 71., p. 457-8.) The dress of ladies was the same as that of the queen, without the distinguishing ornaments, but they frequently appeared in the under garment or skirt alone. The women of the lower class wore that garment only, and some-times it was much shorter than that of the ladies, parti-cularly when they were engaged in manual labour. The women's hair was worn in the same manner as the men's, but it was of greater length, usually reaching about halfway from the shoulders to the waist, being rarely longer, and sometimes much shorter. It was ornainente■l in various ways, but the general form was always the same.
The children of all ranks were very simply dressed, when clad at all, though those of rich persons were some-times attired as their elders. Boys were distinguished by the side-lock, which the princes, as before mentioned, wore in a peculiar fashion.
Relig ion. - The credit which the Egyptian priests enjoyed in antiquity for a knowledge of philosophy led to the expectation among modern scholars that, when hieroglyphics were read, the world would recover a lost body of human speculation. The first results disappointed this expectation, but later studies have gone far to justify it. The state-ment of what those studies have achieved may be divided into the two main subjects - the teaching as to the gods and that as to man's duties and destinies, rites and ceremonies coming under both heads.
Had the Egyptians any idea of one God ? - in other words, is their religion a, complex structure raised upon a recognized monotheistic foundation I The E'gyptian religious writings are beld by ,11. de llouge to give an affirmative answer to this question. They speak of one supreme being, self-existent, sell-produeing, the creator of heaven and earth, called the double god or double being, as the parent of a second manifestation. From the idea of a supreme deity, at once father and mother, producing a second. form, probably originated a first triad like the triads of father, mother, and son frequent in Egyptian mythology. To the local divinities the attributes of th's supreme deity are given, as though they were mere personifications : that they were originally so is, however, not certain. Ita, the sun, is indeed spoken of as this supreme being, but this appears to have been a later phase of opinion. (De Rouge, " Etudes stir le Rituel Ftin6raire," Rev. .s., 356 seqq.) It was probably an attempt to substitute a popular materialistic belief for a, philosophical creed. A significant instance of this tendency is perhaps semi in the endeavour of a king of Dynasty XVIII. to abolish all wor-ship but that of the solar disk - sun-worship in its most material form.
A very ancient moral tract, the papyrus of Ptah lotep, composed under Dynasty Y., although a purely Egyptian work, mentioning Osiris and a divinity who may be a form of Osiris, yet speaks constantly of God as if the author had the idea of one God.' It also appears from one remarkablc,. fact that this idea prevailed in Egypt before the conversion of the nation to Christianity. The Copts took care to eliminate from their vocabulary all the words connected with the religion of their forefathers, substituting for them G'reek equi-valents. Their term for God is, however, not Greek but Egyptian, II01(`~+mn~, the hieroglyphic neter. They also used it for heathen objects of worship, god or goddess. These uses must therefore have been prevalent in the vulgar dialect when it was first written in Coptic.
Though it cannot peasonably he donbted that the Egyptians had a distinct idea of monotheism, this idea was mixed up with the basest polytheism. The double character which we perceive in the race and the lzuiguage, both partly Nigritian, partly Semitic, is equally evident in the religion. Every town in Egypt had its sacred annual, or fetish, and every town, its local divinities. As the aniinal worship was associated with higher ideas by the union of an animal's head with the body- of a man in the figures of divinities, so the local divinities were connected with the monotheistic idea by intermediate forms, principally identifying them with Ra, who thus was the generally received form of the notion of one god. Accord-ing to this view monotheism was not the parent of poly-theism, but in a later phase connected with it.
One great change affected the essential ideas of the Egyptian religion. For many centuries Seth, specially the divinity of Lower Egypt, who seems to have represented then, as certainly afterwards, the destructive power of nature, held a place in the Pantheon, although regarded as the adversary of Osiris and thus of mankind, whom, how-ever, Ile finally befriends. He seems thus to have a charac-ter of necessary evil. At length, after the Empire, he was expelled front the Pantheon. This may have been because the worship of Seth was repugnant to a reigning house of Asiatic origin, which might have held the Persim dualism which identified physical and moral evil. It may have been because Seth had been considered to be the divinity of the eastern neighbours of Egypt, and with their success and the fall of Egyptian supremacy- had come to be thought hostile to that country. If this were the cause, the kings who proscribed his worship could have had no relation to the nations supposed to reverence Seth. In effect the change identified physical and moral evil and destroyed the earlier philosophical notions on the subject, besides introducing some confusion into the Pantheon.
Herodotus speaks of orders of gods, Manetho of divine dynasties. The explanation is to be found in the worship at each town of a cycle of gods. This cycle is called " the society of the gods," or " the nine gods." M. de Roug6 does not admit the second rendering except as a plural of excellence (" Etudes," Rev. n.s., 237). The num-ber varies at different places and in different lists at the same place, but is always nearly or exactly nine. The Egyptians themselves explained this cycle as the self-development of Ra ; the other gods were in this view his attributes (De Rouge, 236, 237 ; Rif. xvii. 2, 3). Two forms of the cycle acquired the highest importance as repre-senting the systems of the learned men of -Memphis and Thebes, the successive great capitals of Egypt.' The two systems are thus given by Professor Lep-sins2 The views of Professor Lepsius on the origin and consti-tution of these systems, with such modifications as later researches have suggestel, may now be given. We first observe that the two systems are but variations, and may be treated as one. They consist of male divinities, most of whom are associated with goddesses. These goddesses hold an inferior place, and are not to be counted in reckon-ing the nmnber of the order, except perhaps Isis, whose importance is much greater than that of the others. An examination of the various forms of the two systems immediately suggests that they increased in course of time, Ptah and Amen, the chief gods of Memphis and Thebes, having been added for state reasonF, The order thus reduced consists of two groups, the group of and that of Osiris. The group of Ra is vs-holly of solar gods, the group of Osiris begins with Seb and ends with Hathor. Sebek then stands alone, but he is wanting in the older lists, and is only an addition of the Theban system.
The solar group consists of Ra, or else Mentn and Atm, and Shu. Mentn and Atmu are merely a division of Ra into his two chief phases, the rising and the setting sun, the sun of the upper and of the lower world. Both are solar divinities (Brugsch, Geogr. luselir., i. 254.) Situ, the solar light, is the son of Ra or of Mentu or Atmu ; Tefnet, the goddess associated with him, is the daughter of .Ra.
The Osiris group is not genealogically connected with the solar group. The central point of the group is found in Osiris, with his consort Isis and his opponent Seth. Seb and Nut are merely extensions of the gronp upwards. They are, however, spoken of as parents of the gods, showing that they represent the commencement of a series. Osiris, Isis, Seth, and Neplithys were usually considered their children, and Horns, the child of Osiris and Isis. Hathor ig associated with Horns, but her genealogical place is not clear. It is, however, certain that she is of the fainily of Osiris. The characteristics of this group are predominantly cosmic ; this is true of the myth of Osiris, and consequently of the whole group, and is especially evident in the eases of Osiris and Isis, Seth, and Seb and Nut.
How did these two groups come to be united in a single series'? Professor Lepsius argues that this was due to the influence of Thinis, the oldest Egyptian royal seat, from which the first historic king Menes came to Lower Egypt and founded Memphis. Thinis at a very early time merged into the more famous Abydos. Abydos was the great seat of the worship of Osiris, which spread all over Egypt, establishing itself in a remarkable manner at :Memphis. All the mysteries of the Egyptians and their whole doctrine of the future state attach themselves to this worship. Osiris was identified with the sun, and the union of the two groups was thus not forced. Both had indeed a common origin. Sun-worship was the primitive form of the Egyptian religion, perhaps even pre-Egyptian. The first development was the myth of Osiris, due to the importance of Thinis, just as the rise of Memphis put Ptah, an abstract idea, of intellectual power, even before Ra. So the rise of Thebes introduced Amen, who was identified in the form Amen-ra with lia, and as.an intellectual principle placed before the physical solar powers. This argument derives great weight from the relative position given to the two groups, the solar divinities coming first, and from the circumstance that the religious reform under Dynasty XVIII. suppressed everything but material sun-worship, as though this had been the primitive belief of Egypt.3 M. de Rouge, in his examination of the Egyptian Ritual, comes to a similar but more d efi n i te result in treating of the mythological elements of the important seventeenth chapter. He traces the solar gods to Heliopolis, and considers the Osiris myth as proba.bly derived from Abydos, and added at a later time.1 Professor Lepsius doe,s not admit the Heliopolite origin of the solar group, on account of the small political importance of Heliopolis. 1.'et tlie circumstance that the chief divinities of that city, which had the sacred name Pe-ra, the abode of Ra, were Atmu, Shu, and Tefnet xviii, 4, ap. Brugsch, Geogr. Inschr., i. 254, cf. 233) seems conclusive.2 Some account may now he given of these divinities in more than the simplest particulars, and many names in the Pantheon must be omitted altogether.
lta, the sun, is usually represented as a hawk-headeet man, occasionally as a nia33, in both cases generally bearing on his head the solar disk, round which the umus, symbolic of royal power, is sometimes coiled. IIis symbol is either the solar disk or the hawk. Ra had the most general worship of any Egyptian divinity, except Osiris. The worship of Osiris under his own name was more common than that of Ila under his, but this was in some degree compensated for by the union of Ea with. other gods besides solar ones, such as Amen, NUM, Sebek, forming the compound divinities Amen-ra, Num-ra, Sebek-ra (Lepsitis, .Erst. fieg. Gotterkreis), and by his beir.g the type of sovereignty-, so that each king was a Ea son of Ea. This importance of his worship was due to the adoption of R. as the leaaing representative of the supreme being,, from whom indeed he is sometimes 'indistinguishable in tuella-1ml, though' as already noticed this does. not seen) to have been the primitive opinion, for there are evidenc,es of his infeeiority to the supreme god and to Osiris (De Rouge, " Etudes," Rev. n.s. , 358). In the religions paintings he is the supreme being, carrying on in his course a constant warfare with and triumph over evil, repre-sented, by the great serpent Apap, a wholly evil being, not a divinity. His careen resembles that of Osiris, but with notable differences. Ita is purely solar. He is rarely associated with any consort, and if so associated his consort is a female Ea (Lepsius, Erst. (Atter-kreis). Ile is always victorious. Ile protects mankind, but has nothing in common with therm Osiris on the other hand is only solar because lie is tile beneficent power of nature. He is con-stantly associated with Isis. Ile has a life-long conflict with a maleficent power, his brother or S311 Seth, who is not wholly evil. Vanquisdied and killed he recovers his life and wins, but it is rather Horns his son who wins, and Horus, a sun-god, is the direct link with Ea in the Osiris fawdly. Osiris protects mankind because his life resembled theirs : if he did not live on earth, at 1.,!ast his tomb was shown there. At Heliopolis two animals saered to Ita were reverenced, the black bull Ilfnevis, sacred to Ea and Atinu, and the Phoenix (13ennu) sacred to Ea. Both are connected with Osiris, the bull by the worship of Apis at Heliopolis, the Pluenix as also representing Osiris (I3rugsch, Geogr. hisehr., i. 257, 258). In addition the sacred Persea-tree was reverenced at In the attempt -under Dynasty XVIII. to establish sun-worship in an original or ideal simplicity, the only representation is the solar disk with the miens entwined round it, and rays ending in human hands, one of which offers the symbol of life to the worshipper. The great sun-temple then founded contained no statue whatever (Lepsius, Erst. flag. Gotterkreis).
Merin' and Atinn may best be noticed together as merely tto phases of Ea, representing, as already stated, the rising and the setting sun, the sun of the upper and the lower world. Their twin-character is seen in the circumstance that Mentu was worshipped at Southern An (liermonthis) and Antra at Northern Au (Helio-polis, the On of the Bible). Mentn, or Mentu-ra, is represented as Ea with the tall plumes of Amen, Atunt in a human for3n. Both cannot be disting,uished from lta except that probably their attri-butes were more restricted, and while Moitu seems to be within identical with Ita, the human form of Atmu may perhaps hiut a relation to Osiris.3 Sim is light, and is a type of celestial force, for he is represented supporting the goddess of -heaven. de Rouge remarks that it is curious to find in this ancient cosmogony the principle of force identified with the luminous principle ("Etudes," /kr. 2,?5, 236). lIis fi,gure is human and he sometimes bears on his head the ostrich-feather, which, though the in itial of his name, mustherc have its symbolical sense of " truth." The relation of light and truth is not less remarkable than that of light and force. Tefnet, associated with Shu in the cycle, is represented with the head of a lioness. This is the most common compound form of Egyptian goddesses, as the hawk-headed cf the gods. Both are connected with solar worship. The lioness was probably chosen as the highest form of the family to which the luminous-eyed eat, one of the most popular of the sacred animals, belonged.
Seb stands at the head of the family of Osiris. Ile is repre-sented in human form like his consort Nut. They are called " father of the gods" and "bearer of the gods.'' Seb was the god of the earth (De Ronge, Ibid. 238), and Nut the goddess of heaven. Her name means the abyss, though curiously the primordial abyss is called, in ch. xvii. of the Ritual, nu, in the masculine (Ibid. 359).
Osiris, in Egyptian Hesiri, is usually represented as a mummy, wearing the royal cap of Upper Egypt, which may indicate the Thiuite origin of his worship, or that, as Horns and Seth were the special divinities of Upper and.Lower Egypt, so ho was particularly connected with the tipper country. His cap is usually flanked by ostrich plumes, which probably have a reference to Ma-t the goddess cf truth and justice. The myth of Osiris is the most interesting because the most human part of Egyptian mythology. It is im-possible to attempt a full account of it : the materials have yet to be gathered. We cannot accept the treatise Oil Isis and 08iTiS representing the older form of the myth. ln different documents we seem to trace its growth, and notably do we find in those later than Dyn. XXII. the change due to the altered theory of good and evil. Yet the general outlines are the same in what we may eason-ably hold to be the earliest documents. It is these that are, as far as possible, used here.
Osiris is essentially the good principle : hence his name lin-nefer, the good being, rather than the revealer of good ("gasper°, Histore Ancienne, 38). Like Ea he is the creator, and like him in perpetual warfare with evil. Ilis brother, or son, Typhon, Seth (Set), is his opponent. They are light and darkness, physical good and evil, the Nile and the desert, Egypt and the foreign land. Osiris is certainly moral good, Seth is to a certain extent moral evil. 'Throughout the Ritual they are in conflict for right and wrong, for the welfare and destruction of the human soul. In ch. XVII., Wiliell was preserved intact from a remote age, this conflict appears. Seth is, however, not there distinctly named as the opponent of Osiris, except in the glosses, which may be as old or (like the case of the Mislina and the Gemara) older than the. text, and once in the text he appears as joining with Horns his adversary in accomplishing the final condition of the deceased who had 3-eached the abode of happiness (ver. 35); and on the other hand, one gloss explains the executioner of souls to be Seth, but otherwise Horns the elder, brother of Osiris, who is but a variation of the younger Horns Nen 33). Yet the opposition of Osiris and Seth is a perpetual combat. Osiris is vanquished. He is cut in pieces and submerged in the wat....r. -Watched by his sisters, Isis his consort and Nuplithys the con-sort of Seth, he revives. Horns his son avenges him, and with the aid of Thoth, or reason, he destroys the power of Seth, but does not annihilate him. The myth is a picture of the daily life of the sun, combating darkness yet at last succumbing to it, to appear again in renewed splendour, as the young Hollis a solar god triumphs over Seth. It is also a picture of human life, its perpetual conflict and final seeming destination, to be restored in the new youth of a brighter existence. In this view suffering is not wholly evil, but has its beneficent aspect in the accomplishment of final good. 'There are two .vays of explaining the origin of this myth. Either we 3nay regard Osiris as the sun of the night, and so the protector of those who pass away into the rordni of shades, or WC may suppose that once taken as the type and ruler of mankind in the after slate, the hiddeu sun was naturally chosen to represent him, the sun being with the Egyptians the sonrce and governor of all life. Those who make the solar idea the first form of the myth have to explain its specially human aspect, and particularly why we see no such aspect in any deep sense in the case of Atilin the sun of the night in the group of solar divinities.
It will be easily seen how such a story took ho'd of the affections of the Egyptians. Osiris was the type of humanity, its struggles, its sufferings, its temporary defeat, and its final victory. The liv-ing, and still more the dead, were identificd with him. Under his name, without distinction of sex, they passed into the hidden place because the word tuin has the sense nian, and may be thus a play upon the name of the divinity (cf. De Rouge, " Etudes," 350, 351), but rt is more likely that Tam is here used as Osiris everywhere to indicate the divine quality of the justified.
(Amend), the divine world below (Ker-neter), to be protected by him in their conflict with Seth and his g-enii, and to have their final state determined by him as their judge. lt was to Osiris that the prayers and offerings fur the dead were made, and all sepulchral inscrip-tions, except those of the oldest period, are directly allressed to hint As Isis is a form of the female principle, Osii is, the sun and the Nile, WaS considered in one phase to be the male principle. The Osiris of Mendes wa.s the name of this form, which was inure especially by- the name of Mendes.
The three most famous of those more sacred animals which were worshipped as individuals, not as a class, were the bulls Apis and Mnevis and the Mendesian goat. Of these Apis and the Mendesian goat were connected with the worship of Osiris. Manetho says that all these animals were first reckoned among the gods under a very earlv Egyptian Pharaoh, Kaieelffis, in Egyptian Ka-kau, second king of lip" 11.' It is very characteristio of the Egyptian religion that the reverence for Osiris should have taken this grossly-material form.
The bull Apis, who hears in Egyptian the same name as the Nile, 1111pi, was worshipped at Memphis. Here M. Marlette discovered a series of the tombs of these bulls, with tablets recording, the reigns in which they were buried, and in several cases further exact par-ticulars of date, thus affording important chronological evidence. Apis was considered to be the living emblem of Osiris, and was thus connected with the sun and the Nile, and the chronological aspect of both explains his being also connected with the moon. On the death of an Apis, a successor was sought for and recognized by certain marks. He was then inaugurated and worshipped during his lifetime. (See Anis.) Sarapis, or Serapis, in Egyptian Hesiri-Hitpi, is the defunct Apis, who has become Osiris. The great extension of the worship cr Sarapis, after the importation of his statue by Ptolemy I., was merely a development of long existing Egyptian ideas. Hence the apid spread and great popularity of this worship. (See Smiaris.) Mendesian goat had no special name. He is called. the Ran:. Ile was considered an emblem of Ra and Shu as well as of Seb and Osiris, but probably he was chiefly sacred. to Osiris, and in his solar aspect, which would thus introduce the relation to the more markedly solar gods. The seat of his worship was Mendes in the eastern part of the Delta, where Dr Briigsch has discovered a very interesting stele of the reign of Ptolemy II., Philadelphns, giving the history of the finding and inauguration of a sacred ram, and of the honour paid to and to his temple. His worship was similar to that of Apis, but of a grosser form, inasmuch as the goat or rain was a symbol of the productive force of nature.= Isis, or Hes, represented as a woman bearing on her head her emblem the throne, or the solar disk and cow's horns, is the female form of Osiris. Unlike Rs, the Osiris family have ccusorts ; but no one is so distinctly as Isis a counterpart and of equal importance. Thorigh the place of Isis is not as significant as that of Osiris in tlic myth to which they belong, she is necessary to it, and this is pro-bably the reason why she attained an importance beyond the othet Egyptian goddesses except only Hathor, who is but another Isis.
Seth, the Egyptian Set, usually called by the Greeks Typhon, is represented with the head of a fabulous animal, having a pointed snout and high square ears. He was the brother or son3 and oppo-nent of Osiris, the divinity of the enemies of Egypt, and the chief of the powers which fought with the human soul in the after life. I lc certainly represents physical evil. It would be easy to account for his worship in Egypt were it not for his appearing as the enemy of gods as well as of men. There is indeed something illogical in his holding a place in the Pantheon, which gains consistency hy his expulsion, though the consequent confusion of morn] and physical evil was detrimental to ethical ideas. It is remarkable as showing the Egyptian notion of Seth while lie was still worshipped, that in the Tombs of the Kings at Thebes, those whose names are composed with his, Setee 1. and II., and Set-neklit, use instead the name of Osiris. This seems to have been sometimes done afterwards by a change in the inscriptions, but still at the thne when the tombs were first completed, and thus while the reverence of Seth; as is shown ny these royal names, was in full bloom (1,cpsins, Erst. "leg. 05lterkrcis). The subsequent change of opinion as to Seth, his identification with moral evil, and his consequent expulsion from the Pantheon have been already noticed. In consequence his figure and name are usually effaced on the monuments, and other gods take his place in the cycles in which he had a position. In later times Seth is the enemy of all good, feared and hated, but no longer reverenced. The date of the change is as yet undetermined. It has been usnally assigned to the Dribastite kings who composed Dyn. XXII. M. Marlette has discovered the anions fact that one of those kings, a hitherto unknown Osorkon, altered the figure of Seth in the legends of Ramses II. at Tanis to that of a Set-Ra (.4.1-usec Boulak, p. 273). Was this the beginning, of the change ?
Neplithys, or Nebti, the sister of Osiris and Isis, and conscit of Seth, does not, as far as the Egyptian documents tell its, share his character. It is rather the sister of Isis that she there appears, aiding her in her labours to recover and revive OSiliS. TIII1S like Isis she is a protector of the dead, and her figure and worship escaped the fate of those of Seth.
Horns, or Har, is in the cycles the son of Osiris and Isis. Time is also a Horns the elder, Hararis, liar-oer, brother of Osiris, and a, Horns the child, Harpocrates, Har-pe-khruti, son of Osiris and Isis, and two other forms, liar-Hut, the Ilorus of Hut or Apollmo-polis Magna, and Har-ein-akhu, " Horns in the horizon." Horns is generally- hawk-headed, and thus a solar ged connected with This connection is pelhaps strongest in the form Har-ein-akliu, worshipped at Heliopolis sometimes even as Ra-Idar-ein-aldin. The most interesting form is that of Horns as the son and avenger of Osiris. Osiris being identified with the sun of the night, Horns is naturally the sun of the day. From this identification arose the idea of an infant Horns as the rising sun. As Horns took the place of Osiris in the contest with Seth, lie becarne the elder Hems, to be on an equality with his opponent, who seems oftener the brother than the son of Osiris. Specially Horns is the ruler of Upper Egypt, and the typical kin," of Egypt as much as Rs. It is indeed so hard to distinguish gorns from Rs that it seems fin-possible to hold. any opinion but that they had their might in separate religions systems.
Hathor, Athos, or Hat-har, whose name means " the abode of Horns," is hard to distinguish from Isis.4 She was worshipped with Isis at Dendarali (Diimichen, Ba-uurkunde del Tempdanlagcm ron Dendera, 3, 4) and 1)1 Brugsch even supposes the local goddess to have been lsis-Hathor (Geogr. Inschr., i. 202, 203), but this he has not proved, for the representations and titles are different for the twc goddesses (cf. 1.c.). cow was sacred tc both Hathoi and Isis, and both wear the disk and cow's. horns. Hathor in the form of a cow plays an important part in Amenti (cf. Diimichen, ibid. 21; Mariette, Musee Boldaq, 118, 119). Curionsly she is more widely reverenced than even Isis. She is really the, female counter. part of Osiris. She was, like Min, worshipped throughout Egypt, and the great temple of Adfoo contains a list of oyez three hundred names of the goddess in hei local forms (Diimiehen, ibid. 20). Still more remarkably, in late times, the cow, here the symbol ot Hathor, not seldom takes the place of the name of Osiris as applied to women decea.sed : instead of taking the form of Osiris, they take that of Hathor (ibid. 21). It is characteristic of the Egyptian religion that this irregularity should occur, and we may well hesitate to attempt to define the place of Hathor in tlic Pantheon (Mariette, Boulaq, 118), though M. Diimichen has made this endeavorir in a very interesting passage, that could be accepted had lie given sufficient authority from the monuments, and not shown traces of the influence of Greek interpretation, besides too great a, tendency to rea.son on the negative evidence of the simple statements of the earlier nioninnents (Ibid. 20, scqq.).
Plitha, or Ptali, the Egyptian Ilephsestus, is the first to be noticed of the divinities introduced into the chief cycles after their formation. Ilis name is one of the Egyptian words which can be recognized letter for letter in Hebrew (f1;_19 " he opened, began," and (Piel) "carved "); and the sense is shnilar. Ptali is thus the divine architect (cf. Brugsch, Ifistoire, 2d ed., 21). He was the chief god of Memphis, worshipped under a human form, sometimes as a pigmy, supposed to be an embryo, He was the creative force, hut seemingly not as thesun. Thoughwhen connected with the local formof Osiris worshipped at Memphis under the name Sekeri-Hesiri, and then called. Ptah-Sekeri-Hesiri, he is sometiinos hawk-headed, this is rather with a reference to Horns than to Ra. Perhaps Professor lepsius's view that he is put before Ra in the Memphite form of the cycle as a.n abstract idea of intellectual power is the true one. lf so, it seems probable that the svorship of Ptah was of foreign origin.
Amnion, the Egyptian Amen, " the hidden," probably owed his importance to the greatness of Thebes, the chief Egyptian seat of his worship. He seems to derive his characteristics from his association with other gods. As Amen-ra lie takes the qualities of the san ; as Aincii-ra ba-mut-f, " the husband of his mother," he takes those of Min or Khein, the. productive principle. Rarely he has the raua-headed form tbat Greek notions would: lead us to expect.
Sebek, the crocodile-beaded god, seems to have held a similar place to Seth. There may have been a time when he was reverenced throngbout Egypt, but in the Grreco-Roman period he was a local divinity so disliked in most parts of Egypt that, as:tire:lily noticed, the Arsinoitc nome where he was worshipped does not appear in the geographical lists. llis sacred animal the crocodile was held in abhorrence and hunted wherever Sebek was not reverenced (ef. Brugsch, Hist., 2(1. ed., 106, 107).
Thoth, or Tauut, is the head of the second cycle in the two principal forms of the cycles. As the chief moon-god he thus takes an inferior place corresponding to that of Ra. Ile is generally represented as ibis-headed, and frequently bears the disk and crescent of the 'noon. He is the ,god of letters and of the reckoning of time, and thus sometimes bas solar attributes. The ibis and the eynocephalus were sacred to him. As the deity of wisdom he aids Horus in his conflict with Seth, and records the judg-ment of the decea.sed before Osiris. Ile appears in Phoenician mythology, though not at a period early enough for us to infer that his worship was not borrowed horn Egypt. Yet it is not impossible that here, as in the ease of Plitha, we have a trace of early Eastern influence. I t is at least remarkable that the. great seat of his worship, Hermopolis Magna, bearing in. ancient Egyptian the civil name Sesennu, also Pe-sesennu and Ila-sesentin, Eight, or the preaches the Semitic form (Brugsch, Geogr. Inschr., I. 219). Was the elmn,,oe in the Coptic numeral due to an ancient form of the name of this celebrated city the goddess of truth, succeeds Thoth in a fragment of the list of the dynasties of the gods in the Turin chronological papyms. She is characterized by the ostrich-feather, the emblem of truth, upon her head. She thus corresponds to Sim, holding the corre-sponding place. Thoth is called her husband (Lepsiug, Iientigsbiteh, taf. iii. 22), but she is not his consort at liermopolis (Brugsch, Geogr. In,sehr., i. 220). She is the daughter of the sun. Iler place in the myth of Osiris is very important, for it is in her hall, where she is called the Two Truths, that the deceased are judged.
Anubis, or Anup, jackal,headed, probably held in one system the next place to Ma-t. lie below's to the family of Osiris, being called the son of that divinity. Ire presided over mummification. ln the earliest sepulchral inscriptions the divinity addressed is Anubis, not Osiris. No reason has yet been discovered. for this. There can be little donbt that Osiris was always intended, and that the earliest inseliptions, for some reason connected with the Egyp-tian reticence as to this divinity, address Anubis.
The four genii of Amenti were inferior divinities connected with embalming. They were called Amset, Tiu-mut-f, and liebli-senuf. The vases found in Egyptian tombs which bear covers the forms of the heads of these genii were intended to contain the viscera of the mummy, as it was held to be of importance that every part of the body should be preserved.
The rest of the principal- Egyptian gods may now be noticed as far a.s possible in the order of their importance. It umst, however, be remembered, that we are likely to be misled by the abundant monuments of Upper Egypt, and the scantiness of those of Lower Egypt, and that therefore we cannot yet decide which were insig-nificant members of the Pantheon.
Chnuphis, or lilinum, represented with a ram's head, and to whom the ram was sacred, is the soul of the universe, and thus is spoken of as thc creator Planate, Musee Boulag, 113). lie was specially worshipped in Nubia, and at the First Cataract, with his consort Sati, the goddess of the inundation (Brugseh, Geogr. Ludt., i. 150, seqq). lie is closely connected with Amen.
The Egyptian Pau, the god of Panopolis, or Chemmis, wa.s or Khein, the productive principle, a form of Osiris. Ire was worshipped at Panopolis with a form of Isis as his consort (Brugseli, ibid., 212 segg.) lt is remarkable that he was connected with Amen at 'Thebes, for the myth of Amu and that of Osiris are singularly apart.
Mendes, or Ba-neb-tet, is merely a local form of Osiris, lord ot Mendes, connected with the worship of the sacred ram, or Mende-sian goat (Brugsch, ibid., 207, 203, 271, 272 ; Iiceords of the Past, viii. 91).
Neith, or Nit, worshipped at Sais, identified by the Greeks with Athena, is one of the few goddesses who held the first place iu local worship. From the idea of a supreme being., single and self-producing, arose that of a female aspect of this being. Thus Klima is called, as representing this tieing, " the father of fathers, the mother of mothers" (Marlette, Masee Boulaq, 113). This would suggest the personification of a female principle. This principle seems specially represented by the higher goddesses, like Neith, who is called the mother who bare the sun, the first born, but not begotten, born" (13rugsch, Geogr. laschr., i. 217). She wears the crown of Lower Egypt, where she was principally worshipped.
Puldit, or &I.:het, and Bast, are two forms of one goddess diffi-cult to distinguish. They are both usually lioness-headed, though sometimes they have the head of the eat, their sacred animal. Paklit was worshipped at :Memphis as the consort of. Naha ; Bast seems to have held a place at her city Bubastis like that of Nei:it at Sais. The monuments identify Hathor with Bast, mid Isis with both Paklit and Bast, Hathor being called " Lady of Bubastis," while Isis is spoken of as " bringing misfortune as the goddess Pakht, bringing peace as the goddess Bast" (Champ., Not. Nun. 192, ap. Brugseh, Geogr. i. 276). Paklit and Bast thus represent a double nature, not unlike the two prineiples in the Osiris ntyth (Mariette, Musee Boulog,1106 ; Brugseli, Geogr. Insehr., i. 275, 276). Pakht and Bast were identified with Artemis (Brugsch, ibid., 224, 275).
Mut, the "mother," consort of Amen-ra at Thebes, is, as her name implies, another embodiment of the female principle, though not in so important atonal as Neith, so far as our present know lsdge goes.
Kliuns, worshipped at Thebes as the son of Amen and Mut, is a lunar divinity wearing the disk end crescent of the moon, his hair being plaited in the side-lock of a child. Sometimes he is hawk-headed, and thus connected with the sun. As a divinity mainly lunar his inferior place is accounted for.
The goddess Suben, identified with Eileithyia or Lueino, was worshipped at the town Eilethyia. Site was especially the mother-goddess, and the goddess of southern Egypt; her symbol, that of maternity, was the vulture (Marlette, Musee Poulag, 121).
The goddess corresponding to Suben was Uati, or Buto, who was the protector of the north, and whose emblem was the urteus serpent.
Onuris, or Anher, was the local deity of the ancient city of Tbinis. Ilis functions are not clearly defined.
luiliotep, identified by the Greeks with tEseulapius, was the son of Ptah and Paklit, and with them formed the triad of blemphis. Ile is probably- the god of the sciences, and similar to Thoth (Mariette, ibid. 117, 118).
The Nile as a divinity bears the same name as the sacred Mem-phite bull, Mild, probably meaning " the concealed." Ile is represented as a man witlt pendent breasts, to indieate the fertility of the river. A hymn to the Nile by Enna, who flourished under bletiptalt, the successor of Itemises 1I. (Dyn. shows how completely even an inferior Egyptian diviiiity 'was ideetilied with the supreme god, and with the principal members of the Pantheon (Select Papyri, cxxxiv.-exxxix.; blaspero, i/ ....imtne Nil, a critical edition, and Records of the Past, iv. 105, son., an elegant translation by the Rev. F. C. Cook).
The Egyptian divinities were frequently associated in triads, temples being dedicated to one of these lesser cycles, consisting of father, mother, and child. The child is almost always a son. It is extremely difficult to make out a local triad in several CLUA'F., where there were two chief local diviuities, or where the chief divinity was a goddess. At Thebes the triad was Amen-ra, Mut, and Mums ; at Memphis, Ptali, Pant or Sekhet, and 1 inhotep at Ombos there were two triads, Sebek, Hathor, and nuns, Haruer, Ta.sen-nefert, and Pnebto-pkhrut ; the triad of Nubia and at Elepliantine was Num, Sati, and the goddess Ank-t ; at Apolline-polls Magna, liar-Hut, Ilat-har, and Ilar-iikhrut ; at Eatopolis, Num, Nebuut, and Ilar-pkhrut; at Ilernionthis, blunt, Ra-ta, and Har-pkItrut ; mid Osiris, Isis, and Horns, throughout Egypt. The third member of the triad always belongs to an inferior rank, and is sometimes a child-god (khrut), as will be observed in the thice eases iu which liar-pkhrut (Harpuerates) occurs, and the similar instance of Puebto-pkhrut. blueli of our knowledge of the Egyptian triads is founded on late documents of the Ptolemaic and Roman temples, and. it is possible that the idea may have not been as much developed in earlier times. The whole subject requires a careful investigation.
The Egyptian notions as to the cosmogony are too closely identified with mythology to be very clearly defined. It seems, however, that they held that the heavenly, aby ss was the abode of the supreine deity, who there produced the sun and the moon as well as the rest of the Pantheuti. Yet it is stated in one gloss in the Ritual t4t the abyss itself was the supreme deity. (cf. De Itouge, " Etudes," Rev. Arch., n.s., i. 235, seql.). The aspect of the passages of the Rituu/ in which these ideas are developed seems as if clue to the attempt to introduce philosophical ideas into the mythology, as though the Egyptians iiatl some notion of the origin of things independent of that mythology.
The worship of the Egyptian deities was public and plivate - that of the temples and that of the tombs. Every town had at least one temple dedicated to the chief divinity of the place, with certain associated gods, and usually, if not always, a living- symbol in the form of a sacred animal supposed ta be animated by the, chief local divinity. The services were conducted by priests, and on occasions by the king, and by scribes, who sometimes formed a college and lived at the temples, the various duties of which required the services of learned men. It is probable that the common people had a very small share in the religious services, the most important of which took place in the smaller inner chambers, which could never have admitted many worshippers. The outer conrts, and still more the great inclosures containing the whole group of temple-buildings, must, however, have been the chief public resort for business aud pleasure. There were no other public build-ings, or, apparently, market-places. Like the modern mosque, the temple, must have been the chief ceutre of the population.
The worship in the tombs was not local. It was always connected with Osiris or a divinity of the same group, and had the inteution of securing benefits for the deceased in the future state. It took place in the chapel of each tomb of the wealthy; and though properly the function of the family, whose members officiated, the inscriptious invite all passers-by, as they ascend or descend the Nile, overlooked by the sepulchral grottoes, to say a prayer for the welfare of the chief person there buried.
The sacrifices were of animals and vegetables, with liba-tions of wine, and burning of incense. Human sacrifice seems to have been practised in early periods. The monuments do not mention it, but Manetho speaks of its having been abolished, at least at one place, by AmiIsis, no doubt the first king of Dynasty XVIII. The reference is probably to some barbarous usage during the great war with the Shepherds,' The origin and destiny of man in the Egyptian religion is now known to us on the authority of its own documents, which in the main confirm what Greek writers had already stated on the subject. The aspect of the Egyptian teaching is either that of a simple theory, which was afterwards mythically interpreted, or of a union of such a theory with a superstition existing side by side with it. In the famous seventeenth chapter of the Ritual it is possible, as De Rouge has done with extraordinary skill, to extract from the text a consistent theory which the glosses confuse by- the mythological turn they give to the simple statements of the text. Notwithstanding this difficulty, it is suffi-ciently- clear that the Egyptians attributed. to the human soul a divine origiu, that they held that it was throughout life engaged in the warfare of good and evil, and that after life its final state was determined by judginent according to tts doings on earth. Those who were justified before Osiris passed into perpetual happiness, those who were condemned into perpetual misery. The justified tuok the name of Osiris, the judge, uuder which they indeed already appeared for judgment.
Ilad this plain outline been left unfilled by the priests, the Egyptians rnight have been credited with a lofty philosophy, Unfortunately, however, a thousand super-stitions took the place of the attempt to lead an honest life. In the tombs we find every one who could pay for a sculptured record characterized as justified, every mummy already an Osiris. How was this determined Possibly there was a council held, which decided that the deceased could be treated as one who was certain of future happiness. It is, however, raore probable that the learning certaiu prayers and incantations, the performance of ceremonies, and the whole process of embalming, together with the charms attached to the mummy, and prayers said by those who visited the tomb, were held to secure future happiness. In reading the Ritual we are struck by the small space given to man's duties as compared with that filled by incantations and charms. The human mind must have lost sight of the value of good and seized upon the multifarious equivalents which needed nothing to be done by way of either self-restraint from evil or active bene. volence, Thus as we look at the documents we see a noble idea lost in a crowd of superstitious fancies; as we look at the Egyptians as they lived, we trace the effect of the in-domitable good, and yet tind it alway-s greatly alloyed with evil. The Egyptian idea of the future state is the converse of that of Socrates. It is no little incident of human weakness, like the request to sacrifice a cock to JEsculapius, which injures but does not destroy a harmonious whole ; mere glimpse of truth is seen through thick mists peopled with the phantoms of the basest superstition.
In the long course of ages the Egyptian ideas as to the future state seem to have undergone changes, not in them-selves, but in the manner in which they were regarded. The vast labour expended on the Pyramids, and their solid situplicity, are in striking contrast with the elaborate religious representations of the tombs of the kings of Dynasties XIX. and XX. Su, too, the sculptures on the walls of the tombs of subjects of the earlier kings, representing the everyday life of duty and pleasure, give place to funereal and religious scenes in the later periods. These were fashions, but they show the changed mood of the national mind. It is only in a tablet of the ago of the Ptolemies that Greek ideas assert their pre-dominance in a touching lament addressed from the land of shades, which no longer speaks of active happiness, but in its place of purposeless oblivion (I3irch, " Two Tablets of the Ptolemaic Period," Arclurologia, xxxix. 22, 23).
Laws antl Government. - We are gladually gaining an in-sight into the Egyptian laws. This is principally due te Chabas, the third volume of whose Melanges .ggyptolu-gigues mainly consists of essays, nearly all by himself, on texts relative to the administra.tion of justice under the Pharaohs. His general results confirm the accuracy of what Diodorus Siculus and Plutarch state on the subject. It was to be expected that their evidence would have been good as to matters which could not have been easily mis-understood, and which must in the case of Diodorus have been personally observed. In this matter the two sets of authorities may fairly be combined.
The government of Egypt was monarchical. It was determined as early as the rule of Dynasty II., according to Manetho, that women could reign. Accordingly we find instances of queens regnant. Their rule, however, seems to have been disliked, and they are passed over in the lists made under Dynasty XIX., when, it may be ob-served, the royal family seems to have been affected by Shemite influences. The royal power can scarcely- have been despotic, although under certain kings it became so. It is sufficient to compare Assyrian and Babylonian with Egyptian history and documents to perceive a marked difference. The earliest monuments indicate a povverful local aristocracy holding hereditary functions. Those of the. Empire (Dynasties XVIII.–XX.) scarcely indicate any such class. Even the princes are no longer a royal clan, but the children of the reigning sovereign. The whole system of government rests. with the king, who appoint& all the functionaries and dismisses them at his pleasure. Hence arose a vast and corrupt bureaucracy, to which the decay- of Egypt may have been mainly- due. At all times the country was governed by nomarchs and lesser officers. In the earliest period these were local magnates whose office was at least sometimes hereditary, and whose interest it was to promote the welfare of their districts. Under the Empire governments seem to have been mere places of profit given by favour and held by force and corruption, according to the Turkish method.
The laws were administered by judges appointed by the king. It is certain that commissions for an occasion were thus formed. We do not know that there were judges ap-pointed for life ; but it is probable that such was the ease, as it must have been the duty of a class to be thoroughly acquainted with the written laws. A legal scribe may, however, have been attached to each commission.' All the particulars of each ease, though not necessarily submitted in writing, were recorded, and the decision was written. The process was conducted with great care, and the culprit examined on his oath. The punishments probably were not extrernelysevere. For murder, but not for manslaughter, death was the penalty. Adultery was severely- punished, perhaps rather by custom than by- law. Theft was rigor-ously prosecuted. For sacrilegious theft the criminal was punished with death. The laws relating to debt are not yet well known. They appear to have been complicated by a system of loans and pawning, and to have been sub. ject to modifications. Of the tenure of land we know little. The temple-lands seem to have been held in perpetuity, and this was probably the case with private domains in the earliest period (De Rouge, Six Prem. Dyn., 255, note 1).
Army. - We know little as yet of the organization of the Egyptian army, but much of its arms and mode of conduct-ing warfare. It consisted from very early times of foreigners as well as Egyptians. The Egyptian troops seem to have been a military caste, though not in the strictest sense, and to have had certain lands allotted to them. There were two main divisions of the army, - a chariot-force, in which each chariot contained an archer and a charioteer, and was drawu by two horses; and a force of foot-soldiers variously armed, chiefly heavy infantry, armed with shield and spear, sword, axe, or mace, and light infantry, with bow, and axe or falchion, as well as slingers. It may be noticed that flint-tipped arrows were used in the chase. We know nothing of the military manoeuvres, but it is evident that the troops were drilled to move in formations, and that the art of besieging was as well understood as by the Assyrians, in the mode of attacking the enemy's fort as well as in that of protecting the soldiers.
Manners and Customs. - The subjects of the walls of the Egyptian toinbs and the hieratic papyri tell us much of the domestic life of the ancient people. The education in the earliest age seerns to have been more manly and more simple than in that of the Empire, when the college of a temple or the miniature court of a great officer was the school instead of the estate of the landed proprietor. This system, however, gave almost his only- chance of advancement to a poor man's son, for the very highest posts were open to the successful scholar. (Cf. Brugsch Hist. 2d ed. 16, 17.) Circuincision was practised front the earliest times, but apparently not as a religious rite, aud not until the earlier years of childhood had passed. Of the education of girls there is no indication, but, as they afterwards shared the public life of men, and even held posts of importance in the priesthood, it could not have been neglected. It has not been proved that the Egyptians had any definite marriage law. We find, how-ever, that they married but one wife, who is termed the lady of the house, and shares with her husband the honours paid to the deceased. Concubinage was no doubt allowed, but it is seldom that we find any- trace of children more numerous than those of legitimate wives could be. The family of Ramses II. is an instance of an Oriental house-hold, and the fifty-two children of Baba, whose tomb is found at Eilethyia, may also be cited, though the term children may in this case include other descendants (of. Brugsch, ibid. 176, 177). Ordinarily the aspect of the family is that which it wears in civilized countrie::. The women were not secluded, and, if they did not take the place of those of republican Boum, it was due to faults of national character rather than the restraints of custom, There was no separation into castes, although many occupations were usually hereditary. As there was no noble caste, there was nothing to prevent the rise of naturally able persons but the growth of the official class, which gradually absorbed all power and closed the avenues to success. The corruption of this class has been remarkably shown by the researches into the Egyptian administration of justice by M. Chabas, who cites lists of robbers of tombs and houses containing the names of sciibes and priests, besides a higher grade of servants (Melanges,iii.i. 144, seqq.). There are other indications of the social condition of Egypt under the Empire in the complaints of the lower class against the brigandage to which they were subject on the part of persons who found means to interest the highest functionaries, and so escape merited punishment. At the same time it is to be remembered that they- hacl the right of direct appeal to the king (Bid. 173-216). This part of the picture of Egyptian life is strikingly like that of China, and the dislike of foreigners is consistent with the comparison. The lower class being uneducated, and for the most part very poor, was held in contempt by the higher, and this was especially the case with labourers and herdsmen. All handicrafts were considered unworthy of a gentleman, and even the sculptor and painter were not raised above this general level. The only occupations fit for the upper class were priestly, civil, and military, and the direction of architectural and other works which required scientific knowledge, not skill of hand. The servants were of a higher grade than the labourers : not so the slaves, who were generally captives taken in war.
The everyday- life of the ancient Egyptians is abundantly represented in the pictures of the tombs from the earliest monumental age to that of the Empire. The rich passed much of their time in hospitality, giving feasts at which the guests were entertained in various ways. The host and hostess sat together, as did other married people, and the other men and women generally were seated apart. The seats were single or double chairs, but many sat on the ground. Each feaster was decked with a necklace of flowers by the servants, and a, lotus-flower was bound to the head, on which was also placed a lump of ointment. Small tables were set before the guests, on which were piled meat, fruits, cakes, and other food, and wine-cups were carried round. Before the repast, hired musicians and (lancers entertained the company, and often this seems to have been the sole object of invitation.
These two kinds of entertainment are precisely what are customary at the present day in Egypt. Among the amuse-ments of the ancient Egyptians was witnessing the perfor-mance of various gymnastic feats. They had several games, one of which probably resembled draughts. Under the old kingdom the chief occupations of the rich seem to have been those of a country life, in its duties, the superintendence of Imsbandry, of the taking stock of flocks and herds, and of the shipment of produce, and the examination of fisheries, or again in seeing to the efficient work of the people of the estate who were engaged in any craft ; and the pleasures of country life filled up the .leisure. In ancient times Egypt had far more cover for wild fowl than now. Thus we see from the subjects of the tombs that the rich Egyptian was in the habit of goitp-r into the marshes in a canoe, generally with some of his cfnldren, to spear the hippopotamus, or more frequently to knock down birds with the curved throw-stick. In fovvling, a cat was sometimes used as a retriever. At other times he fished in his ponds, or shot or coursed. with hounds various animals of the antelope kind. Every rich man in the age of the Empire had a chariot, generally drawn by two horses, which he usually drove himself, standing up in it. The life of the ladies was not unlike that of the men, except that they only joined in the sports as spectators They seem. to have passed their time in household matters, in visiting, and in the shnplest country pleasures. Occasionally they rode in heavy- cars drawn by oxen. Their manners appear to have been indolent and luxurious. Among the lower orders the lighter work usually fell to the women. Both men and women led hard lives, havimr scanty clothing and poor food ; yet the genial climate, in ;hich the wants of the labourer must always have been few, rendered their condition not so painful as one might suppose.
LaJguage and Literature. - The lanomage of the people was the Egyptian, the later form of° which, after they had become Christians, is called Coptic. Comparative philology has not yet satisfactorily determined its place. There can be no doubt that it is related to the Semitic family, but it has not yet been proved to belong to it. The grammatical structure is distinctly- Semitic, and many roots are common to the Semitic languages. On the, other hand, the Egyptian has essential characteristics which detach it from this family. It is monosyllabic, and its monosyllabism is not that from which scholars have endeavoured to deduce Semitic, but rather snch as would belong to a decayed condition. This monosyllabism is like that of Syriac. Dr 13rugsch strongly a,ffirms the affinity of the Egyptian to the Indo-Germanie a,s well as the Semitic languages (Hist., 2 ed. 6), but the former rela.tion has to be proved. It has been supposed that the monosyllabism of the Egyptian is due to its having in part originated from a Nigritian source (Genesis of the Earth. and of _.41ctn, 2d ed. 255, seqq.). Certainly this is a characteristic of some Nigritian languages, and the want of any large agreement in the vocabulary would be sufficiently- explained by the changes that the languages of savage nations undergo from the absence of a literature. It can therefore scarcely yet be asserted with Dr Brugseh that the Egyptian has no analogy to the African languages (t.c.), by which, no doubt, he intends those which have no Semitic element. The problem will probably be solved either by a careful study of all the African languages which show traces of Semitic structure side by side with those that are without such traces, or by the discovery of the unknown element in Egyptian in the Akkadian or some other primitive language of Western Asia, which cannot be called Semitic in the recognized sense of the term. During its long history the language, underwent little change until it became Coptic. It had two dialects - those of Upper and Lower Egypt, (Brugsch, ibid.); and by degrees a vulgar dialect was formed which ultimately became the national language not long before the formation of Coptic. One curious innova-tion in the Egyptian language was the fashion under the Ramses family of introducing Seinitic words instead. of Egyptian ones. From the manner in which these words are spelt it is evident that the Egyptians at that time had no idea of a Semitic element in Egyptian, for they always treat them as foreign words and retain the long foreign forms. The chief change in Coptic was the introduction of many Greek words, especially to supply the place of religious terms eliminated from the vocabula,ry. The inscribed and written character of Egyptian was the hieroglyphic, a very complex system, which expressed ideas by symbols or by phonetic signs, syllabic and alphabetic, or else by a combination of the two methods. From this was formed the hieratic, a running hand, or common written form of the hieroglyphic, principally used for doemnents written on papyrns. Its oldest records are not equal in age to the earliest hieroglyphic inscriptions, but probably it is not much later iu origin. The demotic or enchorial writing is merely a form of hieratic used for the vulgar dialect, and employed for legal docnments from the time of Dyn. XXVI. downwards. The Coptic is written with the Greek alphabet, with the addition of six new letters and a ligature, these letters being taken from the demotic to ex-press sounds unknown to Greek. For further details see the article HIEROGLYPHICS.
Much ancient Egyptian literature has come down to us, and it must be allowed that from a literary point of view it has disappointed expectation. What it tells is full of interest, but the mode of telling rarely rises to the dignity of style. So unsystematic is this literature that it has not given us the connected history' of a single reign, or a really' intelligible account of a single campaign. The religious documents are still less orderly than the historical. It is only by- the severe work of some of the ablest critics during the last fifty years that from those disjointed materials a consistent whole has been constructed.
The most important religious work is the I'vneral Ritual, or Book of the Dead, a collection of prayers of a magical character referring to the future condition of the disembodied soul, which has already been noticed. It has been published by- Dr Lepsius (Das Todtenbuch der Aegypter) and M. de ltoug4 (Rituel Funeraire), and translated by Dr Birch (Bunsen's _Egypt's Place, v.). De Rouge, in his most interesting papers in the Revue Arckeologique (n.s.), has done the utmost that a splendid critical faculty and an unusual mastery- of language could achieve to present parts of the work in the most favourable form. Still it must remain a inarvel of confusion and poverty of thought. Similar to the Ritual is the Book of the Lower Hemisphere. The other religious works and inscriptions are of a wider range. The temple inscriptions indeed are singularly stilted and wanting in variety ; but the papyri contain some hymns which are of a finer style, particularly that to the Nile by Enna, translated by Canon Cook (Records of the Past, iv. 105), and that to Ra-Harmachis, translated by- Dr Lushington (ibid. viii. 129) and Professor Maspero (Ilistoire Ancienne, 32, seqq.). The moral writings have a higher quality than the religious, if we may judge from their scanty remains. The historical writings fall into two classes according to their official or unofficial character. Those that are official present the worst form of the panegyrical style, the othe,rs are simple though wanting in method. The letters are of more interest, from their lively portrayal of ancient Egyptian manners. In works of fiction there is a greater degree of skill, and in the " Tale of Setnau. " (Records y the Past, iv.) we oven find touches of humour. E'gyptian literature is not without its merits, but it has that want of lofty ideas and of charm which is characteristic of the litera• ture of nations which have written very much and have had no other means of addressing mankind.
Science. - Fresh information is being constantly acquired as to the knowledge of science possessed by the ancient Egyptians. Their progress in astronomy is evident from their observations, and still more from the cycles they formed for the adjustment of different reckonings of time. Their knowledge of geometry is attested by their architecture, and by- a docutnent on the lands of the temple of Adfoo ; and the annual inundation must have made careful surveys and records necessary for the preservation of landed property. Very great mechanical skill must have been needed to move the vast blocks used in their buildings, sometimes for very long distances, in part by difficult land-routes, and then to place them in position. Considering the want of iron, and of any but the very simplest mechanical appliances, the achievements of the Egyptian architects are an enigma to modern science (Brugsch, 2c1 ed. 52). Chemistry and metallurgy had also made great progress. The hardening of the bronze tools with which they ent granite is a, proof of this, and the manner in which Moses destroyed the golden calf is another evidence. Medicine and surgery were much studied, and the Egyptians were in those sciences only- inferior to the Greeks.
Art.y. - Of the arts architecture claims the first place, sculpture and painting being subservient to it among the Egyptians. Temples were not built to contain statues, but statues were set up to adorn temples, of which they were a part, and the walls were covered with sculptures and paintings which had a decorative purpose. The group of these arts may therefore be considered as a whole, and thus the principle they expressed may be best discovered. This principle seems not to ha,ve been accidental, but a deliberate choice. The country and climate afforded the best means of syinbolizing the leading idea of the Egyptian religion in the material forms of art. Life after death was that idea, and it found expression in the construction of tombs as lasting as the rocks on which they rested. The pyramid is the first form of Egyptian art, and modifications of its form, in truncated pyramids, are seen in the main outline,s of all later edifices or excavations. The decora-tions were subordinated to the idea of commemoration, and thus every building was at once religious and historical in its purpose. To this the Egyptian monuments owe a reserved grandeur that is not affected by the symmetrical qualities of hieratic art nor by the use of strongly contrasted colours. The art is always dignified, and the, colours, being seen either in strong sunlight outside the monuments, or in dim twilight within them, are never glaring. The effect is exactly what was intended, and would probably not have been produced had the art been more advanced, In the whole range of ancient art Egyptian may take its place next after Greek. indeed in some instances it excels Greek, as when in animal forms tbe natural is subordi-nated to the ideal, Ile lions from Gebel Barkal, pre-sented by the fourth duke of Northumberland to the -British Museum, are probably- the finest examples of the idealization of animal forms that any age has produced.
From these observations we may form some idea of the character of the ancient Egyptians. They were religious, but superstitious ; brave without cruelty, but tyrannical ; hospitable, but not to strangers. In dress they were plain, but luxurious in their ornaments ; simple in their food, but given to excess in wine. With respect for family ties, they were careless in their morals. The women enjoyed great freedom, yet their character does not seem to have been higher than it is among their descendants, subject to the lowering influence of the hareem seclusion. Though the chief object of every man's life was the construction of his tomb, and the most costly- personal event was the funeral, the ).7,gyptians were singularly mirthful, delighting in music and the dauce, and so given to caricature that even in the representation of a funeral ceremony the artist cannot omit a ludicrous incident. The double origin of the race seems as apparent here as in their phvsical type and their religion. The generous qualities of the Simmite are being perpetually perverted by the inferior impulses of the Nigritian ; and again the bright elements of the Nigritian character are strangely darkened by the shadow of the gloomy tendency of the Shernite,.
The industrial arts were carried to a high degree of excellence by the ancient Egyptians. In weaving and all the processes connected with the manufacture of linen they have never been surpassf.,,d. Their pottery was excellent in quality- and suitable to its variou.s purposes, and their glass but slightly inferior to that of the Greeks. In the making of furniture, and instruments of music, vessels of metal, alabaster, and other materials, arms and domestic imple-ments, they shoNved great taste mad skill, and their influence on Creek art through the Plicenicians is undoubted, thoug.h they did little more than afford suggestions to more skilful artists of Hellas.
The Egyptians had a great variety of musical instruments, the number of which shows bow much attention was paid to the art. -Various kinds of harps are represented, played with the hand, and of lyres, played with or without the plec-trim), and also a guitar. There are other stringed instru-ments, for which it is difficult to find a modern name. The Egyptians had also flutes, single and double pipes, the tam-bourine of various forms, cymbals, cylindrical maces, drums of different kinds beaten with the hands or sticks, the trumpet, and the sacred sistrum. The military mnsic vias that of the trumpet, drum, and cylindrical maces; but almost all the instruments were used in the temple services. It is impossible to form any conjecture as to the character of the music, unless we may suppose that with many of the old instruments the modern inhabitants have preserved its tra-dition. It may therefore be mentioned that they are ignorant of harmony, but have fineness of ear and of execu-tion. The musicians often sang or danced while they played. The dances of both men ancl girls were of various kinds, frem what may be called feats of agility to slow move-ments. The dancers were chiefly girls, whose performances e7,-idently resembled those of their i»odern successors, and whose clothing was even more transparent or scanty.
Ceremonies. - We know little of the private festivities of the ancient Egyptians. In particular no representation of a marriage ceremony- has yet been discovered on the monu-ments, The greatest ceremony- of each man's life was his funeral. The period of mourning began at the time of death, and lasted seventy-two days or a shorter time. Dur-ing this time the body was embalmed and swatted in many linen bandages, the outermost of which was covered with a kind of pasteboard, Which represented the deceased, in the form we call a mummy, as a labourer in the Elysian fields, carrying the implements of husbandry, the face and hands being alone seen, and the rest of the body being painted with subjects relating to the future state, and bearing a principal inscription giving the name and titles of " the Osiris, justified." The viscera were separately preserved in vases having covers in the forms of the heads of the four genii of Amenti. The mummy was inclosed in a case of woed having the same shape, and this was again inclosed, when the deceased was a rich man, within either another wooden case, or more usually a sarcophagus of stone, sometimes of the same form sis the mummy, but generally rectanguhar, or nearly so. The mummy was then placed Oil a sledge, drawn by oxen or by men, and was frequently taken to the bank of the river, or the shore of a sacred lake, which was to be crossed in order to reach the place of burial. A sacred boat carryiug the !tummy, attended by mourners, was towed by another boat, and followed by others contain-ing mourners, offerings, and all things necessary for the occasion (Anc. Eg., pl. 83-86). On reaching the tomb the sarcophagus was placed in a sepulchral chamber, usually at the bottom of a pit, and offerings for the welfare of the deceased were made in a chapel in the upper part of the tomb, One tomb sufficed for each family, and sometimes for some generations ; and in the case of the less wealthy, many were buried. in the sepulchral chambers of a single pit, above which was no structure or grotto. It has been already noticed that, according to Diodorns, every one was judged by a legal tribunal before the right of burial was permitted, and of this there may be a survival in the practice of the modern Egyptians, which presmibes that a witness mmd.-, answer for the good character of the deceased before his burial (Modern Egypthms, ch. xxviii.). After tho burial, offerings were made at stated times each year by the family, and the chief in-scription begged the passer-by to say a preyer for the good of the inhabitaut of the tomb. These customs led to litany abuses. The maintenance of the costly prescribed offerings must have been most inconvenient, and for this and other purposes tbe burial-grounds were peopled by a tribe of hungry professional embalmers and lower prie,sts, who made their living not only by their profession but also by fraud and even theft. Yet we must admire the generosity with which the F.gyptians lavished their riches upon the most tender form of affection. They were repaid not merely by a natural satisfaction, but also by the wholesome recognition that there are unselfish and unproductive uses for wealth.
[Mr Lane in 1834 estimated the population of Egypt at less than 2,000,000, and gave the following numbers es nearly those of the several classes of which it is mainly composed : - the remainder, exclusive of the Arabs of the desert, num-bering about 70,000 (Mod. Eg., Introduction).
The last official return (1876) estimates the population the various provinces as follows : - Of the present population of Egypt, the Muslims con-stitute seven-eighths, and nearly four-fifths of that of the metropolis ; and to this class, and more particularly to the people of Cairo, the following sketch of personal characteristics and customs will relate, save in some few cases, which will be distinguished from the rest.
In describing the personal characteristics of this remark-a.ble people, Mr Lane, in the first chapter of The Manners and Customs of the Modern _Egyptians (which was written just before European influence was felt in the country, and still deservedly ranks as the only book of authority on the subject), says : - " In general the Muslim Egyptians attain the height of about 5 feet 8 or 5 feet 9 inches. Most of the children under 9 or 10 years of age have spare limbs and a distended abdomen; but as they grow up their fonns rapidly improve. In mature age most of them are remarkably well-proportioned; the tnen muscular and robust; the women very beautifully formed, awl plump; and neither sex is too fat. I have /levet seen corpulent pers'ons among them, except-ing a few in the metropolis and other towns, rendered so by a life of inactivity. In Cairo, and throughout the northern provinces, those who have not been much exposed to the still have a yellowish but very clear complexion, and soft skin; the rest are of a consider-ably darker and coarser complexion. The people of Middle F...gypt are of a more tawny colour, and those of the more southern pro-vinces are of a deep bronze, or brown complexion - darkest towards /labia, where the climate is hottest. In general the countenance of the Muslim Egyptians (I here speak of the men) is of a line oval form: the forehead of moderate size, seldom high, but generally prominent; the eyes are deep stink, black and brilliant; the nose is stritight, but rather thick; the mouth well-formed; the lips are rather full than othenvise; the teeth particularly beautiful; the beard is commonly black and curly, but scanty. I have seen very few individuals of this race with grey eyes; or rather, few persons supposed to be of this race; for I am inclined to think them the offspring of Arab women by Turks, or other foreigners. The Fellabeen, from constant exposure to the sun, have a habit of half-shutting their eyes; this is also characteristic of the Bedawees. Great numbers of the Egyptians are blind in one or both eyes. They generally shave that part of the cheek which is above the lower jaw, awl likewise a small space under the lower lip, leaving, however, the hairs which grow in the middle under the mouth; or, instead of shaving these parts, they pluck out the hair. They also shave a part of the beard under the chin. Very few shave the rest of their beards, and none their moustache. The former they suffer to grow to the length of about a hand's-breadth below the chin (such at least is the general rule, and such was the custom of the Prophet), and their moustache they do not allow to become so long as to incommode thetn in eating and drinking. The practice oi dyeing the beard is not conunon; for a grey beard is much respected. The Egyptians shave all the rest of the hair, or leave only a small tuft (called shooshelt ') upon the crown of the head From the age of aluout 14 to that of 18 or 20 [the women], are generally models of beauty in body and limbs; and in countenance most of them are pleasing, and many exceedingly lovely; but soon after they have attained their perfect growth, they rapidly decline." The relaxing nature of the climate, and other predisposing causes, contribute to render many of them absolutely ugly at the age of 40. "In the Egyptian females the forms of womanhood begin to develop themselves about the ninth and tenth year: at the age of 15 or 16 they generally attain their bighest degree of perfection. With regard to their complexions, the same remarks apply to them as to the men, with only this difference, that their fates, being gene-rally veiled when they go abroad, are not quite so much tanned as those of the men. They are characterized, like the men, by a fine oval countenance, though in some instances it is rather broad. The eyes, with very few exceptions, are black, large, and of a long almond-form, with long and beautiful lashes, and an exquisitely soft, bewitching expression - eyes more beautiful can hardly be conceived: their charming effect is much heightened by the con-cealment of the other features (however pleasing the latter may be), and is rendered still more striking by a practice universal among the females of the higher alid middle classes, and very common among those of the lower ordeis, which is that of blackening the edge of the eyelids both above and below the eye, with a black powder called `kohl.'" Balt sexes, but especially the women, tattoo several parts of the person, and the latter staita their hands and feet with the red dye of the hinne.
The dress of the men of the upper and middle classes consists of cottan drawers, and a cotton or silk shirt with is woru a long cloth robe, the gibbelt (or jubbeh) somewhat resembling the kaftan in shape, but having shorter sleeves, and being open in front. The dress of the lower ordera is the shirt and drawers, and waistcoat, with an outer shirt of blue cotton or brown woollen stuff ; some wear a kaftan. The head-dress of all is the turban wound ronnd a. skullcap. This cap is usually the red cloth fez, or tarboosla, but the very poor wear one of coarse brown felt, and are often without the turban. Many professions and religions, &c., are distinguished by the shape and colour of the go usually barefoot. The ladies wear a shirt and drawers, a very full pair of silk trousers, and a close-fitting vest with hanging sleeves and skirts, open down the front and at the sides, and long enough to turn up and fasten into the girdle, which is generally a cashmere shawl; a cloth jacket, richly embroidered with gold, and having short sleeves, is com-monly worn over the vest. The hair in front is combed down over the forehead and cut across in a straight line ; behind it is divided into very many small plaits, which hang down the back, and are lengthened by silken cords, and often adorned with gold coins and ornaments. A small tarboosh is worn on the back of the head, sometimes having a plate of gold fixed on the crown, and a handkerchief is tastefully' bound round the temples. The women of the lower orders have trousers of printed or dyed cotton, and a close waistcoat. All wear the long and elegant head-veil. This is a simple " breadth" of muslin, which passes over the head and hangs down behind, one side being drawn forward over the face in the presence of a man, A lady's veil is of white muslin, embroidered at the ends in gold and colours; that of a person of the lower class is simply dyed blue. In going abroad the ladies wear above their indour dress a loose robe of coloured silk without sleeves, and nearly open at the sides, and above it a large envelop-ing piece of black silk, which is brought over the head, and gathered roand the person by the arms and hands on each side. &face-veil entirely conceals the features, except the eyes ; it is a long and narrow piece of thick white muslin, reaching to a little below the knees. The women of the lower orders have the same out-door dress of different materials and colour. Ladies use slippers of yellow morocco, and abroad, inner boots of the same material, above which they wear, in either case, thick shoes, having only toes. The poor wear red shoes, very like those of the men. Among the upper classes, however, the dress is rapidly becoming assimilated to that of Europeans in its most preposterous form.
In religion the Aluslina Egyptians are Sunnees, profess-ing the creed which is commonly ternaed "orthodox," and are principally of the persuasion of the Shafe'ees, whose celebrated founder, the imam Esh-Shafe'ee, is buried in the great southern cemetery of Cairo, Many of them are, however, Hanafees (to which persuasion the Turks chiefly belong), and in parts of Lower, and almost universally in Upper, Egypt, Malikees.
The civil administration of justice is conducted in four principal courts of judicature, - that of the Zabit, or chief of the police; where trivial cases are summarily disposed of ; the Divan el-Khedivi, in the citadel, in which the khedive or his deputy presides, and where judgment is given in cases which either do not require to be referred to the two other courts yet to be mentioned, or which do not fall within their province ; the Divan el-Malikemeh, the court of the cadi (kadee), or chief judge, who must be a, Hanafee, and who was formerly a Turk sent annually from Con-stantinople, but is now appointed by the khedive, and paid a fixed salary of 4000 napoleons a year ; and that of the nauftee of the Hanafees, or chief doctor of the law, who decides all cases of difficulty. There are besides five minor mahkemehs, or courts, in Cairo, and one in each of the neighbouring towns of Boolak and Masr EPAteekah, from which eases are always referred to the court of the kadee; and each country town has a native kadee, whose authority is generally sufficient for the villages around. The Council of the 'Uleino,, or learned Dien, consists of the sheykli, or religious chief, of each of the four orthodox persuasions, the sheykh of the great mosque called the Azhar, who is of the persuasion of the Shafe'ees, aud is sometimes its sheykh, the kadee, and the chief (nakeeb) of the Shereefs, or descendants of the Prophet, with several other persons. This body was until lately very powerful, but now has little influence over the khedive. Cairo is divided into quarters (Harsh), each of which has its sheykh, who preserves order among the people ; and the whole city is partitioned into eight larger divisions, each havina a sheykli called Sheykh et-Tumn. Various trades also ilve their sheikhs or chiefs, to whom reference is made in disputes respecting the craft ; and the servants have sitnilar heads who are responsible for their behaviour. The country is divided into governments, as before stated, each presided over by a Turkish officer, having the title of mudeer, a,nd subdivided into districts under the control of native officers, bearing the titles " Mamoor and "Nazir." A responsible person called Sheykli el-Beled (or "shey-kh of the town" or " village") presides over each small town and village, and is a native of the place. It must also be mentioned that the Sa'eed, or Upper Egypt, is governed by a pasha, whose residence is at Asyoot. Notwithstanding the consistent, able, and in many respects commendable, code of laws which has been founded on the Koran and the Traditions, the administration of justice is lamentably faulty. As is the custom throughout the East, judgment in Egypt is usually swayed by bribes, and a poor man's case is generally hopeless when his adversary- is rich. To this rule there have been some notable exceptions, and the memory of a few virtuous judges is cherished by the people; but such instances are very rare. The moral and civil laws observed by the Muslim Egyptians, being those of El-Islam, will be noticed elsewhere. A great abuse formerly existed in Egypt in the system of consular jurisdiction. Natives were compelled to sue a foreigner before the latter's consul, and in nine cases out of ten lost their cause. Simi-larly it was very difficult for a foreigner of one nation to obtain justice against one of another nation at the latter's consulate. This abuse has now been done away. At the instance of Nubar Pasha, and after the deliberations of a, European commission, three Courts of First Instance at Alexandria, Cairo, and Ismailia, and a Court of Appeal at Alexandria, were established in 1876, presided over by mixed benches of Europeans and natives, the former being the majority, and eniploying a new code based on the Code Kapoleon, with such additions from Muslim law as were possible. These courts decide all cases between the Govern-ment or native subjects and foreigners, and between foreigners of different nationalities; and there can be im doubt that they will exercise a great influence for good on the administration of justice in Egypt. It is to be hoped that in course of time they may supersede the old native system in all causes. At present they do but supersede the consular system.
It is very worthy of notice, that in Cairo, as in some, other Muslim cities, any one may obtain gratuitously au elementary education, and he who desires the fullest attain-able education may receive that also without the payment of a single fee, by joining a class of. students in a collegiate mosque. The elementary instruction which most boys re-ceive consists chiefly of reading, and learning the Koran by heart ; day-sehools, as charitable institutions, abound in Cairo, and every town possesses its school; a trifling fee to the fikee (or master) is the only expense incurred by the scholars. Girls are seldom taught anything beyond needle-work. The children of both sexes, except those of the wealthy, have generally a very dirty and slovenly appear-ance ; and often intentional neglect is adopted to avert the effects of the " evil eye," of which the Egyptians entertain great dread. The children of the upper classes are exces-sively indulged, while the poor entirely neglect their offspring. The leading doctrines of El-Islam, as well es hatred for all religions but their own, and a great rever-ence for their parents and the aged, are early inculcated.
This deference towards parents cannot fail to strike every foreigner who visits Egypt, and does not cease with the children's growth, presenting an example well worthy of imitation in the West. Circumcision is observed at about the age of five or six years, when the boy is paraded, gene-rally with a bridal procession, on a, gaily caparisoned horse, and dressed in woman's clothes. Some parents, however, and most of the learned, prefer a quieter and less expensive ceremony (Modern Egyptians, chap. xxvii.).
It is deemed disreputable for a young man not to marry when he has attained a sufficient age ; there are therefore few unmarried men. Girls, in like manner, marry very young, some even at ten years of age, and few remain single beyond the age of sixteen ; they are generally very prolific. The bridegroom never sees his future wife before the wed-ding night, an evil which is somewhat mitigated by the facility of divorce. A dowry is always given, and a marriage ceremony performed by a, fikee (a schoolmaster, or one who recites the Koran), in the presence of two wit-nesses ; the ceremony is very simple, but constitutes a legal marriage. The bridal of a virgin is attended with great festivity and rejoicing, a grandee's wedding some-times continuing eleven days and nights. On the last day, which should be that terminating with the eve of Friday, or of Alonday, the bride is taken in procession to the bride-groom's house, accompanied by her female friends, and a band of musicians, jugglers, wrestlers, kc. As before stated, a boy about to be circumcised joins in such a procession, or, frequently, a succession of such boys. A Muslim is allowed by his religion four wives ; but advantage is rarely taken of this licence, and very few attempt to keep two wives in one house ; tbe expense and discomfort which polygamy entails act, therefore, as a restriction to its general adoption. A man may, however, possess any number of concubine slaves, who, though objects of jealousy to the legal wife, are yet tolerated by her in consideration of her superior position, and conceded power over them, a power which she often uses with great tyranny; but certain privileges are possessed by the concubine, especially if she have born a son to her master. Such slaves are commonly kept only by grandees, the generality of the Atuslirn Egyptians being content with one wife. A divorce is rendered obligatory by the simple words " Thuu art divorced," and a triple divorce is irrevocable under ordinary circumstances. The hareem system of appointing separate apartments to the women, and secluding them from the gaze of men, is observed in Egypt as in other Muslim countries, but less strictly. Air Lane (ibid. ch. yi.) says - " I believe that in Egypt the women are generally under less restraint than in any other country of the Turkish empire ; so that it is not uncommon to see females of the lower orders flirting and jesting, with men in public, and men laying their hands upon them very freely. Still it might be imagined that the women of the higher and middle classes feel themselves severely oppressed, and are much discontented with the state of seclusion to which they are subjected ; but this is not commonly the case; on the contrary, an Egyptian wife who is attached to her husband is apt to think, if he allow her unusual liberty, that he neglects her, and does not sufficiently love her ; and to envy those wives who are kept and watched with greater strictness." The females of an Egyptian household never sit in the presence of the master, lint attend him at his meals, and are treated in every respect as inferiors. The mother, however, forms a remarkable exception to this rule ; in rare instances, also, a wife becomes a com-panion to her husband. On the other hand, if a pair of women's shoes are placed outside the door of the hareem apartments, they are understood to signify that female visitors are within, and a man is sometimes thus excluded from the upper portion of his own house for many days. Ladies of the upper or middle classes lead a life of extreme inactivity, spending their time at the bath, which is the general place of gossip, or in receiving visits, embroidering, and the like, and in absolute dolce far nicnte. It is there-fore no cause for wonder that their tone of morals is generally low. Both sexes are abstemious in their food, though fond of pastry, sweetmeats, and fruit. The principal meals are breakfast, about an hour after sunrise ; dinner, or the mid-day meal, at noon ; and supper, which is the chief meal of the day, a little after sunset. Coffee is taken at all hours, and is, with a pipe, presented at least once to each guest. Tobacco is the great luxury of the men of all classes in Egypt, who begin and end the day with it, and generally smoke all day with little intermission. Many women, also, especially among the rich, adopt the habit. Men who can afford to keep a horse, mule, or ass, are very seldom seen to walk, and numberless excellent asses a,re to be hired in Cairo. Ladies always ride asses and sit astride. The poorer classes are of course unable to observe the hareem system, but the women are in general carefully veiled. Some of them keep small shops, and all fetch water, make fuel, and cook for their households. The food of the poor is very meagre ; flesh meat is rarely tasted by them, and (besides bread) dates, raw cucumbers, and onions are their common food, with soaked beans, roasted ears of India,n corn, 6:c.
In their social interconrse the Muslim Egyptians are regular, and observe many forms of salutation and much etiquette ; yet they are very affable, entering into conversa. tion with strangers at shops and elsewhere. Their courtesy and dignity of manlier are very striking, and are combined with ease and a fluency of discourse. Of their mental quali-fications Mr Lane (ibid. ch. xiii.) remarks - "The natural or innate character of the modern Egyptians is altered, in a remarkable degree, by their religion, laws, and government, ft3 well as by the climate and other causes; and to form a just opinion of it is therefore very difficult. We may, how-ever, confidently state that they are endowed, in a higher degree than most other people, with some of the more important mental qualities, particularly quickness of apprehension, a ready wit, and a retentive memory. In youth they generally possess these and other intellectual powers ; but the causes above alluded to gradually lessen their mental energy." Their principal virtues are piety and strong religious feeling, a strict observance of the injunctions of El-Islam, and a constantly professed sense of God's presence and over-ruling providence, combined, however, with religious pride and hypocrisy. Their com-mon discourse is full of asseverations and expressions respecting sacred things, often, however, used with a levity which it is difficult for a person unacquainted with their feelings easily to reconcile with their respect for God. They entertain OM excessive reverence for their Prophet ; and the Koran is treated with the utrnost respect - never, for example, being placed in a low sitnation - and this is the case with every-thing they esteem holy. They are fatalists, and bear calamities with perfect resignation to the Divine will. , Their filial piety and respect for the aged have been before mentioned, and benevolence and charity are conspicuous in their character ; poverty is there-fore not accompanied by the distressing circumstances which too frequently attend it in Europe. Humanity to dumb animals is another virtue, and cruelty is openly discounte-nanced in their streets, even to unclean animals ; this is, however, unfortunately wearing off in consequence of their intercourse with Franks. Their affability, cheerfulness, and hospitality are remarkable, as well as frugality and temperauce in food and drink, scrupulous cleanliness, a luve of country, and honesty in the payment of debt. It should be added, however, that the Egyptians rarely, if ever, exer-cise their social virtues but towards persons of their own persuasion and country. Their vices are indolence, ob-stinacy, and licentiousness, especia.11y among the women, cupidity (mitigated by generosity), envy, a disregard for the truth, and a habit of cursing. Murders, and otlter grave crimes of this nature, are rarely committed, but petty thefts are very common.
" The Arabic spoken by the middle and higher classes in Cairo is generally inferior, in point of grammatical cor-rectness and pronunciation, to the dialects of the Bedawees of Arabia, and of the inhabitaLts of the towns in their im-mediate vicinity', but much to be preferred to those of Syria, and still more to those of the Western Arabs" (Lane, ibid. ch. ix.). The language varias in Upper and Lower Egypt, and is more correct inland than near the Mediterranean.
In the decay of Arab literature, Cairo still holds the chief place as a seat of learnino., and its university, the Azhar, is undoubtedly the first of the Eastern world. Its professors teach " gramniatical inflexion and syntax, rhetoric, versification, logic, theology, the exposition of the Kur-an, the Traditions of the Prophet, the complete science of jurisprudence, or rather of religious, moral, civil, and criminal law, which is chiefly founded on the Kur-an and the Traditions, too-ether with arithmetic as far as it is use-ful in matters of faw. Lectures are also given on algebra, and on the calculations of the Muhammadan calendar, the Hines of prayer, &c." (Lane, ibid.). The students, as already remarked, pay no fees, and the professors receive no salaries. The latter maintain themselves by private teach-ing, and by copying manuscripts, and the former in the same manner, or by reciting the Koran. The students are now said to amount to the number of 11,000. Except the professors of librature, few Egyptians are taught more than to read and write ; and of these, still fewer can read and write well. The women, as before mentioned, are very rarely taught even to read.
Science is but little studied, and barbers generally prac-tise medicine and surgery. -Mehemet Ali endeavoured to improve this state of things, by sending young men to Europe for the purpose of scientific study, and by establish-ing variuus schools, with the same object, in Egypt. His improvements have been continued by the present khedive, Ismail Pasha, with some success.
In common with other Muslims, those of Egypt have very many- superstitions, some of which are peculiar to themselves. Tombs of saints abound, one or more being found in every town and village ; and no traveller up the Nile can fail to remark how every prominent mountain has the sepulchre of its patron saint. The great saints of Egypt are the imam Esh-Shafe'ee, founder of the persuasion called after him, the seyyid Ahmad El-Bedawee, and the seyyid Ibraheem Ed-Dasookee, both of whom were founders of orders of dervishes. The former of these two is buried at the town of Tanta, in the Delta, and his tomb attracts many thousands of visitors annually to his prin-cipal festival; the latter is also much revered, and his festival draws together, in like manner, great crowds to his birthplace, the town of Ed-llasools. Bul, besides the graves of her native saints, Egypt boasts of those of several members of the Prophet's family; the tomb of the seyyideh Zeyneb, daughter of 'Alec:, that of the seyyideli Sekeeneh, daughter of El-Hoseyn, and that of the seyyideh Nefeeseh, great-grand-daughter of El-Hasan, all of which are held in high veneration. The mosque of the Hasaneyn (or that of the " two Hasaus") is the most reverenced shrine in the country, and is believed to contain the head of El-Hoseyn. As connected with the superstitious practices of Egypt, dervishes must be mentioned, of whom there are many orderi found in that country, the following being the most celebrated : - (1) the llifa'eeyeh, and their sects the 'Ilwaneeyeh and Saadeeyeh ; (2) the Eadireeyeli ; (3) the Ahmedeeyeh, or followers of the seyyid Ahmad El-Bedawee, and their sects the Beiyoomeeyelt, Shaaraweeyell, Shinnaweeyeli, and many others ; and (4) the Barahimeh, or followers of the seyyici Ibraheem Ed-Dasookee. These are all presided over by a direct descendant of the caliph Aboo-Bekr, called the Sheykh El-Bekree. The Saadeeyell are the most famous for charming and eating live serpents, ikc., and the 'Ilwaneeyeli for eating fire, glass, Scc. The Egyptians firmly believe in the efficacy of charms, a, beliet which is associated with that in an omnipresent and over-ruling Providence. Thus the doors of houses are inscribed with sentences from the Koran, or the like, to preset\ e from the evil eye, or avert the dangers of an unlucky threshold ; similar inscriptions may be observed over most shops, while ahnost every one carries some charm about Lis person. Among so superstitious a people, with whom, as we ha.ve already seen, science is in a very low state, it is not to be wondered that the so-called sciences of magic, astrology in the place of astronorny, and alchemy in that of chemistry, are in a comparatively flourishing condition.
Since the time of the Turkish conquest, the arts in Egypt have rapidly fallen into decay ; this is partly attributable to the deportation of most of the skilled artificers of Cairo to Constantinople by the sultan Selim, but it is inainlv owing to the misrule of the Turkish pasha.s, mho Lave successively domineered over this unfortunate country. Cairo contains the most splendid specimens of Arab architecture of any part of the Arabian empire ; but at present new buildings are erected after the Constan-tinopolitan moclel, or, what is still worse, the purely European - both styles immeasurably inferior to the Arab, and very ill suited to the requirements of the climate. In like manner, every other kind of native art is gradually perishing ; and it is to be feared that even should the people be relieved from oppression and bad government, their industry will be encouraged rather to adopt imaginary improvements imported from Europe, than to cultivate the beautiful taste of their ancestors. The manufactures of the present inhabitants of Egypt are generally inferior to those of other Eastern nations, their handicrafts ale clumsy, and the inevitable results of tyranny are every-where evident ; nevertheless, the curious shops, the markets of different trades (the shops of each trade being generally congregated in one street or district), the easy merchant sitting before his shop, the musical and quaint street-cries of the picturesque venders of fruit, sherbet, water, d".c., with the ever-changing and many-colonred throng of passengers, all render the streets of Cairo a delightful study for the lover of Arab life, nowhere else to be seen in such perfection, or with so fine a background of magnificent buildings.
Among the luxurious habits of the Egyptians must be classed the immoderate use of tobacco (as before mentioned) and coffee. They are, however, rar-ely guilty of the vice of drunkenness, wine being prohibited by the Koran. Eaters of opium, and smokers of hemp, called hasheesh, are not uncommon, thouA they are always of the dregs of the people. The bath is a favourite resort of both sexes and all classes. In Cairo alone are upwards of sixty public baths, and every good house has a private bath. Their amuse-ments are generally' not of a violent kind, being rather in keeping with the sedentary habits of the people, and the heat of the climate. They are acquainted with chess, draughts, backgannnon, and other games, among which is one peculiar to themselves, called Mankalah, and played with cowries. The game of the gereed requires great bodily exertion ; and wrestlers, (3,",c., are found in the ccmtitry, though not in any number. Music is the most favourite recreation of the people of Eg,ypt ; the songs of the boatmen, the religious chants, and the cries in the streets are all musical. There are male and female musical performers ; the former are both instrumental and vocal, the latter (called '211meli, pl. 'Awalini) generally vocal. The 'Awalim are, as their name ("learned ") implies, generally accom-plished women, and should not be confounded with the Ghawdzee, or dancing-girls. There are many kinds of musical instruments. The music, vocal and instrumental, is generally of little compass, and in the minor key; it is therefore plaintive, and strike,s a European ear as somewhat monotonous, though often possessing a -simple beauty, and the charm of antiquity, for there is little doubt that favourite airs have been handed down from remote ages. The prophet Mohammad candenned music, and its pro-fessors are in consequenc.e lightly esteemed by the generality of Muslims, who nevertheless scruple nut to enjoy their performances, and resort to the coffee-shops a_ncl to private festivities, where they are almost always to be found.
The Ghawlizee (sing. G'hazeeyeh) form a separate class, very similar to the gypsies. They always intermarry among themselves only, and are all brought up to the venal profession. Their performances are too well known to need a description here, but it should be observed that the religious and learned Egyptians hold them to be improper. They- dance in public, at fairs and religious festivals, and at private festivities, but not in respectable houses, whether before the men or the ladies. Mehemet Ali banished them to 1sne, in Upper Egypt ; and the few that remained, occasionally- dancing in Cairo, called them-selves 'Awalini, to avoid punishment. A most objection-able class of male dancers also exists., who imitate the dances of the Ghawazee, and dress in a kind of nondescript female attire. Not the least curious of the public per-formances are those of the serpent-charmers, who are generally- Rifil'ee, or Saadee dervishes. Their power over serpents has been doubted by most European travellers, yet their performances remain unexplained ; and apparently they possess means of ascertaining the haunts of these and other reptiles, and of alluring them forth ; they, however, always extract the fangs of venomous serpents. Jugglers, rope-dancers, and farce-players must also be mentioned. the principal coffee-shops of Cairo are to be found reciters of romances, surrounded by interested audiences. They are of three classes, and recite from several works, among which was formerly included the Thousand ancl One Nights,. but manuscripts of the latter have become so rare as to render it almost impossible to obtain a copy.
The periodical public festivals are exceedingly interest-ing, and many- of the remarkable observances with which they abound are passing away. The first ten days of the Mohammadan year are held to be blessed, and especially the tenth ; and many curious and superstitious prac-tices are observed on these days, particularly by the women. The tenth day,, being the anniversary of the martrydom of El-Hoseyn, the mosque of the Hasaneyn is thronged to excess, mostly by women. Following the order of the lunar year, the next festival is that of the Return of the Pilgrims, which is the occasion of great rejoicing, many having friends or relatives in the caravan. The Malimal, a kind of covered litter, first originated by the celebrated queen Sheger-ed-Durr, is brought into the city in procession, though not with as much pomp as when it leaves with the pilgrims. These and other processions have lost much of their effeet since the extinction of the Mernlooks, and the gradual disuse of gorgeous dress fur the retainers of the ofiicers of state. A regiment of regular infantry makes but a sorry substitute for the splendid cavalcade f former times. The Birth of the Prophet (Moolid en-Nebee), which is celebrated in the beginning of the third month, is the greatest festival of the whole year. During nine days and nights its religious ceremonies are observed at Cairo, in the open space called the Ezbekeeyeli. Next in time, and also in importance, is the Moolid El-Hasaneyn, commemorative of the birth of El-Hoseyn, and lasting fifteen days and nights ; and at the same time is kept the Moolid of Es-Salih Eiyoob, the last king but one of the Eiyoobee dynasty. In the seventh month occur the Moolid of the seyyideh Zeyneb, and the commemoration of the Mearag, or the Prophet's rniraGulous journey to heaven. Early in the tenth month (Shaaban), the Moolid of the imam Esh-Shitfe'ee is observed; and the night of the middle of that month has its peculiar customs, being held by the Muslims to be that on which the fate of all living is decided for the ensuing year. Then follows Ramadan, the month of abstinence, a severe trial to the faithful ; and the Lesser Festival (El-Ted es-Sagheer), which commences Showwal, is hailed by them with delight. A few days after, the Kisweh, or new covering for the Kaabeh at Meecca, is taken in procession from the citadel, where it is always manufactured, to the mosque of the Hasaneyn to be completed ; and, later, the caravan of pilgrims departs, when the grand procession of the Mahmal takes place. On the tenth day of the last month of the year, the Great Festival (EliEed el-Kebeer), or that of the Sacrifice, closes the calendar.
The rise of the .Nile is naturally the occasion of annual customs, some of which are doubtless relics of antiquity; these are observed according to the Coptic year) The com-mencement of the rise is fixed to the night of the 1 lth of Ba-ooneli (Payni), the 17th of June, and is called that of the Drop (Leylet en-Nuktall), because a miraculous drop is then supposed to fall, and cause the swelling of the river. The real rise commences at Cairo about the summer solstice, or a few days later ; and on about the 3d of July a crier in each district of the city begins to go his daily rounds, announcing, in a quaint chant, the increase of water in the Nilorneter of the island of Er-Reclah. When the river has risen 20 or 21 feet, lie proclaims the Wefa en-Neel, " Coln-pletion " or " Abundance of the Nile." On the following day, the dam which closes the canal of Cairo is cut with naucli ceremony, and this is the signal for letting the inundation over the surface of the country. A pillar of earth before the dam is called the " Bride of the Nile," and Arab his-torians relate that this was substituted, at the Muslim con-quest, for a virgin whom it was the custom annually to sacrifice, to ensure a plentiful inundation. A large boat, gaily decked out, representing that in which the victim used to be conveyed, is anchored near, and a gun on board is fired every quarter of an hour during the night. Rockets and other fireworks are also let off, but the best, strangely, after daybreak. The governor of Cairo attends the ceremony of cutting the dam, with the kadee and others. The crier continues his daily rounds, with his former chant, excepting on the Coptic New-Year's Day, when the cry of the Wefa is repeated, until the Saleeb, or Discrwery of the Cross, the 26th or 27th of September, at which period, the river having attained its greatest height, he concludes his annual employment with another chant, and presents to each house some limes and other fruit, and dry lumps of Nile mud.
This brief ac?,ount of the modern Egyptians would be incomplete without a few words concerning the rites attendant on death. The corpse is immediately turned towards Mecca, and the females of the household, assisted by hired mourners, commence their peculiar wailing, while fikees recite portions of the Koran. The funeral takes place on the day of the death, if that happen in the morn-ing ; otherwise on the next day. The corpse, having been washed and shrouded, is placed in an open bier, covered with a cashmere shawl, in the case of a man ; in a closed bier, having a post in front, on which are placed female ornaments, in that of a woman or child. The funeral procession is headed by men called " Yemeneeyeb," chanting the profession of the faith, followed by male friends of the deceased, and a party of schoolboys, also chanting, generally from a, poem descriptive of the latter state. Then follows the bier, borne on the shoulders of friends, who are relieved by the passers-by-, such. an act being deemed highly meritorious. On the way to the cemetery the corpse is generally, in Cairo, in the case of the northern quarters of the city, carried either to the lIasaneyn, or, if the deceased be one of the 'Ulein'a, to the Azhar ; or, in the case of the southern quarters, to the seyyideli Zeyneb, or some other revered mosque. Here the funeral service is performed by the imam, or minister of the mosque, and the procession then proceeds to the tomb. In the burials of the rich, water and bread are dis-tributed to the poor at the grave ; and sometimes a buffalo or several buffaloes are slaughtered there, and the flesh given away. The tomb is always a vault, surmounted by an oblong stone monument, with a stele at the head and feet; and a cupola, supported. by four walls, covers the whole in the case of sheyklis' tombs and those of the wealthy. During the night following the interment; called the Night of DesolaCon, or that of Solitude, the soul being believed to remain with the body that one night, fikees are engaged at the house of the deceased to recite various portions of the Koran, and, commonly, to repeat the first clause of the profession of the faith, " There i3 no deity but God," three thousand thnes. The women alone put on mourning attire, by dyeing their veils, shirts, d:c., dark blue, with indigo ; and they stain their hands, and smear the walls, with the same colour. Everything in the house is also turned upside down. The latter customs are not, however, cbservecl on the death of an old man. At certain periods after the burial, a khatmeh, or recitation of the whole of the Koran, is performed, and the tomb is visited by the female relations and friends of the deceased. The women of the fellaheen (or peasants) of Upper Egypt observe some strange dances, &T., at funerals, which must be regarded as partly relics of ancient Egyptian customs.
For further information see, in addition to Lane's 3fodern Egyptians, his translation of the Thousand and One Nights, and particularly- the notes to it, and the Englishwoman in Egypt, by Mrs Poole.
The native Christians of Egypt, or Copts, are chiefly descended from the ancient Egyptian race ; and, as they rarely marry with other races, they preserve in their coun-tenances a, great resemblance to the representations of the tombs and temples. Their dress and customs are very aimilar to those of the Muslim Egyptians, but their reserve towards persons of another persuasion renders a knowledge of their peculiar observances exceedingly difficult. The causes which produced the separation of their church, and the persecutions they suffered, will be noticed in the historical portion of this article. Under Mehemet Ali they were relieved of nitch oppression, and the immunities then granted to them they still enjoy. The neglected appearance of their houses, and their want of personal cleanliness, are in strong contrast to the opposite habits of the -Muslims, and European residents generally prefer the latter as domestic servants.
The Jews, of whom there have always been great num-bers in Egypt, appear to be even more degraded there than in other countries. They are held in the utmost abhorrence by the dominant race, and often are treated with much cruelty and oppression. Many are bankers and money-changers, The quarter of the Jews in Cairo is ex-ceedingly filthy, and wonld give a stranger the notion that they labour under great poverty. But such is not the case ; the fear of the Muslims induces them to adopt this outward show of misery, while the interiors of many- of their houses are very handsome and luxurious. (E. s. r. - s. L. r.)] Before giving a sketch of the history of Egypt it is necessary to speak of Egyptian chronology. The difficulty of this subject has increased with the new information of the monuments. The statements of ancient writers were easily reconciled with half knowledge, but better inforination shows discrepancies which are in naost instances beyond all present hope of solution. It may be said that WC know something of the outlines of the technical part of Egyptian chronology ; but its historical part is in a great measure mere conjecture before the times when we can check the Egyptian lists by their synchronisms with Ilebrew and Assyrian history.
Dr Brugseb, in the second edition of his Ilistoire d'Egypte, frankly admits the growing difficulty of Egyptian chronology in terms which account for his not having continued his Mati:riaux pour servir a la reconstruction du Cczlendrier, the opinions of which are modified in the later work. Baron Bunsen completed his Egypt's Place, but in the progress of the work made a, great change in his theories. Professor Lepsius alone has maintained his views, as stated in the Chronologie and Konigsbuch, of which the general correctness has not been disproved, although in any new work it would be necessary- greatly to modify tlie details. The words, already referred to, of Dr Brugsch, which close the introduction to his History (2d ed.), may be cited in justification of the differences between the present article and that of the last edition of the Encycloyedia. " En comparant cette 6dition avec la premiere, le lecteur impartial reconnaitra facilement que nous avons reniani6 completement le premier travail, et de plus, que nous nous sommes abstenu de found'. des hypotheses auxquelles seulement le temps et des d6couvertes futures pourront substituer les faits " (p. 3).
The Egyptians divided the civil day into 24 hours, 12 of the natural day and 12 of the night, counted from 1 to 12 during each period. Ordinarily the civil day began durimg the night, which was indifferently reck-oned as belonging, to the preceding or following day. Probably the beginning was at midnight. ln the astro-nomical tables of the Tombs of the Kings the civil day probably begins with the night, and the reckoning is from the first hour, or six hours before midnight. The indication is, however, not con-clusive, as the tables are of nights only, bat one term used makes it highly probable (Brugsch, Alizteriattx, 103). We also find the so. called heliacal rising of Sothis indicated as marking the beginning of the New Year, but this may merely- denote that the phenomenon characterized New Year's day of the original Egyptian year, or of the fixed year, not that the civil day began with the 111.11 hour of night (cf. Id., 99 Avg.; Ideler, lIa,ndbuch der Clerovologie, i. 100-102).
The Egyptian month was of tItirty days. The months are usually known by Greek names occurring in Greek documents, which were taken from the cultus connected with the months, and are thus the Egyptian sacred names. They are 1. Thoth, 2. Phaophi, 3. Athyr, 4. Choiak, 5. Tybi, 6. Mechir, 7. Phamenoth, 8. Pharmuthi, 9. Pachon, 10. Payni, 11. Epiphi, 12. Mesori, after whieh came the five Epagomenm. The names were applied to the Yagne and Alexandrian rears. The ancient Egyptians had a different system • of names. With them the months were allotted to three great seasons of four months each, of which the months were called 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and 4th. These seasons are called " sha," inundation, "per," winter, and " shema' summer. The second and third renderings are undoubted; the first, which is that of I)r Brugsch, is not certain. lf, however, it was so, we should have a difficulty in deciding to exactly which four months each season applied. It may be remarked that, according to the Copts, there afe four months from the supposed beginning of the rise of the Nile, a few days before the summer solstice, to the end of the inundation. If this were the ancient reckoning, and the rendering " inundation" be correct, " winter " would be the cold season, and " summer " ,,vould correspond to spring and early summer. In support of this hypothesis it may be observed that the so-called "'ethical rising ot Sothis on the 20th of July marked the berdnning of the Egyptian year, although in the year commonly in use'this phenomenon passed through all the seasons, and further that in the earliest times of Egyptian 'history this phenomenon occurred about the time of the summer solstice, and the conventional beginning of the rise of the Nile, the three phenomena probably marking the beginning of the first season when the calendar was instituted' (cf. on the seasons, Brngsch, iliderictur, 34 seqq.).
'file eonmion year of the ancient Egyptians is that which has been called the Vague Year, because on account of its length of 365 days it fell short of a tropical or a sidereal year, and thus passed through all the seasons. That this year was that in which the inscriptions are usually dated before the introduction of the Alex-andrian year under Augustus appears from the Decree of Canopus ( l-lierog. 1. 18, Greek 1. 36, 37).
The Egy pt i an s also used a fixed year dated from the so-call ed hel aeal rising of Sothis, July 20. It contained 365 days, and was adjusted bv the addition of another day for every four years. It is uncertain h•Ow far back this year was in use. The Calendar of Pledeenet Ilaboo, of' the time of Ramses III., begins with the rising of Sothis, or, if WC accept DrBrugseh'sexplanation, with its festival (..I/aMriaux, p. 84). Perhaps at the time of this monument the phenomenon fell on the 1st Thoth of the vague year, or within the month ; or if the festival he intended, it may be used as ft conventional indica-tion of New Year's day in a typical form (Ibid. p. 84, 85). In the Roman period, after the .‘klexandrian year had come into use, there are double dates in the Alexandrian and Sathiae calendars, but the common Egyptian notation of the months does not appear to have been usually applied to the Sothiac year. An exception is noticed by 1)r Brugsch (Bid. p. 93), and another instance in which the month-name Tybi appears to be used for the Sothiac calendar, while an Alexandrian name is employed for the corresponding month of the Alexandrian calendar (Ibid. p. 92, 17. See on the whole suliject, 13rugsch, Hateriaux).
The inconvenience of the vague year in relation to the festivals, on account of their connection with natural phenomena, led Ptolemy Energetes to reform the calendar by intercalating a day after every fourth year before the year next following (Decree of Canopus, 1Iierog. 1. 22, Greek 1. 43-45). Obviously this arrest of the C0111111011 year was more convenient than the change to a fixed year already in use beginning at a different season. This new style was abandoned and the old resumed, but how soon we do not know.
Under Augustus a fixed year, called the Alexandrian, beginning on the 29-30th August of the Julian year, superseded the vague year. According to Lepsius, the Era of Augustus at Alexandria dated D.C. 30, but the first year of the new calendar, prolepti-e.illy, n.c. 26, when the. 1st Thoth vague corresponded to 30th August of the proleptie year of' Augnstus. The new reckoning, however, in his opinion could not have been introdneed before B.C. 8, and WftS probably introduced A.D. 5. (See Lepsius, Ueber ciaige .1',eriihranyspuukte der Aegyptisehen, Criechischen, wnd Ro-mischen Cltronologie, Berl. Alutd., 1859). .Although it is quite possible that Augustus adopted. a proleptic synchronism of the 'Egyptian and Roman yonrs for the official Egyptian year, finis dating back his reform, yet it is more probable that there was some special reason for choosin, the particular Egyptian year selected, which, moreover, was no't tho first of the Era of Angustns. Ilrugseli has put forward a theory, which is the more remark-able in its bearing on this question as it is of wholly independent origin. I le has ShOW11 l'OtIS0113 for supposing that a year beginning on the 25-29th August was in use in Egypt from the thne of Dynasty VI. It must be adinittial that many of his correspondences are of the Roman period, and therefore probably refer to the Alexandrian year; but others cannot be so explained, and it seems probable that the year which wider Augustus superseded the vagne year was already in use long before (JBteriaux, p. 17 seq.). The Alexandrian year superseded the vague year, and has remained in use to our times, never having been whay supplanted by the lunar year of the Arabs; but it has now given way to the Gregorian calendar.
At the time of Dynasty XII. the Egyptians used four years. These Dr Ilrugsch holds to be the vague year, a solar year, a lunar year, and a limar year with an intercalation (Hist. 2nd ed, 98-99). The second of tIr2se years no doubt Was the Sot'lliac, the beginning 'of which had an original connection with the summer solstice, and the duration of which was probably the Egyptian measine of a solar year. The limar years would seem to be true lunar years, if we arc to accept 31. Gensler's theory that the Egyp thins had discovered a method of adjusting their solar calendar with a lunar year by the intercalation of a month eleven times in thirty years (Id. 73). That the Egyptians at a later time rise'," four years is evident from the Calendar of Isne, in which three beg,innings are mentioned, that which stands at the head of the document and is of the Sothiae year, a beginning of the " year of the ancients" on the 9th of Thoth, and another New Year's day on the 26th of Payni (Brugsch, Matereaux, 19-22). This calendar is attrilmted by Lepsins to the. reign of Claudius, but Brugsch can only decide that it is of the Roman period (Id. 88, cf. 22). If it is much later than the time fixed by Lepsius, the second commencement may be of the vague year, which began July 28 in A.D. 101-104. It is not probable that it is earlier than the introduction of the Alexandrian year, which, however, is unnoticed. Thus at least four years were probably in use in Egypt under the Romans.
No Era has been found in the Egyptian inscriptions. They always, if they date at all, date by the year of the reigning sovereign. There is but one instance of a reckoning of the nature of an era. It is the statement of the interval between two distant reigns in the stele in which, under Ramses II., an interval of four hundred years after a Shepherd king is mentioned, or more strietly, following the analogy of ordinary dates, the 400th year of the earlier kin,, thongli he were still This, however, is not a strictly Egyrdian document (Records of lite Past, iv. 36). Similarly the coins of the Ptolemies, except one class, present no era ; even those bearing the name of Ptoleniy Soter, struck in Palestine and Phoenicia linder Ptolemy Philadelplins and Ptolemy Euergetes, are dated by the regnal years of the kings who struck them. Theie are indeed coins dated by an era, probably struck at some town of Plmenicia, but these follow a foreign usage which otherwise is not found in the foreign coinage of the Ptolemies. It is therefore not surprising that the Egyptian cycles mentioned by ancient writers are not traceable on the monuments. One of these, the Sothiac Cycle, consisting of 1450 Sothiac and 1461 vagne years, or the period in which the vague year passed through one Sothiac year, was probably used by the astronomers, but we have no indication of its having been known earlier than the first century- B.C., when Gemini's writes that the Egyptian festivals pass through the whole year in 1460 years (hag., e. 6, Petav., Uranologium, 33). Censorinus fixes the beginning of a Sothiae cycle in A.D. 139 (e. 21), in the third vague year or second Alexandrian of the reign of Antoninus Pius. Curiously the Alexandrian coin commemorating in a symbolie manner this event is of the sixth year of this emperor. neon, writing during the cycle beginning A.D. 139, speaks of the previous period as the Era of Menophres (ap. Biot, Rech. sur plus. 2). de l'astr., p.181 seq., 303 seq. • Sur la periode Soth.I.S, 129 seqq.) lt is therefore generally- supposed' that a cycle beginning B.C. 1322 com-menced in the reign of a Menptah, usually identified with the king of that name of Dynasty XIX. This is possible but not certain. Other cycles rest on less distinct evidence, and for the present we must be content to accept Brugsch's cautious judg-ment on the whole subject.' must be reduced, end as supplying fragments of historical chronology which may ultimately be_ united into a complete system. It has indeed been supposed that they enable us to construct an approxi-mat i ve chronology on genealogical evidence. This system, ho-wever, breaks down where we can test it, and it is therefore dangerous where it must stand alone. The great genealogy of the official archi-tects gives 21 generations frem the contemporary of Setee 1. (Dynasty XIX. 21, to the contemporary of Darius 1. (XXVII. 3); and thus, allowing three generations to a century, we should bring the birth of Setee and the beginning of Dynasty XIX. to about B.C. 1200.1 It is, however, quite certain that, reckoning from the synchronism of Sheshonk I., or Shishak, with Rehoboani, we must allow for the intervening period at least a century more. The historical events require this. We must therefore suppose that generations, either of heiresses or of other persons who did not hold the office of architect, are dropped. If this method of computing by genealogies thus fails where we have a genealogical list, obviously it cannot be applied. to dynastic lists which we do not know to be genealogical. ale average length of reigns is usually different from. and less than that of generations, and we cannot tell the inost probable average length of reigns without knowingl the law of succession of the country, and its political conditions in the period under consideration. It is therefore especially hazardous thus to measure the Egyptian chronology before Dynasty XVIII., at which time ascending genea-logical evidence fails us. (See, however, Brugsch, //isl., 2 ed. 25-27.) The preceding observations will prepare the reader to find in the following pages no definite chronological system for the period before the synchronism of Egyptian and Hebrew history at the beginning of Dynasty XXII. 'Phe essay would, however, be incom-plete without a short account of the chronological views of the leading Egyptologists. _Marlette accepts Alanetho's numbers with some modifications, and makes all the dynasties but one consecutive. Ile thus dates the beginning of Dynasty I. B.C. 5004. Dr Brugsch, fol-lowing the genealogical in ethod, proposed by Prof. lieblein, and treat-ing the reigns of the Tablet of Abydos as generations, hut making an exception for the distracted age of the X111.-X V I E. Dynasties, when he adopts a series of years deriyed from Manctlio, place.s the beginning of Egyptian history cir. B. C. 44002 (//ist., 2d ed. 1791. Professor Lepsins adopts the 3555 years as the true duration of the thirty dynasties, and thus lowers the (late in question to B. c. 3992. Ile reduces the length of the dynasties by making some in part or in whole contemporary.3 111. Chabas proposes with much hesitation the 40th Cell thry B. C. (Etudes sur l'Antiquitd Ilistovique, 2 ed. 15, 16). The following table gives the date of the beginning of each dynasty according to M. Mariette and Professor Lepsius. The less definite schemes of Dr Brugsch and M. Chabas cannot be tabulated in the same inannef.
There are two weak points in all these systems. They rest to a greater or less degree upon numbers either occurring but once or due to a single authority. The sum of 3555 years, which is the foundation of Professor Lepsins's system, occurs in but a single passage, rind the same is the (•ase with the round number of 500 years adopted by Dr Brugsch for the doubtful period of Dynasties X111.-X VII. ; it is taken from 3Ianetho's 511 years of the Shepherd dominion. Dow if both these numbers are corrupt ? If they are not their e:.ape is a marvel, considering to what authors and copyists NVI.: owe them. Again, the sums of most individual dynasties rest on 111anetho's sole authority, and his lists are in a state which is at present hopeless. It is equally unfortunate that while certain dynasties are represented by monuments from which Illanetho's lists can be verified, others have left little or no records. Thus we have no monuments of Dynasties 1.-111. until the close of the last. Then there is an abundance of monuments of Dynasties 1V., V., VI. A blank follows without a montunent that we can assign to Dynasties VII., IX., X. Records reappear under Dynasty Xl. ; of Dynasty X11. they are abundant. Under Dynasty XIII. they become scanty, and of XIV., X V., X VI., XVII. there are but a few, which may be of XV., XVI., or XVII. Tie have therefore three blank periods, the age before known monuments, the interval of Dynasties VI I.-X., and that of Dynasties X11E-XS'''. It is significant that whereas M. Illariette's reckoning exceeds that of Professor Lepsius 1112 years in the whole stun of the thirty dynasties, the excess is 110 less than 966 years in the stuns of Dynasties VIL-X. and X111.-X-V11. Such a difference between two such great anthorities is a proof of the want of even probability for solving this part of the problem. Dr Drugsch, in applying the genealogical method to the lists of the monuments for the first and second blanks, while lie rejects it for the third, is manifestly unwary. The evidence of the Turin Papyrus proves that we must not apply any such method to the third blank. Dow do we know that it can be applied to the other two ? It may be argued that 11Ianetlio's numbers for the reigns of the first blank are probable, but neither his lists nor the monnments throw any light on those of the second, to which, notwithstanding, Dr Brugsch allows no less a period than about 500 years. Ins system has also the special fault that it rests on the supposition that the Egyptian reigns are equivalent to gene-rations, which, as already shewn, is by no means proved.
In the following sketch of Egyptian history, no dates before the Christian Era will be giTen nntil the beginning of Dynasty .X when approximative chronology becomes possible. -Where, how-ever, we may reasonably conjecture the length of" a particular part history', this will be stated.
The traditional age in Egypt is extremely obscure. History begins with the First Dynasty. The earlier period with Manetho, who is supported by the Turin Papyrns, is mythological, the age of the divine reigns, an idea also traceable in the monuments which treat certain divinities as sovereigns. This age is held to be spoken of on thc him in his combats with Seth (Chablis, Apt. .11isr., 7, 8 ; Brugsch, 2d ed. 23). Manetho completely divests the time of any historical character by making it cyclical. It might be supposed that the Egyptians had some idea of records actually dating from this age, if we could accept :M. Chabas's reading of the Ptolemaic inscription relating to the plan of the temple of Dendarab, in which it is stated that the original plan was found in the time of Feld, of Dynasty VI., in ancient characters on a. skin of the time of the .1lies.1- liar. It appears, II:iwever, from the context that this inscription WaS of the time oi of Dynasty IV., and consequently the parallel expression is merely used to denote remote antiquity (Diimichen, Baunrktinde der Tempelanlogen 2`0?2, Dendera, 15, ta.f. ; 1 8, 1 9, taf. xv.; V., on the other side, Chabas, Ant. .1hst., 2d ed. 7, 8).
Egyptian mythology has not been found to contain any allusion to a deluge, nor to have any connection with the Mosaic narrative in reference to the cosmogony and the early conditions of the human race. Similar terms have been pointed out, but the leading facts are wanting. Thus the Egyptian ideas of their prehistoric age have a strange isolation by the side of those of most other nations of remote civilization, which agree in one or more particulars with tlr.i narrative of Genesis. Discoveries may, however, modify this view.
In Egypt stone implements have been recently discovered. Owing, however, to the abundance of historical monuments, the prehistorical remains have scarcely received due atten-tion. We do not yet know whether these implements were used by the Egyptians or by savage tribes who may have made incursions into their territory-. We find, however, the use of flint arrow-heads in the historical period from the paintings at Benee-Hasan (Dynasty- XII.).
It is impossible to conjecture the duration of the prehis-toric age in Egypt. M. Chabas has proposed a space of 4000 years before the First Dynasty- as sufficient for the develop-ment of the civilization which had already attained maturity in the thne of the Fourth Dynasty (Ant. Hist., 9, 10). We are, however, so entirely ignorant of the causes of this civilization, and so unable to decide how far it was native to the soil of Egypt, that it is safer to abstain from any attempt to compute a period of the length of which the historical Egyptians themselves do not appear to have had any idea.
With Menes, in Egyptian Mena, the " stable," the history of Egypt begins. It is true that Manetho states cautiously of his successors of the Second Dynasty certain things that are evidently legendary-. This must be the natural result of a want of monumental evidence, and a consequent dependence on tradition. At present no monuments are known before the time of the last king of Dynasty III., and this may be the limit at which inscribed contemporary re-cords began. It is, however, agreed by all Egyptologists that the founder of the Egyptian state is no legendary per-sonage. All We kllOW of him wears the air of history, and is consistent with the conditions in which a state would have been formed. Menes was of Thinis, in Upper Egypt, and consequently the first two dynasties are called Thinite. Thinis, or This, in Egyptian Teni, was perhaps only a quarter of the more famous Abydos. Certainly it was ob-scured by the near neighbourhood of the sacred city-. Menes, having gained the sovereignty of Egypt, which probably before his time was divided into two states, founded the city of Memphis. In order to gain sufficient room for the site he changed the course of the Nile by- constructing a dike, which turned the stream more to tbe east, M. Linant believes that this dyke is probably represented by that of Kusheysh. The great temple of Ptah, at Memphis, was then founded ; and there can be no doubt that the seat of government was, under Menes, or not much later, removed to the new city. Menes made laws and waged a successful war. After a long reign of sixty-two years lie was killed by a hippopotamus. All this has a perfectly historical aspect. Only a legislator and warrior, and so a mighty hunter, could have set upon a stable basis the long-lasting fabric of Egyptian polity. The main qualities of the man who did this could not have been forgotten at Memphis, which WaS great and flourishing, the chief seat of Egyptian learning and wealth, before the close of the Third Dynasty. The reproach. that Menes corrupted the prhnitive shnplicity of the Egyptians is probably a, perverted tradition, like that which changed the tyranny of Khufu and Khafra to impiety. In later times Menes was reverenced with other kings, but as far as we know had no special worship, a con-dition suitable to his historical character, now universally admitted.
Athothis, either Tota or Atot, the first or second succes-sor of Menes, is related to have founded the palace- at Memphis, and, being a physician, to have written anatomi-cal books. A medical papyrus in the Museum of I3erlin, composed under Ramses II. (Dynasty XIX.), curiously illus-trates the second statement. It contains a portion said to have.been copied from a very ancient papyrus discovered in the time of Hesp-ti, or Usaphaidos, a later king of the First Dynasty, and to have been subsequently taken to Septa, or Egyptian inscriptions they are !ailed Rebu, or helm, and appear on early monuments as dark people. Under the Empire they have Caucasian characteristics. The change was probably due to the great maritime migrations of the l'elasgic tribes, in which the Libyans had an important share. To the next king, Tosorthros, Manetho assigns the invention of building with hewn stones and cultivation of letters, and says that for his medical knowledge the Egyptians called him iEsculapius. If the Pyramid of Steps dates from an earlier king, the first statement must be qualified, though it is to be remarked that the difference of constructive skill between that monument, if so early, and the works of Dynasty IV., would almost justify the historian; and again the discovery of inscriptions of a less accurately ordered kind than those of Dynasty IV. may support the second statement; the third seems at variance with the Memphite worship of the Egyptian YEsculapius, Imlb - ep. On the monuments contemporary history begins with the last king the lists assign to this dynasty, Senoferu, probably Manetho's last but one, Sephuris. We may now take a retrospect of the age. It is in some respects curiously primitive in comparison with that which immediately follows it. Dr Brugsch has remarked the general absence in the kings' names of the name of Ra, afterwards essential to throne-names, which from the medallic character of seine of these they seem to have been, and the equally general absence of the names of other gods, Ra occurring once in the three dynasties and Sekeri once. Again he has observed the somewhat plebeian aspect of these names, as proper to men who sternly ruled the masses. Mena is "the stable," lie who resists ; Tota, " he who strikes ;" Senta, " the terrible ;" Huni," he who strikes." Senoferu is "the betterer." As "the striker of the peoples," for so he is called in his inscription at Wadee Magharah, in the Sinaitic peninsula, he is a foreign conqueror.' From Senoferu, at the close of Dynasty III., to the end of Dynasty VI., we have a succession of contemporary monuments by which history can be reconstructed, not only in its political events, but in those details of the condition of the population which make an essential part of all real history. Under Senoferu we find great material prosperity, and the arts already in that condition of excellence which makes the Pyramid age in sonic respects the most remarkable in the annals of Egypt. We also find foreign conquest, not as in the time of the Empire for glory, but with the view of extending the Egyptian rule to countries whose products were valuable for the arts. It is thus that this Pharaoh is the earliest who has left a tablet in the Sinaitic peninsula, where perhaps he, as Dr Brugsch thinks, was the first to plant military colonies to protect the workers in the mines of copper and the valuable blue stone called " mafkat," and this idea is supported by his being afterwards worshipped there. He is also the first king whose pyramid is found with its special name on the monuments. Dr Brugsch thinks it is that now called the Pyramid of Meydoom, near which chapels of tombs bearing his name have been discovered, and a group consisting of two statues, remarkable as a splendid specimen of Egyptian archaic art. The subjects, it may be remarked, were usually buried near fLe pyramid of the reigning king. Senoferu the betterer left a good name as a beneficent king, and his worship was maintained until the Ptolemaic period.
Khufu, the Sunhis I. of Manetho and Cheons of Herolotus, immediately succeeds Senoferu in the lists of the monuments, so that he may be regarded as the legitimate head of Dynasty IV. The list of that dynasty is as follows : - Khufu, Ratatf, Khafra, Menkaura, Shepseskaf, corresponding to eight kings in Manetho, in whom also the order is different, Ratatf (Ratoises) following Menkaura (Mencheres), a natural consequence of the association in fame of the builders of the three most celebrated pyramids, Khufu, Khafra, and Menkaura.2 The age of the pyramid-builders is the most brilliant before the Empire. We can judge from the royal tombs of the magnificence of the kings, and from the sepulchres around of the wealth of the subjects. The construction of the pyramids has perhaps been unduly marvelled at we should know in what other manner the. kings employed the vast amount of manual labour at their disposal, if we would estimate how much they could have effected by it in pyramid-building in the long period of time for which they ruled. If the two reigns of Khufu and Khafra extended over more than a century and a quarter, we may measure what we know them to have done against the works of other states during a like interval, and the comparison reduces our wonder.
The regal power at this time seems to have been very strong. So at least may we infer from the phraseology of the inscriptions, and from the fact that the kings threw much, if not all, of the force of the nation into personal monuments for their own memorial. Never in later times is the royal tomb the chief object of the king's reign, or is he so completely detached from the welfare of Egypt. The pyramids with their priesthoods are proofs that then the Pharaoh was more positively worshipped than ever afterwards.
It must, however, be admitted that the great men whose tombs are planned around the pyramids enjoyed abundant wealth and ease. Their time was passed not in war or in state affairs, but in the management of large estates, probably royal gifts, and in superintending the handicrafts of their people, and giving no small share of their leisure to the pleasures of the chase, to hospitality, and to the enjoyment of musical performances. In the chapels of their tombs these occupations of everyday life are portrayed. There is no sign of war, no great military class. It is true that the common folk seem to have been very poor, but their life in that land of abundance is at least represented as happy. On the other hand, it is significant that the nobility include a large number of the royal family, and that the king is not represented in the tombs, and when he is spoken of it is in terms of the most distant respect. Similarly there is an extraordinary reserve as to worship. Religions subjects are wanting, and the religious inscriptions are usually limited to the formula of dedication. The priesthood is already numerous, but it is connected with the service of the chapels of the pyramids. In the vast court a baneful bureaucratic class is already growing, in future to destroy the welfare of the people.
The reign of Khufu is principally marked by the building of the Great Pyramid. We learn from a curious inscription of a later date that he rebuilt the temple of Isis, near the Sphinx, carved out of the rock by some earlier king, and that be made a pyramid for the Princess Hent-sen in the same neighbourhood. The charge of impiety which the local tradition reported by Herodotus brings against Khufu thus fails, and the charge of tyranny associated with it, may be equally groundless. The cost of life in building the Great Pyramid can scarcely be compared with that of a long war under conditions resembling those of modern China. It should be noted that Khufu, as well as Khafra and Ratatf, were still objects of worship under Dynasty XXVI. (Brugsch, Mist., 2d ed. 57, 58). The only record of foreign conquest is a tablet in the peninsula of Sinai, commemorating what was probably no more than a successful maintenance of the posts already there established to guard the mines.
The reign of Khafra is commemorated, like that of Khufu, by the royal sepulchre and the tombs of subjects. From the latter we are able to contradict the tradition of his hostility to the national religion, in which Herodotus associates him with Khufu. The most interesting remains of the time are the statues of this king found in a well near the Sphinx, into which they were probably thrown either by a foreign invader or by early Christians or by Arabs, rather than in a popular revolt after his death (cf., however, Maspero, Histoire Ancienne, 73). A statue and a bust of Khafra from this find have been published by M. de Roug6 (Six Pron. Dyn., pl. iv. v,). Both are remarkable works, showing a naturalistic style that makes them far superior to later statues. The king's head is evidently a portrait, and the type is more Caucasian than the generality of later subjects.
Menkaura, or Mencheres, the Mycerinus of Herodotus, and the founder of the Third Pyramid, does not seem to have been specially reverenced in later times, in contradiction to the report of Herodotus. It is, however, interesting, in connection with the tradition of his support of religion, that the Egyptian Ritual speaks of its 64th chapter as found by Har-tot-ef, son of Mencheres, at Hermopolis Magna, when he made an inspection of the temples of Egypt, and brought as a precious document to the king (Brugsch, Kist., 2d ed. p. 59, 60). It would thus appear that the Ritual was not then completed, and Manetho's statement that Suphis I., Khufu, wrote the sacred book may be another hint as to its date. It may also be noticed that the queen of Khafra was priestess of Thoth (Six Prem. Dyn., 277 seqq.), and a noble, probably son of Khafra, was high-priet of Thoth at Hermopolis, a dignity held by another prince in the same reign (Id. 280, 281).
The most interesting record of Menkaura is his wooden mummy-case, found by General Howard Vyse in the Third Pyramid. In the disappointing silence of those vast monuments, without a single ancient Egyptian writing save the graffiti of workmen and the inscriptions of native visitors, this solitary record of the time is the one authoritative voice from the royal sepulchres, and it tells us in its short archaic formula that the whole myth of Osiris in its relations to human destiny was already matured. The king as Osiris has become divine and has vanquished his enemies (Brugsch, Hist., 2d ed., 58, 59).
The next family, Dynasty V., continued to rule at Memphis.1 Of its sovereigns we know but little. The last but one, Asia, is the first Pharaoh whom we know to have had two names, the throne-name as well as the ordinary one. To his son Ptah-hotep is assigned the ancient moral treatise already noticed in speaking of Egyptian literature, which is on the whole the best fruit of Egyptian thought that time has spared. The last king, Unas, varied the form of royal tombs, by constructing the great truncated pyramid now called Mastabat-Faraoon, or Pharaoh's Seat, north of the Pyramids of Dahshoor. (Id. 67.) The Sixth Dynasty was probably a family of a different part of Egypt.2 It has left many records which indicate less centralization at Memphis than those of the earlier sovereigns, and mark the beginning of wars for predatory purposes and extension of territory. This change is accompanied by a less careful style of sculpture, and less pains in the excavation of the tombs, as though the Egyptians were gaining a larger horizon, or, it may be, exchanging religion for ambition. The interest of the dynasty centres in the undoubtedly long reign of Pepi, second or third king of the line, and the inscription of Una. In this inscription we first read of great wars, and foreign conquered nations are spoken of by name. A military system had already begun, for we read how the king sent with Una an officer and soldiers to transport a sarcophagus for the royal tomb front the quarries of Turk. A war is then undertaken against the nomads of the eastern desert - the Amu (Shemites 1) and the Herusha, " those who are on the sand." An army is levied from the whole population of Upper and Lower Egypt, as though there were no military caste. Negroes are also enrolled front several countries mentioned by name, which must have been subject to Egypt, and are drilled by Egyptian officers, including priests. Una is appointed general in chief. Five separate expeditions are conducted by him into the country of the Herusha. It seems an error to suppose that this nation were Arabs of the desert, for the Egyptian general cut down their vines and their fig-trees (1) Another expedition was conducted by water against the same nation in a country called Takheba ? (De Rouge) or Terehba I (Brugsch), which M. de Rouge conjectures may be Arabia Petnea, or a part of Syria, remarking that it was near Egypt, for the expeditions seem to have been annual. The external activity of the reign of Pepi is also attested by a tablet at Wadee Magharah, and his public works by many inscriptions, among which we must not omit the occurrence of his name at Tanis, and in the inscription relating to the building of the temple of Dendarah. He founded a city called the "City of Pepi" in Middle Egypt, which has wholly disappeared, and tombs of his time are found in various parts of the Nile valley. His pyramid, which, like Memphis, was called the " good station," Men-nofer, was probably at the ancient capital, and may be one of the two great pyramids of Dahshoor, which are of later date than Dynasty IV., if we may judge from their structure, and both of which from their size imply reigns of the greatest prosperity and of long duration.
Pepi was succeeded by his son Merenra. The new king made Una governor of Upper Egypt, and employed him to bring blocks of granite from Elephantine for his pyramid, and in various other works of which the inscription already referred to gives most curious details. He was charged to obtain wood, which was provided by the prince of four Ethiopian nations already mentioned among those furnishing negroes to the great army of Pepi. We thus learn that tributary Ethiopia was ruled by a native prince or princes under the governor of Upper Egypt, who also had the power of establishing posts in the dependency. Una made four docks and timber-yards in Ethiopia for building boats, and attached a chapel to each. We may thus expect to find some record of Egyptian rule at this early time, long before the complete reduction of Lower Nubia, in territories far south ; for the timber-growing country does not begin for some distance within the tropics.
Merenra was followed by his younger brother Neferkara, and, according to Manetho, the dynasty ended with the beautiful Queen Nitoeris, whose name appears in the Turin Papyrus, but whose exact historical place is not certain. If she was buried in the Third Pyramid, of which Manetho, according to the copyists, makes her the builder, she enlarged the original work of Mencheres, and certainly no pyramid is so evidently not merely a double structure but one of double design. Nitocris is almost the only Egyptian whose historical character has been lost in a succession of legends. One version of her story is the most ancient form of that of Cinderella ; in another, she still bewitched the Arab of the Middle Ages when he approached her pyramid (cf. 'gasper°, Hist. AnC., 94).
With the later part of Dynasty VI. the second great chasm in Egyptian history begins, and we have no monuments to guide us until the time of Dynasty XI. According to Manetho, Dynasties VII. and VIII. were of Memphites, and IX. and X. of Heracleopolites, the Diospolite or Theban line comprising Dynasties XI., XII., and XIII. Whether the dynasties which intervened between the VIth and XIIth were contemporary or successive, and how much time they occupied, cannot yet be proved. In the Tablet of Abydos, a series of kings unknown from other monuments follows Dynasty VI., and precedes two kings of Dynasty XI. In the Chamber of Kings of El-Karnak other and earlier kings of Dynasty XI. are named, with curious indications that it was first but a local line. To the period of the earlier kings of Dynasty XI. belongs Entef-aa, who reigned at least fifty years. It would appear that the Memphite kingdom waned, and that another line arose at Thebes, the house of the Entefs and Mentuhoteps. The power of these kings gradually increased, and at last one of them reunited under a single rule the whole of Egypt. (Maspero, Hist. Aar., 98, 99.) Probably the Ileracleopolite line, Dynasties IX., X., was a local house contemporary with the Memphites or Thebans, or both.
With Dynasty XII.1 the Theban line was firmly established over all Egypt. In the circumstances referred to in the " Instructions " of Amenemhat I., its first king, to his son Usurtesen I., we have a glimpse into the unquiet condition of the country when the line arose (Id., 101). Similarly the custom of associating the heir apparent as king with his father, the peculiarity of this dynasty, indicates the dangers that then surrounded the throne (ef. Id, 105).
It is to the grottoes of Benee-Hasan that we owe most of our knowledge of the manners and arts of Egypt under Dynasty XII., and much of its history is there told in the memoirs of a family of governors under the first five kings of this house. No one can have examined these beautiful tombs without being struck by the advance in architecture which they show, and the evidence of prosperity and cultivation afforded by their paintings. The subjects resemble those of the tombs of the earlier dynasties, but there is a greater variety, partly due to a inure luxurious condition of society, partly to a more flexible art. It is sufficiently evident that the preceding dynasty (XI.) cannot have been weak, and the country under its ride distracted. A time of prosperity must have preceded this bright period of Egyptian history.
Amenemhat I., probably a successful minister of an earlier king (Brngsch, Hist., 2d ed., 79, 80, 84), had an active and prosperous reign, ruling like Pepi beyond Egypt to the south, and occupying himself in the construction of various monuments. As the head of a new line he paid special attention to the boundaries of territories, to the regulation of the inundation, and to the confirmation of hereditary governors (Benee-Hasan inscr. ; Brugsch, 2d ed., 94, 95). A very curious view of the state of Egypt in his time is given us by the story of Sandia in a hieratic papyrus of the Berlin .1useum (translated by M. Goodwin, in Records of the Past, vi. 131, sm.). It is the history of an Egyptian who fled from the king and took refuge with a neighbouring prince, whose territory unhappily we cannot as yet determine, and after a long sojourn sought his sovereign's pardon and returned home to be taken into the favour of Amenemhat. The reception of the fugitive abroad, his home-sickness, and the kindness of the Pharaoh, who at the same time is described in terms of the most abject respect, form an interesting picture, and one remarkably illustrating several events in the history of Egypt.
Under Usurtesen I., the co-regent and successor of Amenemhat I., Egypt had reached its highest prosperity after the age of the pyramid-builders of Dynasty IV. The obelisk which still marks the site of Heliopolis, a fragment of a statue at Tanis, inscriptions on the rocks of the Sinaitie peninsula, and a stele from Wadee lialfeh, recording foreign conquests in the south, now in the Naples Museum, attest the splendour of this reign. The records of private individuals are, however, its most instructive memorials. Mentuhotep has given us a picture of the power and status of an Egyptian prime minister, holding all or nearly all the functions of the members of a modern cabinet, a position singularly parallel to that of Joseph, to the detail that even great men bowed before him. To his stele we owe the information that he gained successes against the Asiatics, the Herusha, and the negroes. (Brugsch, Hist., 2d ed., 91, sm.) Of Amenemhat II. and Usurtesen II., the next kings, there is little to relate but that Egypt continued to prosper. It was under Usurtesen III. that a great step in advance was made by the fixing of the boundaries of the Egyptian dominion beyond the Second Cataract, at Semneh and Kummeh, where this king built sanctuaries and fortresses, and placed great boundary-marks in the form of tablets. These in their inscriptions define the limits of the kingdom, and regulate the passage of negroes by the river (Id., 102). Here and throughout Nubia, Usurtesen was worshipped in subsequent times. He had introduced a settled govermnent into the country, which long after was virtually a part of Egypt rather than a dependency. His successor Amenemhat III. is chiefly famous for his great engineering works. That care which the first Amenemhat bestowed on the regulation of the inundation seems to have been the great object of his reign. The rocks of Senmeh and Rummell bear registers of the height of the Nile in several years of his reign. His great enterprise, the most successful of its kind ever carried out in Egypt, was the construction of a vast artificial reservoir, Lake Mceris, in the province now called the .Eeiyomn, which received the waters of the Nile by a canal, and after the inundation spread them over the country. Its fisheries were also very valuable. Through the neglect of ages the site of Lake Mceris was forgotten until, in our time, M. Linant traced it. Near the lake, Amenemhat ID. built the famous Labyrinth, of which the remains were discovered by Dr Lepsius during the Prussian Expedition to Egypt, and there raised a pyramid. The use of the Labyrinth is unknown ; the pyramid was no doubt the royal tomb. Its moderate dimensions and the vast size of the lake show a remarkable contrast to the earlier great pyramids, with apparently no corresponding work of public usefulness. At the time which produced the Lake Mceris civilization had reached a point far above that of the age of Khufu, perhaps the highest Egypt has ever known. Of the short reigns of Amenenthat 1V. and Queen Sebek-nefru-ra we know nothing, but that with the latter the dynasty came to a close.
With the accession of Dynasty XIII. we reach the third chasm in the Egyptian monumental records. This line, Theban like its predecessor, but with a special favour for Middle Egypt (V. Brugsch, Mist., 24 ed. 115), seems to have ruled all Egypt. Its power, however, was evidently weakened, either by external war or by internal dissension. Many monuments may have been lost or may yet lie hid in the mounds of towns of Middle Egypt, but the scantiness of records of public works is a proof of its weakness. Where are its tablets in the quarries '1 In the Turin Papyrus are preserved the lengths of several of the reigns of its kings, who generally bore the names Sebek-hotep or Nefer-hotep. The longest reign is 13 years, and but one other reaches 10, the total of 13 reigns being but 48 years 22 days, and 6 sums of months and 7 of days effaced. Putting the total at 50 years, the allowance for each reign is under 4 years. This must have been a time of disturbance, but not necessarily of disastrous wars ; for if we compare the rule of the second line of Memlook sultans we obtain an average reign of 5 years each. This we know to have been the consequence of domestic disturbance, and not of great public disasters at home or abroad. Dynasty XIV., of Xoites, the next in Manetho's list, is the first which had certainly its capital in the Delta. Beyond this fact we can only conjecture its importance and chronological place.
The invasion and conquest, at least in part, of Egypt by the Hyksos, or Shepherd Kings, is undoubtedly the chief cause of the obscurity of this age. The event did not happen until at least some time after the beginning of Dynasty XIII., for the eighteenth king of that line in the Turin Papyrus, who bears the significant name Mer-mesha, " the general," has left a record at Tanis near the eastern frontier, which was probably the chief city of at least one dynasty of the invaders.
Manetho, as cited by Josephus, allows for the stay of the foreigners in Egypt a period of 511 years, which has been supposed to be about the interval beween Dynasty XII. and Dynasty XVIII., by which they were expelled. This number, however, rests upon the single evidence of Josephus, and is moreover probably made up of sums of dynasties, which would render its evidence doubtful. A bett.3r means of measuring the period would be afforded by the monumental evidence that a Shepherd king ruled 400 years before Ramses If. could we place this foreign sovereign. All that can be said as to the chronology is that Dynasty XV. and XVI. were probably of Shepherds, and Dynasty XVII. was certainly Theban. Judging from the numbering, it is probable that there was a break in the Theban succession, and that the two Shepherd dynasties were successive, the Xoites perhaps being but a provincial line.1 The story of the Hyksos is thus told by Manetho. Under a king called Timaios, or Timaos (not recognized in the list or on the monuments), certain invaders from the East conquered Egypt without a battle, destroying the temples and slaying or enslaving the people. At length they made one of themselves, Salatis by name, king, who ruled at Memphis, and made all Egypt tributary. For the better protection of the eastern border be rebuilt and fortified the city Avaris, in the Sethroite nome in Lower Egypt, where he kept a great force of soldiers. He was succeeded by other kings mentioned by name, who, and their descendants, held Egypt for 511 years. After this the kings of the Thebais and of the rest of Egypt rose against the Shepherd rule, and a great and long war was waged, until Misphragmuthosis drove the Shepherds out of all Egypt except Avaris, where his son Tuthmosis besieged them, and failing to take the place agreed to a capitulation, on the condition that they should be allowed to leave the country. Accordingly they went through the desert to Judas and founded Jerusalem. They were called Hyksos, or Shepherd kings, and, according to some, they were Arabs.
This narrative, notwithstanding a general confirmation from the monuments, is evidently not wholly correct. In particular it is inconsistent with all other evidence in attributing the foundation of Jerusalem to the Shepherds, which is evidently the result of an endeavour to connect their departure with the Exodus. Manetho seems to have preserved two Egyptian theories of the Exodus, which both explained that event as the retreat of eastern invaders. M. Mariette's researches in the ruins of Tanis have brought to light monuments of the Shepherds, and led to the discovery of others elsewhere, while M. de Bongo and other scholars have explained Egyptian documents connected with the war of independence. From these different sources we learn that the foreigners were of the Shemite or a kindred type, resembling the modern inhabitants of the north-east of Lower Egypt, who still retains the peculiarities already noticed by Greek writers. Though their conquest may have been marked by violence, we find them in their own monuments using and cultivating the manners and civilization of Egypt, and even giving a new and characteristic development to its art in their costly monoliths of granite, which show from their material that their rule extended to the southern boundary of Egypt. The war of independence arose between Apepee, one of their later kings, who is described as worshipping Seth only, and one of the three Theban kings called on the monuments lia-skenen Taa, at this time apparently a tributary prince. Time war, contrary to Manetho's statement, does not seem to have been of long continuance, having been brought to a successful end by Aahmes, first king of Dynasty XVIII., between whom and Ba-skenen Taa no great length of time can have elapsed. Manetho's text is again erroneous in making the conqueror Tuthmosis (Thothmes IV.), son (grandson) of Misphragmuthosis (Thothmes III.), sixth and fifth sovereigns of Dynasty XVIII. in his list; but this may be a confusion due to copyists, as there is other evidence that he placed the conquest of the Shepherds under Amosis, or Aahmes. The expulsion of the foreigners was not so complete as Manetho would have us imagine. Several names in their territory remained Shemite, or the population non-Egyptian, and under Dynasty XIX. the prejudice that appears in Dynasty XVIII. seems almost removed.
It must be here noticed that Dr Brugsch has copied a remarkable inscription, from the tomb at Eilethyia of Baba, whom he assigns to the latter part of Dynasty XVII., in which mention is made of a famine of successive years. " A famine having broken out during many years, I gave corn to the town during each famine." There are but two known instances in history of a famine in Egypt lasting several years, the seven years' famine of Joseph and the seven years' famine of the Fatimee caliph El-Mustansir. Dr Brugsch has, therefore, argued with high probability that Baba records the famine of Joseph, and that the old tradition that Joseph governed Egypt under the Shepherd King Apophis is a true one (cf. sepia, p. 735, note 1). To this we shall recur in speaking of the Exodus. (See Brugsch, Ha, 2 ed. 174, seqq.) The beginning of Dynasty XVIII. (n.c. 1600-15002) is marked by two great events, the union of divided Egypt under one head, and the victorious end of the great war with the Shepherds.' Aahmes, probably a Theban prince, appears to have secured the supreme rule over the various princes of Egypt, without abolishing their rights, and to have gained Ethiopian support by his marriage with Nefru-ari, daughter of a king of Ethiopia. He then directed his whole power to the final liberation of Egypt. The tomb at Eilethyia of Aahmes son of Abuna, an officer of the Egyptian flotillas, in an inscription relating his services, throws light on the events of this war. He passed his early youth in the fortress of Eilethyia, one of the strong positions where the kings of Dynasty XVII. rallied their subjects. In the reign of Aahmes he was made officer of the ship called the "Calf." Later he went to the flotilla of the north to fight. It was during the siege of the✓fortress of Avaris. He served in the vessel " Ruling in Memphis," a name no doubt given to commemorate the addition of the ancient capital to the dominions of Aahmes. An engagement took place on the water near Avaris. Subsequently Avaris was taken, and the young officer carried off three captives, whom the king granted him as slaves. This was in the. fifth year of Aahmes ; in the next we read of the conquest of Sharuhan, the Sharuhen of the book of Joshua, in the south-west of Palestine. The memoir then adds that, after having slain the Shepherds of Asia, the king undertook a successful expedition against an Ethiopian country. (See Brugsch, Mist., 1 ed. 80,81.) Tins narrative, while generally confirming Manetho's story, corrects it in some particulars. It states that Avaris was taken, not that it capitulated, and indicates a pursuit of the enemy within the territory of Palestine, where they were again conquered in a city which they attempted to hold. The Ethiopian expedition was a reassertion of the Egyptian dominion to the south. Two tablets in the Tura quarries record how, in the twenty-second year of his reign, Aahmes restored the temples which had fallen into decay, the blocks being removed by bulls under the charge of Phoenicians? (Feukhu) (Brugsch, Dist., 2 ed. 173, 174). It may be recollected that the Phoenicians appear as skilled smiths and masons in the time of Solomon, and that as early as the Exodus they were already great metalworkers.
From the time of Aahmes till the close of Dynasty XX. we may reckon the rise, fulness, and decay of the Egyptian Empire. It is a period of abundant monuments, sculptured and painted, and of many papyri, rich in records of the history, manners, and religion of Egypt. The state of the country may be glanced at in this place, where the Shepherd period closes, so as not to break the continuity of the subsequent history.
The sudden growth of prosperity at home and power abroad which marks the early reigns of Dynasty XVIII. is truly surprising. The Egypt of Dynasty XVII. is broken up and only slowly reuniting ; that of Dynasty XVIII is at once solidly bound together, and soon to engage in designs of world-dominion never hinted at in earlier times. These conditions were the result of a great national war, in which the country discovered her hidden force, and was not content to use it only so far as was needful to make a strong Egypt like that of Dynasty XII. Having conquered her foreign rulers at home, she desired to add their native lands to her own dominions. The first effects of these designs were the enrichment of Egypt. In the early reigns of this house the wealth of the subjects as of the king rapidly grew. From the simple monuments of Dynasty XVII. and the first kings of Dynasty XV1IL there is a sudden advance to richness and splendour. Egypt was, however, becoming a military state. The king is constantly more powerful, and his public works more magnificent ; the subjects, notwithstanding the luxury of individuals, have not that solid princely strength that we admire in those of the Pyramid kings and Dynasty XII. The appearance of the horse under this dynasty is most significant. The beasts of burden, the ox and ass, now yield in importance to the war-horse, and the landed proprietor journeys in his car whose ancestor went afoot staff in hand. Thus the military man succeeds the fanner. The priest is no longer a great man who has assumed sacerdotal functions, but one of a class immensely extended, reaching from the highest dignitaries, one of whom, strengthened by hereditary power, could at last seize the throne, down to the menial class who lived upon the superstitions of the people. To carry on the government there grew side by side with soldiers and priests a vast official body, clever, ambitious, and unscrupulous, which rapidly on the true bureaucratic principle involved the administration in an entanglement which must have mainly led to the decline of the Empire. Justice, which was difficult at home, must have been almost impossible abroad. We now cease to hear of hereditary nomarchs studying the welfare of provinces to which they were attached by ancestral connection. All posts went by the royal favour. The common people fared ill in this age. Their function was to supply soldiers for the army and navy, and at first to take their share in the construction of public works ; their only hope was to rise in the official class. Handicrafts and all labour were beneath a gentleman ; hence no one could rise to his grade but through success at the schools, which were open to every one, and where a boy of talent had his chance of a career (ef. Brugsch., 1 ed. 16,17).
Of the administration of provinces and conquered states we know little. Lower Ethiopia had always been ruled as a part of Egypt ; this system was extended southward. At first the eastern states only paid tribute. Ultimately garrisons were placed in Palestine and Phu:nicht (Brugsch, Mist., 1 ed. 135). Compared with the Assyrians the Egyptians were civilized conquerors, and the sculptures of their battles do not represent any scenes of extreme cruelty. They do not, however, seem to have known the art of effectually holding their acquisitions, which had to be reconquered over and over again, until the inevitable tide of conquest on the other side set in, and the Empire fell.
On examining the earliest monuments of Dynasty XVIII. we are startled by their astonishing resemblance to those of Dynasty XI., a resemblance which would, had we Co historical evidence on the other side, justify the leap of the Tablet of Abydos from Dynasty XII. to XVIII. This may be partly explained as a renaissance of art due to a royal descent traced rather to Dynasty XI. than Dynasty XII. Similarly under Dynasty XXVI. there was a renaissance of the art of the age of the early Memphite Dynasties. We must also not lose sight of the local character of Egyptian art and its intense conservatism, which may have preserved an ancient type through many centuries. The early art of Dynasty XVIII. has this character of a survival ; that of Dynasty XXVI. is clearly a modern imitation.
The art of this age is in some respects the finest Egypt produced ; it is, perhaps, best about the time of Thothmes III. and Amenophis II., the middle of Dynasty XVIII. It is inferior in naturalism to the art of Dynasty IV., and in delicacy to that of Dynasty XII., but it has a certain splendour before wanting. After it had attained its highest point it slowly declined, partly from a decay in the vigour of the national character, perhaps more from the vast size of the later monuments, which must have led •L3 a neglect of finish in the details, though this neglect can only be seen by one who is thoroughly acquainted with the Egyptian styles. At all times there is an invincible patience in the mastery of material and the execution of detail. The temples, not the kings' tombs, are now the largest and most costly edifices ; though a compromise with the old idea is effected by making grand temples as sepulchral chapels in religious connection with the royal tombs, commemorating in their sculptures the events of the reigns. The tombs of subjects do not maintain the proportion the earlier ones hold to the royal sepulchres. Their paintings have less of daily life, and religion takes a greater and growing place on the walls. We have, however, a multitude of interesting scenes, which show us a life more luxurious in the many than that of earlier times, but not as splendid in the few. There is more of feasting, of music, and the dance, less of country life and the welfare of the retainers. The royal tombs are now grottoes deeply cut in the rock, and the pictures of their walls are religious, the historical part being left to the funereal temples.
Amenhotep or Amenophis I., son of Aahmes and his Ethiopian queen, carried on the Ethiopian wars. It is of his son, the next king, Thothmes I., that the great eastern campaigns are first recorded. He advanced as far as the Euphrates, and must therefore have subdued, or at least marched through, the greatest part of Phcenicia and Syria. The prosperity of Egypt at this time is shown by the splendid works he executed in the great temple of Amen-ra at Thebes, the earliest of their kind that we can trace, and apparently the beginning of the series which was only to cease with the fall of the Empire. The employment of captives in public works was the main means by which they could be carried out. Probably after a time all that Egypt could. do was to furnish men for the army, and in even this she failed when the dynasty came to an end. Before his death Thothmes I. had associated with him on the throne his daughter Hatshepu, or Hatasu (Maspero, Ilist. AnC., 201), who succeeded him with her elder brother and husband Thothmes II. Her power is an evidence of the importance the a king, being represented in male attire, a circumstance to which the monuments present no parallel.
After the seemingly uneventful reign of Thothmes II., Hatshepu was associated, apparently as regent,•with her younger brother Thothmes III., and usurped the sole power. It is in this time that she appears as a king. She continued the works of the temple of Amen-ra, where at Thebes. The glimpse we thus gain into the state of the civilization of the spice-growing countries at this remote age is most valuable, and explains the facility with which the southern dominions of Egypt were held. The nations in this direction were not masses of barbarous tribes, but their civilization did not take the direction of the pursuits of war.
Hatshepu had reigned about twenty-one years when Thothmes III. succeeded her. He carefully effaced her Whether he thus included his brother's reign or not we do have great insight into the condition of Syria and Palestine about the 15th century B.C.
It will be well here to glance for a moment at the Egyptian geography of this territory. There is great difficulty in explaining it, probably due to the different names apparently given to the same countries and peoples at one and the same time or at different times. We may, however, gain somewhat in clearness by observing that more than one important geographical name can only be an Egyptian appellative. Thus the Shasu, who were wander-. ing Arabs of the desert, who moved up as now into Palestine for pasturage or on predatory excursions, are nothing but " robbers." Most other names may be probably identified with Semitic equivalents. Syria is called Khal : this word is connected with Syria by the late equivalent Asher (cf. Maspero, Hist. Anc., 181, note 1), which shows that the Egyptians then identified Syria and Assyria. The great nation of Syria in the time of Thothmes III. was the Ruten. These may be the Shemites of the stock of Lud, and may be also the Lydians in a primitive seat. Under Ramses II. the Kheta, a northern division of the Hittites, held the political position of the Ruten, as though the Ruten bad migrated. As the Ruten probably represent the AramTans, so the Hittites represent the Canaanites. The Phoenicians appear to be the Kefa ; in the time of Thothmes III. they held an insular position in the Mediterranean, probably Cyprus; under Ptolemy III., they give their name to Phcenicia. They are clearly the Biblical Caplatorim. The Philistines do not appear- until the time of Ramses III. None of the primitive nations whom the Bible mentions as supplanted in the period before Joshua have been traced on the monuments, nor is there any clear notice before the time of Sheshonk I. (Shishak) of the Terahitcs. The period of Thothmes III. is one of Ararnan supremacy, that of Ramses II. of Canaanite ; together they well correspond to the age before the Israelite conquest, while the condition of the time of Ramses III. suits the latest age of the Judges. The names of towns present less difficulty. Many are traceable in Biblical geography, and here but one indication occurs which may point to Israelite occupation.
The Egyptian conquests on the east being tributary, there were constant revolts on the accession of new sovereigns. It was thus that Thothmes III., on becoming sole ruler, had immediately to reduce the Ruten and their neighbours. This caused the series of eastern campaigns, which began in the twenty-second year, very early in his sole reign, and certainly extended to the forty-second, during which whole time there was seldom a year of repose. The If they were marked by barbarity, there is no boast of ought but conquest and the levying of tribute. The tribute no less than a contemporary painting shows the great material civilization of the Asiatic states. Throughout, the Ituten are the most formidable enemies ; the Kheta only appear. The first great achievement was the defeat before Megiddo of a confeieracy led by the prince of Ketesh, or Kadesh on the Orontes. In the battle only 83 of the enemy were killed, and 340 taken prisoners ; but the magnitude of the success is proved by the capture of 2232 horses, 924 chariots, and the speedy surrender of Megiddo. This town, as in Josiah's time, was the key of the route to the Euphrates, and on its capture the king of the Ruten and the king of Assur are mentioned as becoming tributaries. In the course of the wars Kadesh was captured twice, and the king of Egypt marched as far as Nineveh, and the name of Babel is mentioned. The reign of Thothmes was also marked by expeditions in Ethiopia, and then we first meet with the supposed Egyptian name of the Danai, with whom he came in contact during some expedition in the Mediterranean. Great buildings commemorate this active reign, and we have a glimpse of the personal character of the king in the eccentric architecture of one of his additions to the temple of Amen-ra at Thebes. After a reign of 54 years 11 months, reckoning from the accession of Hatshepu, Thothmes III. was succeeded by his son Amenophis II.
The accession of the new king was marked by a war in Assyria, in which he captured Nineveh. An incident of his eastern campaigns is remarkable for its Oriental barbarism. He brought back to Egypt the bodies of seven kings whom lie had slain with his own hands. The heads of six were placed on the walls of Thebes ; the seventh was sent to remote Napata in Ethiopia to be hung on the walls to strike terror into the negroes. After a prosperous but probably short reign, Amenophis II. was succeeded by his son Thothmes IV., of whom we only know that he maintained his father's empire during a reign that probably did not exceed the nine years assigned to him by Mauetho.
Amenophis III. succeeded his father, and, during a long and it seems mainly pacific reign, occupied himself in great architectural works. Two temples at Thebes owe their origin to him, that on the western bank, which was the funereal temple of his tomb in the western valley beyond, and of which little now remains but the two great statues in the plain, the Vocal Memnon and its fellow, and also the temple of El-Uksur on the eastern bank. In his time the dimensions of the structures of the earlier kings are surpassed, and the proportions of the greatest monuments of the Empire are almost attained. Probably he was the first of the family after A.ahmes who took a foreigner to wife. On the great scarabmi which commemorate his marriage, with Queen Tai, we are informed that his rule extended from Mesopotamia to Southern Ethiopia.
Amenophis IV., the son of this foreign marriage, is the most perplexing character in ancient Egyptian history. Under his mother's influence he introduced a new religion, the worship of Aten, the solar disk, and after a time wholly suppressed the national religion, even changing his name to Khu-n-aten. Abandoning Thebes as the capital, lie founded a new city in Middle Egypt, where he constructed a chief temple to Aten, and near which his officials excavated their tombs in the mountain. The type under which the king and his family and subjects are represented is unlike any other in Egyptian art. They are all of emaciated and distended figure, and surpassing ugliness. The king is treated with a servile respect nowhere else seen on the monuments. His troops are mixed with foreign mercenaries. But we do not hear of foreign expeditions; every one is occupied in the duties of the new religion, without polytheism or idols. Flowers are the chief offerings and adorn the temple throughout ; hymns chanted to the sound of harps are the form of worship. Was this a foreign religion, or an Egyptian restoration of primitive belief'? If it were Egyptian why was the sun called A ten, not Ra The king was the son of a foreigner, and his type and that which marks his court, probably because some were of his mother's race, and art assumed the fashionable type for the rest, is not recognizable in any of the characteristic representations of foreign races. It is neither Ethiopian nor Shemite nor Libyan. The names of his mother and of her parents, the name of the sun-god, which is Egyptian, and the character of the worship, do not as far as we know point to any of these races. Certainly they are not Semitic. For race and religion we must probably look beyond the horizon of the Egyptian conquests. The type is not without an Indian aspect, and the religion has in its simplicity and the character of its worship a striking likeness to Vedism.
Khu-n-aten had seven daughters and no son. His successor Ai was his foster-brother and the husband of his eldest daughter. Under him the national religion was tolerated. Two other sons-in-law succeeded. Their lino then or soon after came to an end, on the accession of Harem-heb, or Horns, who claimed to be the legitimate successor of Amenophis III., either by descent or on account of the innovations of Khu-n-aten, who with the kindred kings does not appear in the monumental lists, in which Har-em-heb is seen as the immediate successor of Amenophis III. The same order is followed in Manetho's list, in which the house of Khu-n-aten follows Horns. What time this line lasted we do not know. Probably it did not exceed a generation. Horns occupied himself in destroying the monuments of Khu-n-aten and his successors, and no doubt in fully restoring the national religion.
Another family gained the throne after the reign of Horns, that of the Bamessides, forming Dynasties XIX. and XX.1 Ramses I., who seems to have been of Lower Egyptian extraction, and not impossibly connected by ancestry with the Shepherd kings, seized the royal power, maintained his authority abroad by campaigns in the south and the east, and concluded a treaty of peace with the king of the Hittites. After a very short reign he left the crown to his son Setee I., or Sethos, who strengthened his rights by marrying Tai, a granddaughter of Amenophis Ramses II., the son of this marriage, thus became legitimate king, and Setee made him his colleague at a very early age, no doubt to conciliate the Egyptians, a position at first ignored, evidently owing to the difficulty of defining it, but which ended in the virtual abdication of Setee (Maspero, Hst. Anc., 215-217). The troubles that preceded the reign of Ramses I. must have weakened the foreign dominion of Egypt. Wars in the east occupied the earliest years of Setee. The Kheta had now succeeded to the Ruten in the supremacy of Northern Syria. Although Setee conquered the Kheta and captured Kadesh, now their chief town, the war ended by the conclusion of a second treaty between the Egyptian and Hittite kings. It is not necessary to suppose, with M. Maspero (II1st. Axe., 215), that the Egyptian Empire was already waning, because it was thus barred off from Further Asia and obliged to meet the Hittite king on equal terms. The conditions were no doubt changed from those of the time of Thothmes III., but the list of the confederacy which the next king of the Kheta led against Ramses II., compared with that which Thothmes defeated at Megiddo, shows that the Kheta could bring into the field much inure formidable allies than did the Ruten. Moreover there was a change in the foreign policy of Egypt. Pheenicia, and Palestine were ruled by means of a chain of fortresses held by Egyptian garrisons. (Brugsch, Hist., 1 ed. 135; Maspero, Hist. Anc., 215.) If the Empire was narrowed in its limits, it was more solidly ruled ; and this is quite consistent with the conclusion of a treaty with the Kheta. As a builder Setee I. is only equalled by Ramses II. He constructed the great hall of columns of El-Karnak, on the outside of the north wall of which he commemorated his victories in a series of most interesting sculptures. His splendid tomb is in the Valley of the Tombs of the Kings.
Ramses II. is without doubt the greatest figure irr the long line of the Pharaohs, and at the same time be is the one of whose character we have the best idea. His early training was in war and in government, for it cannot be a pure figure of speech by which the tablet found near Dakkeh in Nubia says that when he was but ten years old no monuments were executed without his orders (Brugsch, Hist., 1 ed. 137). This position was due to his superior right to the throne. Before the death of Setee I. the maritime nations of the Mediterranean made a descent on Egypt. The Shardana, or Sardones, and the Tuirsha, or Tyrseni, allied with the Libyans in this enterprise. Ramses defeated them so effectually that they do not seem to have again attacked Egypt till the reign of his son Menptah, about seventy years or more later. The captives of the Shardana instead of being employed in public works were enrolled in the king's guard. After an expedition against Ethiopia, Ramses, on the death of Setee, returned to Egypt. Early in his sole reign the peace between the Egyptians and the Hittites was broken. The king of the Hittites formed a great confederacy. The nations of Asia Minor, the Mysians, the Lycians, the Dardans, the people of Ilium, are found in the list of the poem of Pentaur, the Egyptian Ramesseid, which appropriately records the oldest war in which Troy had a part. To bring together the army of the confederates time must have been needed. Probably the war was determined on by the Hittites on the accession of the new king. The great campaign was that of the fifth year of Ramses. The decisive battle was preceded by a repulse, when the Egyptian army, deceived by the Arabs (Shasu), were suddenly, while on the march, attacked and routed by the enemy, who numbered no less than 2500 war-chariots. It was only by the personal bravery of Ramses that the Egyptians escaped destruction. This incident is the main subject of the poem of Pentaur. But on the next day the great battle was fought ; the confederates were beaten and retreated into Kadesh. The Hittite king now sued for peace, which was granted. It was speedily broken. In his eighth year Ramses took Shalam, probably Salem or Jerusalem, Maram (Merom), and Tapur (Dabir 1 near Mount Tabor), Bethanath, and Damon. In his eleventh year he captured Ascalon. The war does not seem to have been ended until the Hittite king Klietasar proposed conditions of peace which he brought to Ramses written on a silver tablet. The treaty concluded on these bases in the twenty-first year of Ramses is sculptured at El-Karnak. It is a most interesting document, being an alliance offensive and defensive, with articles of extradition, remarkable for their humanity, and others for the protection of commerce (Maspero, Hist. Anc., 222, 223). Both kings swore to observe the compact, which was a renewal of the previous treaties. It is remarkable that in this document the Hittite prince, instead of being called the "vile chief of the Kheta," is now the " great king," the style given to Ramses also. The eldest daughter of the Hittite king was taken in marriage as queen by Ramses, in whose twenty-third year Khetasar visited his son-in-law in Egypt. This alliance does not seem to have been broken for full a century, and then by conquerors who overcame the resistance of the Kheta and carried them with them. The remainder of the reign of Ramses appears to have been undisturbed by great wars, and given up to those vast buildings which are found throughout Egypt and Nubia, and which give him the first place among the architect Pharaohs. About the thirtieth year of his reign, his fourth son, the eldest surviving, was made regent, and on the death of this prince in the fifty-fifth year, Menptah the thirteenth son, now heir, took this post, holding it for the rest of his father's reign, which ended in the sixty-seventh year. Ramses must then have been at least near a hundred years old, perhaps more.1 He married three queens, and apparently had by them 23 sons and at least 13 daughters. The whole number of his children was 170, of whom 111 were sons and 59 daughters. All are styled princes or princesses, but probably only the children of queens had the right of succession.
Menptah succeeded Ramses II. There are but few monuments of his reign. The principal event they relate is a great incursion into the Delta of the maritime nations of the Mediterranean allied with the Libyans. By this time the Pelasgic tribes had wrested the dominion of the sea from the Phceuicians. Some causes, perhaps famines, had already disposed them to move from Asia Minor and the Greek islands, seeking new establishments in Egypt. The attempt that Ramses II. defeated in the lifetime of Setee was now renewed, apparently on a more formidable scale. The king of the Rebu (Libyans), with the warriors of several tribes joined the Shardana (Sardones), the Shakalasha (Sikels), the Leku (Lycians), the Tuirsha (Tyrseni), and the Akaiusha (Achmans). They had already entered Egypt and spread themselves over the west of the Delta, where they intended to settle, when the Egyptian forces attacked them and put them to rout after a battle of six hours' duration. It is remarkable that in this confederacy the Shakalasha and Akaiusha are added to the former list, and the Leku, who were in the Hittite confederacy against Ramses II., now appear on the west. Everything indicates the growing strength of the maritime nations and that power of united action which marked the period of the Trojan War. For the time the invasion was checked, but the Empire was evidently failing. The Hittites, indeed, were true to the treaty, and during famine were supplied with corn from Egypt, and the external provinces seem to have continued quiet. But side by side with the kingly power that of the high priests of Amen-ra had grown to formidable dimensions,- owing probably to the interest Ramses and Menptah showed for Lower Egypt, which put the weight of Thebes on the side of the highest local functionary. Menptah was not immediately followed by his son Setee II. There intervened two reigns, those of Amen; meses and Siptah, the first of the Ramses family by descent, the second, apparently, by marriage. They appear to have been of a branch holding a local principality. Setee II, succeeded them and restored the legitimate line. His reign •losed in anarchy. There was no longer one king : the chiefs of the nomes ruled and engaged in civil war. A worse period followed. A Syrian, Arisu by name, became chief of the nomarchs, society was dissolved, and the temple-services neglected. We are as yet unable to say how this revolution began. It seems to have had nothing to do with foreign wars, but to have been brought about by internal weakness. The time it lasted must have been long, according to the Papyrus of Ramses III., from which alone we know of it. There "many years " are assigned to the period of the nomarchs and "years" to the rule of the Syrian.
As the Exodus is now generally held to have occurred in the later years of Dynasty XIX., its place in Egyptian history may best be here noticed. The view referred to was first carefully worked out by Prof. Lepsius. It rests upon chronological and historical grounds. Manetho, apparently adopting a tradition, placed the Exodus in the reign of Menptah. The number of generations assigned in the Bible to the interval from the Exodus to Solomon would bring the former event to about the same time. This approximative date is in accordance with that of the Rabbinical chronology, B.C. 1314-13. The coincidence is, however, valueless, for the interval from the Exodus to the building of Solomon's Temple, in the Rabbinical chronology, is that of the Hebrew text, 480 years. The date of the Exodus should therefore be about B.C. 1480. The difference between 1480 and 1314-13 is caused by an error in the date of the building of the Second Temple, which is put B.C. 354, only 46 years before the date of Alexander's death, which is dated B.C. 308, or 15 years too late. There is thus a mistake of more than a century in so cardinal a date as the building of the Second Temple. If an event of this importance, occurring only 800 years before the drawing up of the chronology, is thus incorrectly dated, and a period of Jewish history obliterated, surely the date of the Exodus cannot rest upon any accurate information. The historical grounds are far stronger than the chronological. Manetho, relating, if we may trust Josephus, a current tradition (iraip CUP 8' 0 MavEthlw o b EK TC711, rap' Alyvirriots ypap.p.arow, /VC, 4/3 AUTOS WitoX6yrpccv, EK r(7.a, 4.8E1F7r0TOn /21.100A0)101J/J11/OW rposTiOccev, Zarepov e€iy$6.) 'car& p.lpos, K. 7. X., Contr. Ap., 1G), and Josephus is here confirmed by the evidence which the narrative shows of historical inaccuracy, has given an account of the Exodus from an Egyptian point of view. This story is the fullest version of one current in various forms in antiquity. As Manetho tells it, the chief points are these. King Amenophis, identified by him with Menptah, who occurs in his lists as Amenophis and Ammenephthis, determined, under the advice of a priest of the same name as himself, Amenophis the son of Papis, to cleanse Egypt of all lepers and other unclean persons, whom, accordingly, he set to work in the quarries. On their petition he gave them the city Avaris, left in ruins by the Shepherds. Having occupied the city, they chose one of themselves, a priest of Heliopolis, by name Osarsiph, as their ruler, who changed his name to Moyses. He made laws particularly directed against the Egyptian religion, and sent messengers to Jerusalem to the Shepherds, who had been expelled by the Egyptians, asking their aid and promising to give them their old territory Avaris, and to assist them to subdue Egypt. Accordingly the Shepherds invaded Egypt, when Amenophis came against them, but for superstitious reasons did not fight them, and withdrew to the friendly king of Ethiopia, in whose country be remained thirteen years, his ally protecting the southern Egyptian border. Meanwhile the people of Jerusalem and the unclean Egyptians ravaged Egypt, and destroyed everything connected with the national religion. Afterwards Amenophis and his son Sethos, also called Ramesses, returned and expelled the Shepherds and the unclean people. Chieremon gives a similar account with the same name for the king. Lysimacbus and Tacitus vary in calling the king Bocchoris.
The Egyptian evidence for the date of the Exodus would place it about this time. The geographical inquiries of Lepsius have been carried on by Brugsch, who, in a paper read before the Oriental Congress, has identified the prin. cipal geographical names of the narrative of the oppression and of the Exodus (Brugsch, L'Exode). In particular, nemeses is shown to have been another name of Tanis. The occurrence of this name in Genesis and Exodus is most important as bearing on the date of the Exodus, for it is almost certain that it was given by Ramses II., who rebuilt the great temple of the town. Another cardinal piece of evidence is the mention of the 'Aperiu, or 'Apuriu, as engaged in public works under Ramses II. and later kings, but not after Dynasty XX. In this name that of the Hebrews has been recognized. If the identification were certain we should have much reason for dating the oppression under Ramses II., which would accord with the Exodus under Menptah.
The difficulties of this theory are not slight. On the chronological side Manetho's date is only dependent on a tradition, and we cannot fix the chronology of the dynasty, B.C. 1300 for Menptah being about the middle point in a doubtful two centuries. The evidence of the Hebrew genealogies therefore is not conclusive for a date identical with that of Menptah, which we cannot yet say is irreconcilable with the chronology founded on the interval of 480 years from the Exodus to the building of Solomon's Temple. If, however, the genealogies are to be taken as a guide for the chronology up to the Exodus, Egyptologists prefer for the period of the sojourn the longer intervals stated in the Hebrew text to the very short ones that would result from the genealogical method. Still greater difficulties arise when we give a critical examination to Manetho's story. It reads like a perverted narrative of the calamities which closed Dynasty XIX., for we cannot suppose two conquests by Asiatics and two expulsions, one by Menptah and Setee II., the other by Setnekht, who subdued the Syrian, nor resort to the violent hypothesis that the Papyrus of Ramses III. attributes to Set-nekht that which Setee II. achieved. The name of Amenophis is suspicious, the two names of his son Sethos, "who is Ramesses," still more so ; the recall of the Shepherds from Jerusalem, and the easy conquest of Egypt without a battle, all read like a legend founded on a fusion of the two periods of Eastern occupation. There is, moreover, another suspicious circumstance in the occurrence of the name of Bocchoris in two versions of the story. This would either point to Bocchoris of Dynasty XXIV., in whose time it is quite possible that there was a large number of Israelite fugitives in Egypt, or to some other king of the same or a similar name ; we do not., however, know of any earlier Bocchoris. It may be reasonably asked whether this story has anything to do with the Exodus. Those who hold that it has yet, in common with all Egyptologists, argue, when they examine the Biblical data, on the ground of the minute accuracy of many of these data. If, then, the two narratives, that of Manetho and that of the Papyrus of Ramses III., relate to the Exodus, it may reasonably be inferred that the Manethonian is a. faulty and distorted one. It is, however, quite possible that Manetho may have known when the Exodus happened, and yet may have confused it with an event of the same period. The argument from the Biblical data that Ramses II. ruled during the oppression of the Israelites is very strong, though it may be conjectured that a redactor has substituted the later name Rameses for the earlier Zoan.
The name of the 'Aperin, if certainly that of the Hebrews, would be decisive, bat it is not a proper Egyptian equivalent, and so exact are the transcriptions of Semitic geographical names into Egyptian, that upon them mainly depends the theory of the sounds of the Egyptian alphabet developed by M. de Rouge and adopted by Dr Brngsch. Here, again, the evidence is inconclusive.
The arguments which would place the Exodus in any other period of Egyptian history are but slight. There is indeed the remarkable occurrence of a name similar to that of Jacob, or identical with it, in a record.,pi the conquests of Thothmes Ill.' This may only be a reminiscence of Jacob, as M. de Rouge suggests, but it would be more natural to take it to indicate that the Exodus was anterior to the time of Thothmes, and there are other names in the list which may possibly point to the same conclusion.' Yet the preponderance of evidence is at present greatly in favour of the occurrence of the Exodus towards the close of Dynasty XIX. It is not, however, necessary to accept the date of Prof. Lepsius, in our present state of uncertainty as to the chronology of Dynasty XIX. It is also not a necessary consequence of accepting this historical synchronism, that we should take Manetho's narrative of the Exodus as more than his identification with it of an event of the same period. These may seem but unsatisfactory results of the great erudition which has been bestowed on this question. We refrain from speaking more positively when a discovery may at any moment render speculation needless.
If the Exodus took place towards the close of Dynasty XIX., when did the period of oppression and the government of Joseph fall ? The reckoning by generations would place Joseph in the later part of Dynasty XVIII., and the oppression under Ramses II. downwards. It is, however, very generally acknowledged that this method of computation is not consistent with the growth of the Israelites from a family to a nation during the sojourn in Egypt. Scholars are therefore disposed to choose a reckoning by years. Here the Biblical data give either 430 years exactly for the sojourn and 400 for the oppression, or else 215 years for the sojourn. The longer periods are those generally preferred. If we reckon by them, the government of Joseph would have fallen under the last Shepherd king, and the oppression would have probably begun under Aabines, to be greatly increased in intensity under Ramses II.
Set-nekht, a chief probably of the line of Ramses II., overthrew the Syrian intruder and again restored the Egyptian monarchy. His short reign, which begins Dynasty XX.,2 was probably entirely occupied in reorganizing the administration of Egypt. Ramses III., whom his father had already made his colleague (Maspero, llist. Anc., 262), succeeded to a united Egypt but a distracted Empire. Evidently in the time of anarchy every province and tributary state had fallen away. The new king was equal to the effort of repelling invasion at home and reconquering lost territory abroad. In his fifth year he defeated the Libyan tribes who had invaded the west of Lower Egypt.
In his eighth, he met another attack from the opposite quarter. The Taanau (Danai 1) and the Takkaru (Teucrians), who now first appear, forming with the Tuirsha (Tyrseni), Washasha (Oscans?), Shakalasha (Sikels), Leka (Lycians), and Pelesta (Philistines), a great confederation, which attacked the cast of Egypt by sea and land. Their army conquered and carried with it the Kheta and neighbouring tribes. Their fleet, manned by the Takkaru and Shardana, reached Egypt at the same time. The Egyptian army and fleet encountered and defeated them. This campaign, and particularly the sea-fight, form the subjects of interesting reliefs in the great sepulchral temple built by Ramses III. in western Thebes. In his eleventh year a second invasion of the west of Egypt, by the Libyans, aided by the Tuirsha and the Leka, was equally unsuccessful. The eastern provinces and tributary states were recovered, and an expedition was sent to the Somalee country on the eastern coast of Africa or Arabia Felix. This last great conqueror finally preserved Egypt from the maritime nations. The course of their migrations seems to have been changed. All that remained of their invasions were the Philistine settlement in Palestine and one of the Mashuasha, a Libyan tribe, in the Delta, from whose race the Egyptians drew mercenaries (Maspero, Mist. Anc., 266). The importance of these forces is evident in the Biblical notices of Egypt of the time of the Hebrew kings.
The historical value of the Egyptian notices of the primitive populations of the Mediterranean is being more and more perceived. It is at first perplexing that we find the nations afterwards settled in well-known seats either far to the east or in constant movement. Yet the key thus afforded to the earliest Greek colonization is most valuable, and it is significant of the historical character of the documents that new names appear, as we should expect, in such a manner hs to explain the confusion of the Greek terms, which speak of Achreans and Danai, Dardans and Teucri, at the same time indifferently, whereas the Egyptian documents show that they are not interchangeable. Ramses III., besides constructing the magnificent temple at Medeenet Haboo, enriched the temples of Egypt with splendid gifts, during a prosperous reign of thirty-two years. The later kings of the dynasty do not appear to have achieved anything remarkable. They maintained the Empire, but their authority at home waned, while that of the high-priests of Amen grew until, towards the close of the dynasty, Her-liar, one of these high-priests, gained the royal power. Probably the close of the dynasty was occupied by a struggle between the last Ramesside kings and the high-priests, as well as by the additional distraction caused by the rise of another line, Dynasty XXI., of Tanite kings. Probably the Tanites ultimately gained the sole authority. The high-priests of Amen-ra, about this time, certainly not later than the rise of Dynasty XXII., retreated to Ethiopia, where they founded a kingdom, of which the capital was Napata. The Pharaoh whose daughter Solomon married was, if Manetho's numbers are correct, Psusennes II., HarPsiankha, last king of Dynasty XXI. He seems to have endeavoured to restore the military power of Egypt, for he made an expedition into Canaan and captured the town of Gezer, which he gave to his daughter, Solomon's queen.
During the later period of the Empire, partly through marriages of the Pharaohs, partly in consequence of the large employment of mercenaries, chiefly Libyans, great settlements of foreigners, Asiatic as well as African, were established in Egypt. So far from the Shemites being then disliked, a multitude of Semitic words were introduced into Egyptian, and it even became the fashion to give a Semitic form to native words (Maspero, Mist. Anc., 337, 338). A Shemite family, settled at Bubastis, or in the Bubastite name, succeeded by the command of mercenaries and by alliances with the Tanite family in establishing a new royal line, Dynasty XXII., which is remarkable for its foreign names. The royal names Sheshonk, Osorkon, Takelot are all either Assyrian or Babylonian. Still more striking is the name Nemrut, or Nimrod, borne by non-kingly members of the family. Probably it came from the further East.
Sheshonk I., the Shishak of the Bible, may have gained the royal power peaceably. His son Osorkon married the daughter of the last king of the Tanite Dynasty, to whom Sheshonk succeeded. He seems early to have entertained the design of restoring the Egyptian rule in the East, for he received Jeroboam when he fled front Solomon. The revolt of the Ten Tribes enabled him to carry out this project, and late in his reign he marched against Ilehoboam, and returned with the treasures of the Temple and the palace. A remarkable sculpture at the temple of El-Karnak gives a list of 130 names of towns and peoples conquered by Shishak in this expedition. Long as is the list, it is not like the rolls of the conquerors of the Empire. The items are far less important, and the Ilagarenes recur several times, as if to record the subjugation of a series of small Bedawee tribes. Cities of Judah and Israel appear in the list, but the towns in the kingdom of Jeroboam seem to be Levite and Canaanite, and it is probable that the Israelite king was not averse to their overthrow. With this occurrence we gain the first good chronological footing in Egyptian history. The Hebrew chronology is indeed not as yet fixed. The Assyrian monuments seem to indicate a reduction of at least twenty-three years in the ordinary dates. The invasion of Shishak is ordinarily dated B.C. 971, but may thus have to be lowered to about n.c. 948; and as it probably took place in about the twentieth year of the Egyptian king's reign, his accession may be dated approximately B.C. 967.
The government of Egypt under the kings of Dynasty XXII. underwent an important change. They made the high-priesthood of Amen-ra an office of a prince of the family, usually the eldest son, and gave high governments to other princes. Thus the power of the Pharaoh ultimately became merely nominal, and Egypt resolved itself into an aggregate of principalities. A further cause of decay was the import-mice of the Libyan mercenaries which each of the princes commanded. Under a new dynasty, XXIII., said to be of Tanites, but probably kindred to the Bubastites, Egypt was, for a time at least, reunited under a single rule, but towards its close the process of disintegration had already again set in, and the country was divided among nearly twenty princes, at least four of whom took the royal insignia (Maspero, Hist. .Anc., 378 seqq.).
Among these small princes but one was capable of attempting to reunite Egypt under his rule. This was Tafnekht, Tnepliachthos, prince of Says, who reduced great part of the country, and would probably have achieved complete success, had not the yet unconquered princes called in the priest-king of Napata, Piankhi Meriamen. While Egypt had declined, Ethiopia had constantly risen, and at this time part of the Thebais owed it allegiance. Piankhi, the descendant of the priest-kings of Thebes, was not unwilling to recover his ancient dominions. In one brilliant campaign he defeated Tafnekht and his allies, captured their strongholds, and obtained the sovereignty of Egypt, leaving the small princes to rule as his vassals. The ancient Empire was thus in part restored, but as it was ruled from Ethiopia, and the little princes constantly strove for independence, it had no real durability. Piankhi was succeeded by Kashta, who was probably an Ethiopian, owing his throne to his intermarriage with a princess of the Theban line.
Bokenrauf, or Bocchoris, son and successor of Tafnekht, no doubt seizing this occasion, was able to carry out the pro ject of his father and make himself king of Egypt. After a short reign marked by energy and prudence be perished in a fresh Ethiopian invasion. . Shabak, or Sabakon, conquered Egypt, and having taken Bokenranf in his capital, Sais, put him to a cruel death. It was no longer an Egyptian prince who ruled at Napata; all the circumstances we know of Shabak mid his dynasty indicate an Ethiopian line, governing Egypt as a conquered country, not as their ancient territory. Still Shabak's connection with the priestly line was not forgotten. His sister,Queen A men iritis, governed Thebes, and the power of the local rulers was limited, not destroyed. Hoshea, king of Israel, sent presents to Shabak,1 who was subsequently drawn into a confederacy of Syrian and other princes against Sargon king of Assyria, but, as in all these wars, the Ethiopian king was a tardy ally. His capital lay too far south, and in crossing the eastern border of Egypt he left the ill-affected princes of the Delta in the line of his communications. He therefore came into the field too late, and it was but little east of Egypt that he met the Assyrians and experienced a disastrous defeat at Ilapbia. He lost great part of Egypt, in which the small princes again established themselves, now as vassals of Assyria. Shabak only retaining Ethiopia and part of Upper Egypt.
Shabatok, or Sebichus, was the son and successor of Shabak. Ile made himself supreme king in Egypt, but appears to have lost Ethiopia to Tahraka. Towards the close of his reign the Egyptian dynasts joined in an alliance against Sennacherib, who had recently succeeded Sargon. The confederates were defeated, or made their submission one by one. The Egyptian princes lost a battle in southern Palestine, in the territory of their ally Hezekiah, who was the last in the East to submit. But the Egyptians again advanced, encouraged by Tabraka, king of Ethiopia, who marched to their support. No battle was fought. The Assyrians moved against the Egyptians, but in one night the invading army perish ed,and Sennacherib fled to Nineveh. The tradition of the Egyptians agrees with Biblical history in relating the destruction of the Assyrians as miraculous ; and it should be noted that for the rest of his reign Sennacherib never ventured again to invade Palestine. During this interval of respite Talirak a ente red 11:,ypt, slew Shabatok, and made himself master of the whole country (Re. 692).
After twenty years of what seems to have been a peaceful reign, the Assyrian war began afresh, Esarhaddon, son and successor of Sennacherib, resolving on the subjugation of Egypt. Tahraka was vanquished and fled to Napata, and Memphis and Thebes were taken. The country was divided between twenty princes, with Neku I. of Sais as their chief. The fortresses were garrisoned with Assyrian troops (n.c.672). In a few- years, however,Tabraka returned, defeated the Assyrians, and captured Memphis. In commemoration of the earlier subjugation or of this one, the Ethiopian king puts the name of Egypt among those of conquered nations not only at Narita lint also at Thebes (Maspero, IIist. _Inc., 427; Brugscli, th'st., 1 ed., 244, 245). Soon after Esarhaddon abdicated in favour of his son Assluir-bani-pal, who speedily invaded and reconquered Egypt, driving out Tahraka and restoring the tributary princes. As soon, however, as he had left, a conspiracy broke out, and these chiefs sent emissaries to Tahraka. They were overcome by the Assyrians, and Neku and two others sent in chains to Nineveh, before Tahraka could come to their aid. But lie again reconquered Thebes and Memphis. Asshur-bani-pal now made a politic use of the Egyptian party, treated Neku with honour, and sent him back to Egypt as ruler of Sais, giving a second principality to his son Psametik. Neku returned to find that Tahraka had left Egypt (n.c. 666). Urdamen, Tahraka's son-in-law and successor, held Upper Egypt, and at once attacked the Assyrians, captured Memphis from them, and took Neku, whom he put to death, while Psametik fled into Syria. Asshur-bani-pal now invaded Egypt, defeated Urdamen, and sacked Thebes, carrying the whole population captive. The twenty principalities were again set up, but Psametik was not the chief.
After a time the Egyptian princes became independent of Assyria, but they had once more to submit to an Ethiopian invader, Nouat-Meiamen, who recouquered the country without much difficulty, but does not seem to have long held it. The Saite prince Psametik, whose ambition excited the jealousy of the other dynasts, at last achieved the object for which his predecessors had pertinaciously fought. By the aid of Carian and Ionian mercenaries he put down his rivals, and by a marriage with the niece of Shabak rendered his line legitimate. This alliance with a princess only a generation younger than the first Ethiopian king brings into striking relief the vicissitudes which Egypt underwent during the Assyrian wars. Calamities were crowded into those years which usually occupy centuries. Yet under the new king, who was the real founder of Dynasty XXVI., Egypt rapidly recovered, and during the rule of his successors it was for the first time since the Empire strong and united, enjoying a true national existence. Public works of all kinds were carried on with energy. Art, which had fallen under the Bubastites and their followers, now suddenly revived, and with its recovery the ideas of the primitive dynasties came into fashion. The style of the age may be best compared with that of Dynasties IV. and V. It is, however, wanting in vigour, using elongated forms and abundant details. Still it has an elegance and a mastery of material which show that Egypt had not lost the true feeling of its art, in spite of the disastrous wars which had threatened the overthrow of all the institutions of the country.
Psametik I., or Psammetichus, employed his long reign in strengthening Egypt and in restoring the temples and making additional monuments. He recovered from Ethiopia a part of Lower Nubia, and made a successful expedition into Philistia. His designs of conquest were, however, frustrated by a wholesale desertion of Egyptian troops, caused by jealousy of the Ionian and Carian mercenaries to whom Psametik owed his throne. The mutineers, whose number H .;rodotus puts at 240,000 men, were too strong to be resisted, and deaf to the king's intreaties marched to Ethiopia and received lands from the king of that country. MI that the Egyptian sovereign could do was to form a new army and build a fleet. He thus missed the opportunity afforded by the decline of Nineveh of winning back the influence Egypt had long lost in the East. Au interesting memorial of his reign is the Greek inscription on one of the colossi of Aboosimbel, in Nubia, recording the visit of mercenary and Egyptian troops.
Neku II., B.C. GlI, son and successor of Psametik, inherited hi; father's energy but not his prudence. He attempted to complete an enterprise of the Empire and connect the Red Sea with the Nile, and so with the Mediterranean, by a canal. Under his orders Phoenician seamen circumnavigated Africa. Less fortunate was his attempt to recover the eastern rule of Egypt. He. marched against Megiddo, still the key to the route to the Euphrates. Here he was met by the forces of Josiah, king of Judah, with whom lie unwillingly fought. Josiah was slain, and the king of Egypt advanced to Carchemish on the Euphrates. Thus the Egyptian Empire was for a moment restored. There was no great eastern rival to contest its supremacy. Assyria had fallen, Babylon was not yet firmly established. A fter about three years Nahopolassar, the king of Babylon, sent his son Nebuchadnezzar against the Egyptians. At Carchemish the armies met. Neku was defeated, and the Egyptian rule in the East finally destroyed. Soon after the king of Egypt died, leaving his throne to his son Psametik II., B.C. 595, whose short reign was only marked by an expedition against the king of Ethiopia. The next king, Psametik's son, Uahabra, or Apries, the Pharaoh Hophra of Scripture, B.C. 590, inherited the energy and ambition of the Saite house. His accession was the signal for a general confederation of Palestine and Phoenicia against the king of Babylon. The war was speedily ended by the capture of Jerusalem, which Uahabra in vain endeavoured to prevent. He was, however, successful at sea. His Greek ships beat the Phoenician fleet of Nebuchadnezzar, and for a time he held the Phoenician coast, and aided Tyre in a resistance of thirteen years against the Babylonian besiegers. A great disaster lost Ualiabra his throne. He engaged in a war with the Greeks of Cyrene. His Egyptian troops were defeated. The native soldiers believed that he had planned their destruction that he might put mercenaries in their place. They revolted and chose Aahmes, or Amasis, king. Amasis defeated the mercenary troops of Uahabra and dethroned him, B.C, 571. It is to this time that the conquest of Egypt by Nebuchadnezzar is assigned by Jusephus. The silence of Herodotus and the other Greek historians, and the prosperity of Egypt under Amasis, have induced modern scholars to suppose that Josephus based his statement on the prophecies of Jeremiah and Ezekiel. If, however, we read between the lines of the story of Herodotus, we need some other cause than the disaffection of the Egyptian troops to account for the sudden success of Amasis, and especially for his easy defeat of the mercenaries with a discouraged native force. Again, the conquests of Egypt by the Assyrians, though predicted by Isaiah and noticed as past by Nahum, are unrecorded by Herodotus and the Greeks. The prosperity of the country in the reign of Amasis might as easily follow a Babylonian conquest as that under Psametik I. followed the terrible Assyrian wars. The scantiness of the native records of Nebuchadnezzar's reign leaves us without Babylonian evidence.
Amasis took to wife a grand-daughter of Psametik I. and his heiress-queen Shapentap, thus legitimatizing his pretensions. He greatly embellished the temples of Egypt. It may be that, as in the time of Psametik I., they needed restoration. His foreign policy was marked by energy and caution. lie transferred the Ionian and Carian mercenaries to Memphis itself as a force of guards. He granted the Greeks the free use of Naucratis as a Hellenic settlement and trading port. He conquered Cyprus, and kept up the influence of Egypt in Phoenicia. He had friendly relations with the Greek states, and instead of conducting an expedition against the Babylonians during their Empire or against the rapidly rising power of the Persians, he joined in an alliance of which Crfesus, king of Lydia, was the head, and agreed to furnish him with an Egyptian contingent in his war with Cyrus. After the fall of Crmsus other wars kept Cyrus from any designs on Egypt, and it was not until the accession of his son Cambyses that the Persians could attempt its reduction. Meanwhile Amasis died, leaving the crown to his some Psametik III., the Psammenitus of Herodotus, who, after a single well-fought battle near Pelusium, and the capture of Pelusium and Memphis, lost his kingdom, B.C. 525.
Cambyses, as we learn from the narrative of the Egyptian priest Uta-har-sun of Sais, at first adopted the style of a Pharaoh, and was initiated into the mysteries of Neith at Sais It was not until the failure of an expedition against the Oasis of Ammon, and of another directed by himself against the Ethiopian kingdom of Napata, that Cambyses, probably aware of the satisfactiru the Egyptians must have felt at these reverses, changed his policy, and vented his rage upon the monuments and objects of worship in Egypt. The Saito priest, in general terms, describes this as a time of calamity such as had never before befallen his country. Cambyses left Egypt, which was so completely crushed that the subsequent usurpation of the Magian was marked by no revolt. One of the first cares of Darius I. was to charge Utabar-sun with the restoration of the disordered country. In a visit to Egypt at the moment when a revolt had broken out, he pacified the people by supporting their religion, in the most marked contrast to Cambyses. For the rest of his reign he endeavoured to promote the commercial welfare of Egypt, in particular opening the canal from the Nile to the Red Sea. In the Great Oasis he built a temple to Ammon. It was not until the very close of his reign that the Egyptians rose against his rule, and expelled the Persians, choosing as king Khabbash, whose name has been discovered in the Sarapeum. The revolt lasted but three years, and Xerxes I. suppressed it with severity. Achmmenes, the brother of Xerxes, was made satrap. Egypt did not again rise until the troubles which marked the accession of Artaxerxes I. The insurrection was led by Inaros, prince of Mama, who immediately concluded an alliance with the Athenians. Supported by 200 Athenian triremes, he defeated and slew the satrap Achmmenes, and besieged in the citadel of Memphis the remnant of the Persian army, which, though it included Egyptian soldiers, held out until the attacking force was drawn off by a fresh Persian army. The Egyptians and their allies were now driven to the island of Prosopitis, and there besieged for eighteen months. At last Inaros was taken and put to death; Amyrtmus, an Egyptian who reigned with him, fled to the marshes, where he long maintained himself. Artaxerxes, after this serious revolt of six years, modified the administration of Egypt, recognizing Thanuyras, son of Inaros, and Pausiris, of Amyrtmus, as vassal •kings. The government was, however, held by a Persian satrap; these were merely local princes.
An Amyrtmus, probably son of Pausiris (Maspero, Hist. Ane., 562), revolted, and on the death of Darius II., B.C. 404, made Egypt virtually independent. He is the one king of Dynasty XXVIII., SaIte, His successor, Naifaaurut I., founded Dynasty XXIX. of Mendesians, B.C. 399. With him the monuments, silent since the rising of Kliabbash, again give us information, and under the next dynasty show that the Salle art still lived in spite of the misfortunes the country had undergone. The Mendesians Naifaaurut and Baker are chiefly known for the part they took in aiding the enemies of Persia. Hakor was followed by Naifaaurut II., and then the sovereignty passed to Dynasty XXX. of Mendesians, the last native Egyptian line. The first of these kings, Nekht-har-heb, or Nectanebes I., came to the throne when a Persian invasion was imminent, B.C. 378. Hakor had already formed a powerful army, largely composed of Greek mercenaries. This army Neklitbar-1mb intrusted to the Athenian Chabrias. The Persians, however, succeeded in causing his recall and in gaining the services of his fellow-countryman Iphierates. The invading army consisted of 200,000 barbarians under Pharnabazus and 20,000 Greeks under Iphicrates. After the Egyptians had experienced a reverse, Iphierates counselled an immediate advance on Memphis. His advice was not followed by Pharnabazus; the Egyptian king collected his forces and won a pitched battle near Mendes. Pharnabazus retreated, and Egypt was free.
Nekht-har-heb was succeeded by Tachos or Teos, whose short reign was occupied by a war with Persia, in which the king of Egypt secured the services of a body of Greek mercenaries under the Spartan king Agesilaus and a fleet under the Athenian general Chabrias. He entered Phmaicia with every prospect of success but having offended Agesilaus, he was dethroned in a military revolt which gave the crown to Nekht-nebf, or .Nectanebes II., the last native king of Egypt. At this moment a revolt broke out. The prince of Mendes almost succeeded in overthrowing the new king. Agesilaus defeated the rival pretender, and left Nekht-nebf established on the throne. But the opportunity of a decisive blow against Persia was lost. The new king, Artaxerxes III. Ochus, determined to reduce Egypt. A first expedition was defeated by the Greek mercenaries of Nekht-nebf, but a second, commanded by Ochus himself, subdued Egypt with no further resistance than that of the Greek garrison of Pelusium. Nekht-nebf, instead of endeavouring to relieve them, retreated to Memphis and fled thence to Ethiopia, B.C. 3401 Thus miserably fell the monarchy of the Pharaohs after an unexampled duration of nearly 3000 years, or as sonic think far longer. More than 2000 years have since passed, and though Egypt has from time to time been independent, not one native prince has sat on the throne of the Pharaohs. "There shall be no more a prince of the laud of Egypt" (Ezek. xxx. 13) was prophesied in the days of Apries as the final state of the land.
The causes of the downfall of Egypt are sufficiently evident in the previous history. The weakness of the later Thebans fostered divisions. The Bubastites aided the natural tendency of the country to break up into small principalities. The Ethiopians, while they brought a new force to resist the Assyrians, increased the divisions of Egypt, which had to choose to which of two foreign empires it would submit. The Saltes restored nationality, but they maintained it at the cost of alienating the native troops, and thus could not effectually resist Persia. Although their gallant struggles brought out the fighting qualities of the Egyptians, these Pharaohs could never venture on a great war without Greek mercenaries. Hence constant discontent and an inharmonious military system. At length the native energy was worn out.
The barbarian Ochus used his success mercilessly, rivalling the worst acts of Cambyses. Under him and his successors Egypt made no movement, and when Alexander entered the country as the conqueror of Persia be was welcomed as a deliverer. The Persian governor had not forces enough to oppose him, and he experienced nowhere even the show of resistance. He visited Memphis, founded Alexandria, and went on pilgrimage to the oracle of Jupiter Ammon. He then organized the government under two officers, who from their names appear to have been a Greek and an Egyptian. He left the Egyptians satisfied with his reverence for their religion, and for the rest of his reign the country remained a peaceful province of his great empire. With Alexander, the Macedonian dominion began. It lasted for 302 years, after the Empire the brightest period of Egyptian history, during the whole of which no general native revolt broke out. From this time the Egyptian local princes, who for five centuries, except only during the rule of Psametik and his house, had caused all the divisions of Egypt, disappear from the scene. This final settlement was probably due to the policy of Alexander, under whose successors we see the real government of the country, with its centre in the Greek city he had founded, and the control of the army and navy, intrusted to Greeks ; whereas the native religion was protected, but wholly left to the Egyptian priests, except so far as the king himself acted as one of the priesthood. Thus the foreigners lied all the true power, while the natives were satisfied with a semblance of it, and the local importance this semblance gave to their functionaries. Routes of trade were actively pushed, and works of public benefit carried out, and the Egyptians grew more and more wealthy, in Egyptian towns, where a Greek was rarely seen, and the king only appeared in the character of a Pharaoh to show respect to the religion of the country. The learned men of both races drew nearer together, and Greek speculation had its effect on Egyptian thought. The less cultivated settlers were attracted by the native superstitions, and at last the Alexandrian was far more an Egyptian than even a Macedonian.
On the division of Alexander's dominions, Egypt fell to the share of Ptolemy, son of Lagus and Arsina, a concubine of Philip's, whose son he was supposed to have been. Of all Alexander's generals he was the most far-sighted. Instead of aiming at the rule of the empire, he secured the least exposed province and employed its resources rather for defence than offence. One of his first acts was to divert the burial of Alexander from Macedon to Egypt. The body was taken to Memphis, but under Ptolemy's successor it was removed to Alexandria, so that the conqueror rested in the city he had founded. His first conquest was the Cyrenaica (B.c. 322), a valuable province outside the field of the contests of his rivals, yet greatly useful for naval enterprises against them. Yet he did not declare himself independent ; as a subject of the phantom kings Philip Aridieus and Alexander zEgus, he inscribed their names in his restorations of Egyptian temples, and alone of all the generals struck money in the name of 2Egus so long as that last heir of Alexander lived. He was not long left in undisturbed occupation of his government. The regent Perdiccas, finding that Ptolemy was engaged in a league against his authority, marched into Egypt, B.C. 321; but the resistance of Ptolemy and a mutiny in the invader's army, which resulted in his death, delivered Egypt from this danger. The succeeding years were occupied in attempts to add Ccele-Syria and Phoenicia to the Egyptian dominions, which can scarcely be considered rash when we remember the importance of these provinces to the security of Egypt against invasion, and for winning of the maritime supremacy of the eastern Mediterranean. During this time Cyprus was made a dependency, and the Cyrenaica, which had revolted, was finally reduced by Ptolemy's step-son Magas. A great calamity now arrested the growing power of Egypt, when Demetrius, son of Antigonus, defeated Ptolemy in a sea-fight off Salamis of Cyprus (B.C. 306). Antigonus then assumed the royal diadem, and Ptolemy followed his example. Antigonus and Demetrius immediately attacked Egypt, but without success ; and Ptolemy, rapidly recovering his strength, aided the Rhodians when besieged by Demetrius (B.c. 305-4). It is related that when the siege was raised the Rhodians gave Ptolemy, as their " preserver," the title of Y..oynjia. This appears in his hieroglyphic inscriptions as his distinctive title, and upon the coins of his successors struck in his name in Phoenicia. After this Ptolemy again attempted without success the conquest of Ccele-Syria and Plicenicia, but ultimately seized and held Cyprus, B. c. 295, which thus became a part of the Egyptian monarchy for nearly its whole duration. His later years were passed in consolidating his power. Seleucus was master of a Syrian empire, too firmly ruled to be attacked with any chance of success, and stretching too far eastwards to make its master aggressive on the Egyptian border. The government of Egypt was assured by the care taken to maintain and increase the Greek element in the country. Alexandria was made a seat of Hellenic culture, and if it is not absolutely certain that Ptolemy founded the Library and the Museum, he undoubtedly gathered the necessary intellectual materials. The great Greek colony of Ptolemais, in the Thebais, was established. Thus the native and foreign elements were kept apart, conflicts avoided, and strong Hellenic centres secored. The Egyptians were flattered by the arrival of the image of Sarapis from Sinope and the spread over Egypt, under the king's influence, of a Hellenic form of their religion. The king's portrait on his coins shows us him in old age, and is distinguished by resolution, keenness, and craft.
Having ruled thirty-eight years, the old king abdicated in favour of his young son Philadelphus, chosen to the prejudice of his elder brothers (B.c. 285), and died two years later (B.c. 283).
Ptolemy Philadelphus ruled for thirty-eight years of almost undisturbed peace. His half-brother Magas, probably soon after the death of Ptolemy Soter, declared himself king in Cyrenaica, and attempted to invade Egypt. Ptolemy remained on the defensive, and at last a treaty was signed by which Ptolemy, heir of the Egyptian crown, and Berenice, heiress of Cyrenaica, were betrothed, Magas retaining the power if not the name of king. Philadelphus was also fortunate in recovering Phoenicia and Ccele-Syria. This probably took place not much before B.C. 266, for that is the earliest date in the series of coins struck at. Tyre during his reign. He secured the friendship of the Phoenician and Palestinian coast-towns, by granting them a degree of autonomy, for their coins, though dated in his reign, were struck at each town, and bear not his name but that of his father. In Egypt he paid great attention to the extension of commerce. He reopened the canal of the Red Sea and established a desert route from Coptos to Berenice on the coast which he had founded. He made war in Ethiopia, but according to his custom he was content to be on friendly terms with the Ethiopian king Ergamenes. His Ethiopian expedition led to his establishing a station for the purpose of securing a supply of elephants for war. An ambassador was sent to India. Thus the trade of Ethiopia, Arabia, and India was secured for Egypt, and continued to enrich it for eighteen centuries. Not less wisely Philadelphus made Alexandria, with the Museum and Library, the heart of the learning of Greece. Many cities were founded by him, or like Ptolemais in Galilee, refounded. In his long reign there was little expenditure but such as was calculated to enrich his empire. At his death his dominions equalled those of his father. ' He held Cyprus, much of the coast of Asia Minor, the Cyclades, and part of Ethiopia and Arabia. The Cyrenaica was only to be separated for the life of Magas. He twice married. His second wife was Arsitioe II., his full sister, whom he married in accordance with Egyptian rather than Greek notions. She was a woman of great beauty and force of character, and much loved by her husband. The character of Philadelphus is marked by the craft rather than the force of his father's ; but he inherited to the full his love of literature and his love of pleasure, both undisturbed by warlike ambition. He is the last representative of the old Greek " ty-rannos," whom Pindar has made known to us, rather than one of the restless " diadochoi."
Ptolemy Euergetes, son of Philadelphus and Arsinoe I., by his accession, B.C. 247, reunited the Cyrenaica to the Egyptian empire. A quarrel between Egypt and Syria immediately broke out. The Syrian king Antiochus II. had married a daughter of Philadelphus. She was now put away, and, as well as Antiochus, murdered by her rival, Ids first wife Laodice, who set up her son Seleucus II. Ptolemy invaded Syria, which be speedily subdued, and then following the traditions of Egyptian conquest, he passed the Euphrates and reduced the whole of the eastern dominions of Seleucus. He returned to Egypt with vast treasures, including the statues of the gods which Camnbyses had carried away, and which he restored to the temples. At sea he was equally fortunate, and the maritime territories of Egypt in the eastern Mediterranean were greatly enlarged. For a moment the old Egyptian Empire was again revived in larger proportions, extending from the Thracian coast to Ethiopia, from Cyrene to the border of India. The eastern provinces speedily returned to the Syrian rule, and Ptolemy was content with a moderate accession of territory on that side. He, however, retained his Greek conquests and pushed far south in Abyssinia. Euergetes was not merely a warlike king. He cared for literature, and more than his predecessors laboured to please the Egyptians. He is the first Ptolemy whose Egyptian structures are worthy of the wealth of the country. Art had lost its ancient delicacy, yet the sumptuous architecture of this age merits admiration as showing a new though somewhat false development of the ancient style. His reform of the native calendar, as recorded in the Decree of Canopus, is another mark of his wise interest in Egypt. He was fortunate in his marriage with Berenice II., who as queen of Cyrene is the first Egyptian queen who has the same regal style as her husband. Having reigned twenty-five years be left his kingdom to his son.
Ptolemy Philopator, who began to reign B.C. 222, immediately on his accession put his mother Berenice and others of his nearest kindred to death, and, leaving the management of the state to Sosibius, abandoned himself to luxury. Antiochus III., king of Syria, seized the opportunity to wrest from Egypt all the eastern provinces. Ptolemy at length took the field himself in defence of Egypt, and defeated Antiochus at Raphia, where his success was greatly due to the courage of Arsinoe III., his sister and wife (B.c. 217). By this victory Ccele-Syria and Phoenicia were recovered. Ptolemy returned to his former life, and Arsino6 was put to death. He left his kingdom, greatly weakened by bad administration and growing disaffection, to a child, Ptolemy Epiphanes. The other two Macedonian kings, Philip V. and Antiochus III., now allied themselves to despoil Egypt of the provinces. Everything but Cyprus and Cyrene was taken, and the Egyptian ministers only saved the country by having called in the aid of Rome. The Republic had long been friendly to the Ptolemies, and nothing suited her policy better than a protectorate of Egypt. Accordingly M. ./Emilius Lepidus was sent as regent to Alexandria, and Antiochus was commanded to restore what he had conquered. It was finally settled that Ptolemy should marry Cleopatra, daughter of the Syrian king, and that she should take back Ccele-Syria and Phoenicia. From this time Rome ruled Egypt with reference to her own eastern policy. The kingdom of the Ptolemies was not allowed to fall, but it was kept within the most moderate limits. Consequently the weak kings were supported and the strong kings thwarted in every way. Egypt could not rid herself of a bad ruler or enjoy the full advantage of a good one. The rest of the minority of Ptolemy was marked by a serious revolt in Lower Egypt, put down with great difficulty. In B.C. 196, when but thirteen or fourteen years old, the young king was crowned at Memphis, when the decree of the Rosetta Stone was issued. The place of coronation and the terms of the decree show a policy of conciliation towards the Egyptians which the revolt probably rendered especially necessary. The marriage of Ptolemy and Cleopatra I. took place B.C. 193-2, but the dowry was not handed over. Ptolemy continued true to the Romans in their war with Antiochus, but was not allowed to act as their ally, and gained nothing in the subsequent treaty. Another revolt broke out in Lower Egypt, and was cruelly suppressed, B.C. 185. Ptolemy perished by poison in B.C. 181, leaving two sons surnamed Philometor and Euergetes, who ruled Egypt in succession. Euiphanes inherited the weakness and cruelty of his father, and with him Egypt lost for a time her influence in the affairs of the world.
Cleopatra I., who like Berenice II. was queen as heiress, now became regent for Ptolemy Philometor, and ruled well until her death, about B.c. 174. The ministers then made war on Antiochus IV. (Epiphanes) for the disputed provinces. The Egyptian forces were defeated, Egypt invaded, and Ptolemy seized (B.c. 170). II is younger brother, Euergetes II., with an audacious courage that marks his whole career, declared himself king at Alexandria, where Antiochus besieged him in vain, and Roman ambassadors interfered for his protection. Antiochus retired, leaving Philometor as king at Memphis. The two brothers now made terms, agreeing to a joint rule. Autiochus again invaded Egypt, and marched to Alexandria, but was forced to retire by the resolution of a Roman ambassador, M. Popillius Lamas (B.c. 168). From this time Egypt was more than ever in the hands of the Romans, and in consequence of the manner in which Philometor had yielded to Antiochus while Euergetes had resisted his pretensions and depended on their support, we find them constantly aiding Euergetes, whose abilities, if equal to those of Philometor, were weighted by a perfidious and cruel disposition. It was not long before Euergetes succeeded in driving Philometor from Alexandria. The fugitive went to Rome six. 164, and the senate agreed to reinstate him. Euergetes was spared by his brother, and the Roman deputies obtained for him the kingdom of Cyrene, where he occupied himself in ceaseless plots to obtain Cyprus, assisted by the active support of Demetrius I. of Syria and the unjust diplomatic aid of the Roman senate. Philometor had the courage to oppose his brother, who invaded Cyprus with Roman ambassadors ordered to settle him ie the government of the island. Philometor defeated and took him prisoner, but again spared his life, and left him the kingdom of Cyrene (B.°. 154). The Romans did not interfere with this settlement.
The part Demetrius I. had played in the war in Cyprus led Philometor to take the side of the usurper Alexander I. (Bales), to whom he gave his daughter Cleopatra to wife (B.c. 150). When Demetrius II. endeavoured to recover his father's kingdom Ptolemy advanced to the support of Alexander, but thinking him treacherous, he turned his arms to the aid of the legitimate king. Rapidly subduing the country, Ptolemy entered Antioch and was hailed king of Syria, to the crown of which he had a claim as descended maternally from the Seleucid line ; but he admitted the higher right of Demetrius, whom he aided in resisting an invasion by Alexander. In a decisive victory Ptolemy was thrown by his horse and mortally injured (B.c. 146).
It was in the reign of Philometor that Onias founded the temple at Onion in Egypt, which tended to increase the importance of the Jewish colonies and to separate the Alexandrian from the Palestinian school.
With this king the power of Egypt finally fell. He was the last Ptolemy who had the capacity to rule amidet the growing difficulties of the time. In his wars he showed courage and generalship, in his dealings with Rome caution and decision, in his rejection of the Seleueid diadem moderation and justice, in his treatment of his brother and his subjects an extraordinary clemency and humanity.
Cleopatra II., the sister and widow of Philometor, put their son on the throue.1 Euergetes at once marched from Cyrene to Alexandria. The Romans as usual took his part, and stopped the war on the condition that Euergetee should marry his brother's widow. The young king was instantly put to death. Ptolemy reigned as he had begun: Alexandria was depopulated by his cruelties, though the rest of Egypt seems to have fared better in consequence of his want of ambition. He divorced Cleopatra H. to marry her daughter, his niece, Cleopatra III. In B.C. 130 he was driven out of Egypt by a revolt, and Cleopatra H. became queen. In revenge he put to death their son. Cleopatra having asked the aid of Demetrius IT., Ptolemy was recalled, B.C. 127, and for the rest of his reign adopted a more conciliatory policy. He engaged in war against Demetrius II., and supported the usurper Alexander II., against whom he subsequently turned, apparently with reason. The reconciliation with the Seleucids led to the recall of Cleopatra II., with whom Ptolemy now reigned. He died B.C. 117, in the fifty-fourth year from his first accession. This king, the worst of the Ptolemies, as Philometor was the best, is significantly known by the nickname Physcon, or Fat-paunch, but he was also called by his subjects the Ill-doer, Kakergetes, instead of the Well-doer, Euergetes. Some of his latest coins present, instead of the idealized head of Ptolemy, the founder of the line, bloated and cruel features which can only be those of Physcon. His one good quality was a hereditary love of letters.
Cleopatra III., surnamed Cocce, widow of Euergetes and heiress of Philornetor, succeeded, and, in deference to the popular will of the Alexandrians, associated with her Ptolemy Suter II., surnamed Lathyrus, or Lathurus, her elder son, instead of Ptolemy Alexander I., the younger, whom she preferred. They ruled together with little concord, and at length Cleopatra expelled her colleague, who had been the real sovereign, and recalled Alexander from Cyprus, where he had already ruled independently for seven years (B.c. 107). Cyrene was probably lost to Egypt about this time. Physcon had left this kingdom to his base son Ptolemy Apion, who is generally supposed to have at once succeeded. The coins, however, show that the latest Cyrenaic coinage of Physeon was continued by Lathyrus. Cleopatra III. now ruled with a stronger authority, but by degrees Alexander gained the upper hand, and ultimately dissensions arose which ended by his causing her death (e.c. 89): this occasioned troubles which lost him his throne, and brought about the recall of his brother (p.c. 89). During the interval Lathyrus had ruled Cyprus, and both brothers had engaged on opposite sides in the wars of the Seleucid princes. As king of Egypt, Lathyrus had to subdue a native revolt, the first we know to have happened in Upper Egypt in the time of the Ptolemies. Thebes seems to have been its centre, and here the insurgents stood a siege of nearly three years, when the city was taken and reduced to the ruined state from which it has never since risen. Lathyrus died in B.C. 81. He appears to have been weak and cruel, with some qualities as a politician and general. He left one legitimate child, a daughter, Berenice III., who succeeded him. Her step-son, Alexander II., son of Alexander I., came from Rome as Snlla's candidate, and married her. The nuptials were almost immediately followed by the murder of the queen by her husband's order, and his deserved death in a popular tumult which was thus excited (B.c. 80). In default of legitimate issue, two base sons of Lathyrus now shared the Egyptian dominions, the elder, Ptolemy Neus Dionysus;surnamedAuletes, the Flute-player, taking Egypt, and his younger brother Ptolemy acquiring Cyprus. Auletes inherited the vices without the ability of Physcon, and having spent great sums in obtaining the recognition of the senate, who probably would not readily part with the claim based on the legacy which either Alexander I. or II. had made of his kingdom to the Romans, he wearied the patience of his subjects by heavy taxation, and was expelled by the Alexandrians B.C. 58. His wife Cleopatra V. and 6.a-righter Berenice IV. now reigned together, but, on the death of the elder, the younger became sole 0118313. Berenice was twice married, first to Seleucus, a pretended Seleucid, whom she put to death, and then to Archelaus. With the support of Gabinius, proconsul of Syria, Auletes at length recovered Egypt, B.C. 55. He punished his daughter with death, and in B.C. 51 his troubled reign came to an end. At this time his family consisted of two sons and two daughters, - the famous Cleopatra and Arsina, all of whom in turn exercised regal power, three in Egypt.
Ptolemy, the elder son of Auletes, and Cleopatra VI., his elder daughter, succeeded in accordance with their father's will, which the Roman senate ratified. In B.C. 48 her brother expelled Cleopatra, who fled into Syria. Advancing to conquer Egypt by force of arms, she was met by her brother's forces near Pelusium. Here it was that Pompey, after the ruin of his cause, was assassinated by order of Ptolemy's ministers as he sought the king's protection. Caesar, following Pompey, reached Alexandria. Here Cleopatra, giving up her ideas of war, made her way to Cmsar and secured his interest. After a struggle with the Egyptian ministers, who almost succeeded in overpowering Caesar's small forces, and who ultimately had the support of young Ptolemy, who escaped from the Romans, the Egyptians were defeated and the king drowned (B.c. 47). Cleopatra now became queen, associated with a phantom king, the younger Ptolemy. In B.C, 45 she went to Rome with her brother and young Ptolemy Caesar, her son by the dictator, wishing to be acknowledged Caesar's wife, and that the boy should be made his heir. Next year Cmsar was murdered, but by his will his nephew Octavius became his heir, Cleopatra's son, his onlysurviving child, being necessarily set aside. The queen determined to secure for her son Egypt at least, and made away with her unfortunate brother. She next appears when, af ter the battle of Philippi, the triumvir Antony made his progress through Asia Minor. It was necessary that the queen of Egypt should conciliate the ruler of the Eastern world. Cleopatra resolved to govern him. As Caesar seven years before, Antony now was instantly captivated by the Egyptian queen. She was past thirty, but if her beauty had waned her wit had grown. Her portrait on her coins is that of a woman of intallect and charm, not of beauty. A broad head with wavy hair, an aquiline nose, large deep-set eyes, and a full eloquent month, is supported by a long slender throat. To these personal qualities she added a mind singularly cultivated, ready discourse in several languages, and, what that so often lacks, as ready wit. She took Antony to Alexandria and governed the East for him. While her power waxed his waned. Asia Minor was overrun by Q. Labienus at the head of a Parthian army, and Palestine and Phoenicia by another led by Pacorns, the Parthian king's son. In Italy Antony's adherents were routed. He now resolved to attack Italy itself, and a great war was only averted by the armies, which forced the generals to conclude a peace (B.C. 40). Octavia, his rival's sister, was given in marriage to Antony, and for three years Cleopatra lost her power. In B.C. 36 Antony deserted Octavia and returned to Alexandria and the Egyptian queen. With the exception of an unsuccessful Parthian campaign and an inglorious Armenian one, Antony effected nothing. He was amused by the luxurious life of Alexandria ; and, while Cleopatra maintained her Egyptian rights and ruled with Ptolemy Cwsar, she shared Antony's government of the East, appearing as queen with him as triumvir upon the coins of Antioch. In B.C. 32 Octavian declared war against Cleopatra, and Antony took his revenge by divorcing Octavia. Then followed the conflict in the Adriatic for the world's empire, in which Antony's old military skill failed him, and Cleopatra, leaving the battle, perhaps through a woman's fear, drew him away also (B.c. 31). Arrived at Alexandria, Cleopatra showed more energy than Antony, and, when Octavian reached perished by her own hands in some unknown way. Thus Egypt became a Roman province, B.C. 30. The young Ptolemy Caesar, in spite of his double claim, perished by the command of Octavian, but the beautiful Cleopatra, Antony's daughter by the queen, was generously taken by his divorced wife Octavia, brought up with her own children, and married to a king, Juba II. of Mauretania. With their son Ptolemy, whom Caligula put to death A.D. 40, this great line came to an end. Its genius ended with Cleopatra. The dislike of the Romans for her has tended to give the moderns too low an estimate of her abilities. When we see what Egypt was under Auletes and under her we are astonished to perceive how much she accomplished by her management of Caesar and of Antony. After all the other independent states had been absorbed by Rome, Egypt was raised from a mere protected province to be once more a kingdom, and at last Alexandria became again a seat of empire. But the task Cleopatra set herself was beyond accomplishment; the more she turned Antony into an imperial ruler the less could he control the Roman armies by which he governed. Thus the fabric she had raised was rotten at the base, and with her fall it disappeared.
The history of Egypt under the Romans being that of a province, and the most interesting events matters of ecclesiastical history, may here be told very briefly. Worn out by the cruelty and avarice of a succession of bad rulers, the country must have welcomed the Romans almost as it had welcomed Alexander, and so soon as it was known that the native religion would be protected, all discontent must have vanished. The temples were still the care of the rulers. Art had indeed fallen very low, yet it continued to produce buildings with a certain rich grandeur, that did not begin to give place to Grieco-Roman structures till the time of Hadrian and the Antonines.
Mitts Gallus, prefect of Egypt under Augustus, was ambitious to enlarge the province by foreign conquest. He failed in an expedition into Arabia Felix, but repelled an Ethiopian invasion, and in return penetrated as far as Napata, the capital of Queen Candace, which he captured. In later reigns the chief events were troubles connected with the Jewish population. In the time of Vespasiun, the temple Ouias had founded was closed, and a great Jewish revolt in the reign of Trojan, which was not easily suppressed, cost the Jews the privileges which, in common with the Greek population, they had enjoyed above the native inhabitants. Hadrian twice visited Egypt (A.D. 130, 134). He renewed the old privileges and granted new ones. The foundation of Antinoe shows how low the nation had then fallen. Under Antoninus Pius, a Sothiac Cycle began (A.D. 139). In the next reign, Avidius Cassius, prefect of Egypt, having suppressed a serious revolt, usurped the purple, and was acknowledged by the armies of Syria and Egypt. On the approach of Marcus Aurelius, the adherents of Cassius slew him, and the clemency of the emperor restored peace. After the downfall of the house of the Antonines, Pescennius Niger, who commanded the forces in Egypt, was proclaimed emperor on the death of Pertinax (A.D. 193). Severus overthrew his rival (A.D. 194), and, the revolt having been a military one, did not punish the province, but gave great privileges to the Alexandrians. In his reign the Christians of Egypt suffered the first of their many persecutions. When Christianity was planted in the country we do not know, but it must very early have gained adherents among the learned Jews of Alexandria, whose school of thought was in some respects ready to welcome it. From them it rapidly passed to the Greeks. Ultimately, the new religion spread to the Egyptians ; their own creed was worn out, and they found in Christianity a doctrine of the future life, for which their old belief had made them not unready ; while the social teaching of Christianity came with special fitness to a subject race. The history of the Coptic Version has yet to be written. It presents some features of great antiquity, and, unlike all others, has the truly popular character of being written in the three dialects of the language. Side by side there grew up an Alexandrian Church, philosophic, disputative, ambitious, the very eeutre of Christian learning, and an Egyptian Church, ascetic, contemplative, mystical. The two at length influenced one another ; still we can generally trace the philosophic teachers to a Greek origin, the mystics to an Egyptian.
Caracalla, in revenge for an affront, massacred the population of Alexandria. Under Deans the Christians again suffered from persecution. When the Empire broke up in the weak reign of Gallienus, tEmilianus was made emperor by the troops at Alexandria ; but, after a short and vigorous reign, was conquered by the forms of Gallienus. Zenobia, queen of -Pahnyra, after an unsuccessful invasion, on a second attempt conquered Egypt, which she added to her empire, but lost it when Aurelian made war upon her (A.D. 272). The province was, however, unsettled, and the conquest of Palmyra was followed in the same year by the suppression of a revolt in Egypt (A.D. 273). Probus, who had governed Egypt for Aurelian and Taeitus, was subsequently chosen by the troops to succeed Tacitus, and is the first governor of this province who obtained the whole of the Empire. The country, however, was still disturbed, and under the reign of Diocletian, in A.D. 292, a formidable revolt had broken out, led by Achilleus, who as emperor took the name Domitius Domitianus. Diocletian, finding his troops unable to determine the struggle, came to Egypt and reduced the strongholds of the country. After lie had left, Domitiauus again raised his standard and captured Alexandria, but Diocletian returning to Egypt took the city and put his rival to death (A.D. 297). This revolt has very distinctly the character of a native rising, for it was not localized in Alexandria, but spread over the country.
The reign of Diocletian is the turning-point in the history of the Egyptian Church. The edict of A.D. 303 against the Christians, and those which succeeded it, were rigorously carried out iu Egypt, where Paganism was still strong, and face to face with a strong and united church. Galerins, who succeeded Diocletian in the government of the East, implacably pursued his policy, and this great persecution did not end until the persecutor, perishing, it is said, of the dire malady of Herod and Philip 11. of Spain, sent out an edict of toleration (a.n. 311). The Copts date front the accession of Diocletian (A.D. 284), which they call the Era of Diocletian or of the Martyrs.
By the Edict of Milan (a.n. 313), Constantine, with the agreement of his colleague Licinius, acknowledged Christianity as having at least equal rights with other religious, and when he gained sole power he wrote to all his subjects advising them, like him, to become Christians (A.D. 324). The Egyptian Church, hitherto free from schism, was now divided by a fierce controversy, in which we see two Greek parties, rather than a Greek and an Egyptian, in conflict. The Council of Niena was called together (A. n. 325) to determine between the orthodox and the party of the Alexandrian presbyter Arius. At that council the native Egyptian bishops were chiefly remarkable for their manly protest against enforcing celibacy on the clergy. The most conspicuous controversialist on the orthodox side was the young Alexandrian deacon, Athanasius, who returned home to be made archbishop of Alexandria (A.D. 326). For the long period during which he presided over the Church of Egypt, his history is that of the struggle of the two parties. Four times expelled by the Arians, and once by the emperor Julian, he employed each banishment for work iu the cause to which he was devoted, and on each restoration he used his success with a moderation in marked contrast to the persecuting policy of his enemies. His name and person were at last known to the whole empire, which unconsciously recognized in him an ecclesiastical ruler of Christendom, rather than the chief prelate of a province. He was more a man of action than of thought, more an administrator than a student, but his intrepid patience, his moderation, and his indomitable energy, all directed to the welfare of the church and to no personal ends, gave him an influence never afterwards obtained without the support of avast ecclesiastical machinery. His is the latest character which was formed upon the model of St Paul's, and the most remarkable of his age. He died A.D. 373, at the moment when an Arian persecution began. The reign of Theodosius 1. witnessed the overthrow of Arianism, which was followed by the suppression of Paganism, against which a final edict was promulgated A.D. 390. In Egypt, the year before, the temple of Sarapis at Alexandria had been destroyed, and to the same period we must assign the beginning of a partial destruction of those Egyptian temples which had escaped the Persian conquerors. Generally the Coptic Christians were content to build their churches within the ancient temples, plastering over or effacing the sculptures which were nearest to the ground and in the way of the worshippers. They do not seem to have been very zealous in the work of destruction. The native religion was already dead and they had no fear of it. The prosperity of the church was the sign of its decay, and before long we find persecution and injustice disgracing the seat of Athanasius. Cyril the patriarch of Alexandria expelled. the Jews from the capital with the aid of the mob, and by the murder of the beautiful philosopher Hypatia marked the lowest depth to which ignorant fanaticism could descend. A schism now produced lengthened civil war, and alienated Egypt from the empire. The Monophysites, after a struggle of two centuries and a half, became utterly hostile to the Greek mule. It was in these circumstances that a country which, remote front the great conflicts that destroyed the Western Empire and threatened the existence of the Eastern, had enjoyed uninterrupted freedom from an invader since its conquest by Zambia, and had known no rebellion since that of Achilleus, fell without a conflict when attacked by Chosroes (A.n. 616). The success of licraclins restored Egypt to the Empire and for a time it again received a Greek governor. The Monophysites, who had taken advantage of the Persian occupation, were persecuted and their patriarch expelled. The Arab conquest was welcomed by the native Christians, but with it they ceased to be the Egyptian nation. Their language is still used in their churches, but it is no longer spoken, and its literature, which is wholly ecclesiastical, has been long unproductive.
The decline of Egypt was due to the purely military government of the Romans, and their subsequent alliance with the Greek party of Alexandria which never represented the country. Under weak emperors, the rest of Egypt was exposed to the inroads of savages, and left to fall into a condition of barbarism. Ecclesiastical disputes tended to alienate both the native Population and the Alexandrians. Thus at last the country was merely held by armed force, and the authority of the governor was little recognized beyond Alexandria, except where garrisons were stationed. There was no military spirit in a population unused to arms, nor any disinclination to be relieved from an arbitrary and persecuting rule. Thus the Muslim conquest was easy.
[In the year 639 of our Era, or the eighteenth of the Flight,' Egypt was invaded by the Muslims, under the celebrated 'Amr Ibn-El-As (or El-Asee). Entering the country from Syria, at the head of only 4000 men, he besieged Pelnsium, and took it after thirty days. This town was considered the key of Egypt on the Syrian frontier, and its capture was, therefore, an important advantage, which opened the country southwards to the Arab general. He marched thence to 'Eyn-Shems, the ancient Heliopolis, where he found the Greeks collected in force, and commanded by John Mukowkis, or rather John the Mukowkis, or Gureyg the Mukowkis,2 the governor of Memphis, a native Egyptian. They offered a vigorous defence, but were put to the rout, and 'Amr advanced to the banks of the Nile and laid siege to Egyptian Babylon, a fortress of great strength, and garrisoned by a Roman legion. Here he received two reinforcements of 4000 Muslims each, and after a protracted siege of seven months he took the place by assault. In an enemy's country, and far from all supplies, the small army of the Arabs was still in a critical position and unable to push on against the capital, Alexandria, when the enmity of rival Christians and the perfidy of Mukowkis decided the balance in their favour. The persecutions which the Copts had suffered had greatly embittered them against the Greeks, and, as Gibbon observes, had "converted a sect into a nation, and alienated Egypt from their religion and government." Mukowkis, who governed Memphis, was in heart a Monophysite, and had also withheld the tribute clue at Constantinople ; and both be and his Coptic brethren, after the first resistance, hailed the new invaders as their deliverers from the Greek yoke. On the fall of Babylon they entered into subjugation of the country. Having concluded this treaty, and founded the city of E1-Fustdt on the site of his first encampment on the banks of the Nile, with the mosque known by his name, 'Amr marched against Alexandria ; and after overcoming many obstacles, and disputing the whole way with the Greeks, who conducted their retreat, in the face of a victorious array, with great ability, in lated ; but it is said that this conquest was only achieved with the sacrifice of 25,000 Muslims. Abu-l-Farag relates that 'Amr, wishing, at the earnest request of John the Grammarian, to spare the famous Library, wrote to the caliph (khaleefeh) Omar, asking his instructions respectdestruction." The historian adds, that they were burnt in soon effected, and the various strongholds successively fell into the hands of the invaders.
'Amr governed the country with much wisdom for four years, but was dismissed by 'Othmin, who appointed in his place 'Abd-Allah lbn-Saad Ibn-Abee-Sarh. The latter reduced Alexandria, which had been retaken by the emperor Constans II., and pushed his conquests beyond Africa Proper. He died at Ascalon, in the year 36, having governed eleven years. His successor's rule was short, and the next viceroy, Mohammad, son of the caliph Aboo-Bekr, on assuming the reins of government acted with such tyranny towards the followers of 'Otliman, that Mu'iwiyeli was compelled to dispatch 'Amr to Egypt with a force from Syria, and a great battle was fought in A.11. 38 between the two armies of Muslims, in which 'Amr was again victorious. As a reward for this service, he was a second time appointed governor of Egypt, and he died there at the age of ninety years, in A.H. 43.
From this time to A.D. 868, or for rather more than two centuries, Egypt was governed by a succession of viceroys, appointed by the caliphs of Damascus and Baghdad. Their period was distinguished by intestine troubles and a constant change of rulers, resulting from the caprice of the caliphs or the vicissitudes of their fortunes. Here we may mention, that shortly after the overthrow of the Amawec ("Ommiade ") Dynasty of Damascus, and the accession of the house of 'Abbas, which ruled at Baghdad, the city of El'Askar, immediately to the north-east of El-Fustat, was founded, and the seat of government removed thither. The site is without the walls of modern Cairo, and is marked by extensive mounds of rubbish.
In A.D. 868 (A.n. 254) Ahmad, the son of Tooloon, a Turkish slave who held a high office at Baghdad, was appointed governor of the province of Misr by the caliph El-Moatezz, and two years after of that of Alexandria also, by his successor El-Muhtedee. His temporal allegiance to the caliph soon became merely nominal, and lie was virtually sovereign of Egypt ; but at the same time he endeavoured to avoid a complete rupture by continuing the prayer for the Prince of the Faithful in the mosques, and the mention of his name on the coins which he struck. Later in his reign, however, he forbade the mention of the next caliph's brother and colleague El-bluwaffik in the prayers and state-documents of Egypt, and ElMoatemid, who was a weak prince, was prevailed on to denounce him publicly as a traitor from the pulpits throughout his dominions. Yet that he Secretly favoured him is proved by his vain attempt to escape to Egypt from the tyranny of his warlike brother. Ahmad founded the dynasty of the Benee-Tooloon, which lasted for a period of 37 years. He built the royal city of El-Katie', between El'Askar and Mount Mukattam, enriched it with splendid buildings, and constituted it the seat of his government. Its site is now covered with ruins, only his great mosque remaining a proud example of his wealth and magnificence, still the largest mosque of Cairo, and, as presenting the earliest specimens of the pointed arch, noteworthy in the history of architecture. The reign of this vigorous and wise prince was remarkable for prosperity at home and conquests abroad. He took Barkah, and in Syria in 264 captured Damascus, flints (Emessa), Hamill, and Aleppo ; after which lie proceeded to Antioc'n, and the governor refusing to surrender, he took that city by storm. He then advanced towards Tarsus, but his supplies failing be was compelled to retire. About five years later, Lulu, his deputy and governor of Aleppo and other towns in Syria and in Mesopotamia, revolted and entered into a league with El-Muwaffik. It was apparently after an expedition against this rebel that Ahmad died, in the year 270 (A.D. 884). During the latter years of his reign, he had abandoned that sim- plicity of life which had distinguished his youth, and had given himself up to boundless luxury. At his death, there was found in his treasury ten millions of deenars, and his establishment was discovered to consist of 7000 mounted memlooks, 300 picked horses for his own use, a body-guard of 24,000 slaves, besides 6000 asses and mules, 10,000 camels, and 100 wherries. By what oppression the revenue necessary to maintain such a household was raised some idea may be formed, when it is stated that at the time of his death 18,000 persons were confined in lhn-Tooloon's prisons.
Khumaraweyh, on the death of his father, was appointed his successor by the army, he being then twenty years old, and be inherited a kingdom extending from the Euphrates to Nubia. He fought a battle with the forces of the caliph, commanded by a son of El-Muwaffik (afterwards the caliph El-Moatadid), between Damascus and Eamleb ; in which his army gained the victory, although he himself, never having seen a battle before-, fled the scene of action in a panic, drawing a large part of his troops after him. But he soon reversed the independent policy of his father, and making peace with the caliph in 273 he not only put the latter's name with that of his brother El-Muwaffik in the public prayers, but entirely omitted his own ; though it must be allowed he did not pursue the same servile course in his coinage. On the accession of El-Moatadid in 279, Khumaraweyh continued his conciliatory policy and offered his daughter Katr-en-Neda (Dewdrops) in marriage to the caliph's son. In 282 he made an incursion into the Greek territory, and died at Damascus. It is said that he was fearful of assassination ; to avoid which he had trained a lion to guard him while he slept on his bed of quicksilver. His fears were justified ; for he was put to death by his women, or according to some by his eunuchs.
His eldest son, Geysh Abu-l-'Asakir, not yet fourteen years old, succeeded him. This prince was killed in less than eight months : his youth, which rendered him unfit to govern, occasioned his fall ; for he had discarded from his society those who were in favour with his father, and associated with none but worthless men, He was succeeded in 283 by his brother Haroon, the principal events of whose rule were a great tempest and earthquake in Egypt in 286, and a treaty which he concluded with the caliph, by which the provinces of Awasim and Kinnesreen were ceded to him and the annual tribute from Egypt was fixed at 450,000 deenars. lie reigned upwards of eight years, but gave himself up to pleasure, and, as some say, was put to death in 292 by his uncles Sheyban and Adee, sons of the founder of the dynasty, the former of whom succeeded to the government. In the meantime, at the instigation of the generals of Haroon, Mohammad lbn-Suleyinan, a scribe of En-lu, advanced against Egypt with a numerous and heavily equipped army. Sheyban went forth to meet him with all the forces he could muster, but numbers of his troops deserted to the invader, and he was soon compelled to surrender. Mohammad I bu-Suleynuin burned El-KataV, and sacked El-Fustat, reducing the women to slavery, committing many atrocities, and exiling the family of Ahmad Ibn-Tooloon, with all their adherents (A.n. 292, A. D. 905).
Having thus completed his conquest, and restored the province of Egypt to the house of 'Abbas, Ibn-Suleymin yielded the government to 'Eesh En-N6sharee, appointed by El-Muktefee. He died in 297, and was followed by Tekeen El-Gezeree, under whose rule Egypt was invaded by the forces of 'Obeyd-Allah El-Mandee, first prince of the dynasty of the Fatimees, which had succeeded the lieneed-Aghlab in the dominion of Northern Africa. His general Enbasheh, having taken Barkah, advanced (in 302), with an army of 100,000 men, to Alexandria, which he found deserted, and thence marched to the Feiyoom, where Tekeen, reinforced with troops from El-lrak, gave battle, and defeated the enemy in a sanguinary conflict In the following year, he was succeeded by A bu-l-Hasan Zekee Er-Roornec, in whose time El-Mandee again attempted the conquest of Egypt with an army under the command of his son, Abud. Kasim ; Alexandria fell into his hands in 307 ; its inhabitants lied, and Zekee entrenched himself in E1-Geezeh, on the western bank of the Nile, and shortly afterwards died. In this emergency Tekeen was reinstated in his office ; and a fleet of twenty-five sail was sent from Tarsus by the caliph, which meeting with the flotilla of the enemy off Eesheed almost annihilated it. Tekeen, meanwhile, had defeated the Africans, but without decisive effect. At length, being twice reinforced from Baghdad, lie drove AbuKasim back to Barkah. After rendering this important service Tekeen was again recalled. Three other governors were then successively appointed ; but the troops revolting, and much sedition and rapine ensuing, Tekecu was once more despatched to Egypt, where he remained until his death in the year 321 (A.D. 933).
He was followed by Aboo-bekr Mohammad El-lkhsheed lbir-Taghag, afterwards the founder of the dynasty of the Ikhsheedees, who was almost immediately superseded by another governor ; and for one year more Egypt continued to be a province of the caliphs of Baghdad. In the year 323, El-lkhsheed again succeeded to the government. About this time little remained to the caliph of his once broad empire beyond the province of Baghdad, and even there his power was but nominal. Kburasan, Fars, harman, Eel, Ispaham, Mosul, and the provinces of Mesopotamia, were either iii a state of revolt, or nearly or wholly lost to him. Spain was governed by the Dynasty of Umeiyeh, and Africa by that of El-Mandee ; and we have seen the distracted state of Egypt since the fall of the Benee-Tooloon. EI-I klisheed availed himself of these circumstances to make himself the independent sovereign of Egypt and Syria, continuing, however, to acknowledge the spiritual supremacy of the caliph. Shortly after, lie defeated the forces of El-Mandee, who had again made an inroad into the country : and in 327 Ile was decorated by Er-Radee with the title of El-lkhsheed, a name borne by the rulers of the province of Ferghaneh in Transoxania, from whom he was descended. In the following, year subdued a great part of Syria, and having taken Damascus advanced to the from-tier of Egypt, where after a very severe engagement he was utterly routed and pursued by the troops of El-lkhsheed as far as Damascus. There, however, the fortune of war Dimmed against El-lkhsheed, and for a time lie was deprived of the province of Syria, thoiigh he subsequently regained possession of it. During his reign, the caliphs of Baghdad were daily losing power, and in the year 333, El-Muktefee wrote to him lamenting his miserable state ; whereupon El-lkhsheed immediately repaired to him at Rakkah with valuable presents and offered him assistance and an asylum in Egypt, of which the caliph was too timid to avail himself. About this time, also, he conducted a war with various success against Seyf-ed-Dowleh the Hamdanee, who had attacked Syria. He died at Damascus in 334 (A.D. 946), in the 66th year of his age, and was buried, as were his sons, in the moscpm of Omar at Jerusalem.
Of Ei-lkhsheed's two sons and successors, Abn-l-Kasini Oongoor (who died in 349), and Abu-l-Hasau 'Alec, little is known, their vizir Kafoor, a black eunuch, being the actual ruler. In the reign of the former, in the year 343, a great fire occurred in ElEustat, which destroyed 1700 houses and much merchandise. Kafoor succeeded to the throne in 355, and was acknowledged throughout Egypt, Syria, and the Higaz. He ruled with great ability, and was a patron of literature ; his name is celebrated by the poet El-Mutanebbee, who was his boon-companion, and whom, as well as other learned men, he rewarded with magnificent presents. On his death in 357, internal dissensions respecting the succession of Abu-l-Fuwaris, a son of 'Alee, presented a favourable opportunity to the Fitimee caliph to renew the often-repeated invasions of Egypt.
Hitherto, with few exceptions, the most notable of which are the reigns of Ibn-Tooloon, Khumaraweyh, El-lkhsheed, and Kafoor, the Muslim rulers of Egypt had not much benefited the country, or rescued it from time anarchy and troubles in which it had become involved under the Lower Empire. But the incidents of the time are so little known that they have been deemed worthy of lame mention in this article than perhaps their importance would otherwise warrant. From the period at which we have now arrived, however, the annals of Egypt contain much important matter, and are so closely biters-oven with the events of the Crusades as to render them deeply interesting to the student of European history. The rise of the schismatic caliphs of Africa is a remarkable episode in the early days of El-Ishim, and most of the princes of that dynasty were not unworthy of their successors, the renowned Sala-din and his family, and the Memlook sultans.
In the year 358 (A.D. 969) El-Mo'izz h-deeni-llah, the fourth Fatimee caliph, equipped a large and well-armed force, with a formidable body of cavalry, the whole under the command of AlmI-Hoseyn Gdhar el-Ka:id, a native of Greece, and a slave of Lis father Eh-Mansoor. This general, on his arrival near Alexandria, received a deputation from the inhabitants of El-Fustat, charged to negotiate a treaty. Their overtures were favourably entertained, and the conquest of the country seemed probable without bloodshed.
But, while the conditions were being ratified, the Ikhshcedees prevailed on the people to revoke their offer, and the ambassadors on their return were themselves compelled to seek safety in flight. G6har lost no time in pushing forward. Before El-Geezeh a partial combat took place ; several days were passed in skirmishes, and at length he forced the passage of the Nile a few miles south of that town, at the head of his troops. Here the Iklisheedees offered a brave resistance ; the greater part were left dead on the field, and the remainder, taking what valuables they could carry off, fled from El-Eustat. The former mediators were now brought to intercede for the inhabitants and the women of the fallen dynasty, and to the honour of the African general it is related that they were pardoned and the city was peaceably occupied. The submission of the rest of Egypt was secured by this victory ; and all the Higdz, including the holy cities, and the Yemen, speedily acknowledged the authority of the Fatimee El-Mo'izz. In the year 359 Syria was also added to his dominions, but shortly after was overrun by the Karmatees (Carmathians), the troops of El-Mo'izz met with several reverses, Damascus was taken, and those lawless freebooters, joined by the Ikhsheedees, advanced to 'Eyn-Shems. In the meanwhile, G6har had fortified El-Kiihireh,1 or Cairo (the new capital which he had founded immediately north of El-Fustat), and taken every precaution to repel the invaders ; a bloody battle was fought on Friday, the 1st of Rabeea el-Owwal, in the year 361, before the city walls, without any decisive result. On the following Sunday, however, G6har obtained a great victory over the enemy, who experienced a reverse more complete than any before suffered, and the camp and baggage into the hands of the conqueror.
At the earnest solicitations of his lieutenant, who had ruled Egypt both ably and justly, with almost absolute authority, ElMo'izz at length determined to remove his court to his new kingdom. In Ihunadin 362, he entered El-Kahireh, bringing with him the bodies of his three predecessors and vast treasure. ElMo'izz reigned about two years in Egypt, dying in the year 365. He is described as a warlike and ambitious prince, but, notwithstanding, he was especially distinguished for justice and was fond of learning. He showed great favour to the Christians, especially to Severus, bishop of El-Ashmooneyn, and the patriarch Ephrein; and under his orders, and with his assistance, the church of the Mu'allakah, in Old Misr, was rebuilt. He executed many useful works, (among others rendering navigable the Tanitic branch of the Nile, which is still called the canal of El-Mo'izz), and occupied himself in embellishing El-Kahireh. Gaihar, when he founded that city built the great mosque named El-Azhar, the university of Egypt, which to thiS day is crowded with students from all parts of the Muslim world. The principal event of his reign in Egypt was the second irruption of Hasan the Karmatee. The enemy, as on the former occasion, reached 'Eyn-Shems ; but now he gained more advantage over the African troops. Although he was twice defeated in different parts of Egypt, and constantly harassed in his advance, the capital was closely besieged by him, and its defenders were driven across the fosse. Thus straitened, El-Mo'izz had recourse to stratagem, and succeeded in bribing Hasan Ibn-EI-Garrah (who, with a body of the tribe of Tei, fought with the Karmatees) to desert them in the heat of the next battle. The result of this plan was successful, and again Hasan was defeated and compelled to flee. This event, which occurred in the year 363, relieved Egypt of another invader, an ally of Hasan, by name Abd-Allah Ibn-'ObeydAllah (formerly governor of Syria under Kafoor), and obtained for the arms of El-Mo'izz various successes in Syria.
El-'Azeez Aboo-Mansoor Nizar, on coming to the throne of his father, immediately despatched an expedition against the Turkish chief El-Eftekeen, who had taken Damascus a short time previously. G6har again commanded the army, and pressed the siege of that city so vigorously that the enemy called to their aid the Karmatees. Before this united army be retired by little and little to Ascalon, where he prepared to stand a siege ; but being reduced to great straits, he purchased his liberty with a large sum of money. On his return from this disastrous campaign, El-'Azeez took the command in person, and meeting the enemy at Ramleh, was victorious after a bloody battle; while El-Eftekeen, being betrayed into his hands, was with Arab magnanimity received with honour and confidence, and ended his days in Egypt in affluence. El-'Azeez followed his father's example of liberality. It is even said that he appointed a Jew his vizir in Syria, and a Christian to the same post in Egypt. These acts, however, nearly cost him his life, and a popular tumult obliged him to disgrace both these officers. After a reign of twenty-one years of great internal prosperity be died (A.n. 386) in a bath at Bilbeys, while preparing an expedition against the Greeks who were ravaging his possessions in Syria.
El-'Azeez was distinguished for moderation and mildness, but his son and successor rendered himself notorious for very opposite qualities. El-Hakim hi-amri-1161. Aboo-'Alee Mansoor began his reign, according to Muslim historians, with much wisdom, but afterwards acquired. a character for impiety, cruelty, and unreasoning extravagance, by which he has been rendered odious to posterity. Ile is described as possessing at once " courage and boldness and cowardice and timorousness, a love for learning and vindictiveness towards the learned, an inclination to righteousness and a disposition to slay the righteous ;" and this character is fully borne out by his many extravagances. Of his cruelty numerous anecdotes are told us, especially in the discharge of his functions as Mohtesib, or " regulator of the markets and of the weights and measures," an office which lie assumed, and in which he became the terror of the inhabitants. But his cruelty was surpassed by his impiety. He arrogated to himself divinity, and commanded his subjects to rise at the mention of his name in the congregational prayers, an edict which was obeyed even in the holy cities, Mecca and Medivah. He is most famous in connection with the Druses, a sect which he founded and which still holds him in veneration and believes in his future return to the earth. He had made himself obnoxious to all classes of his subjects, when, in the year 397, he nearly lost his throne by foreign invasion. Hisham, surnamed Aboo-Rekweh, a descendant of the house of Uineiyeh in Spain, took the province of Barkah with a considerable force and subdued Upper Egypt. The caliph, aware of his danger, immediately collected his troops from every quarter of the kingdom, and marched against the invader, whom, after severe fighting, he defeated and put to flight. Hisham himself was taken prisoner, paraded in Cairo with every aggravation of cruelty, and put to death. El-Hakim having thus by vigorous measures averted this danger, Egypt continued to groan under his tyranny until the year 411, when he fell by domestic treachery. His sister Seyyidet-el-Mulook had, in common with the rest of his subjects, incurred his displeasure; and being fearful for her life, she secretly and by night concerted measures with the emeer Seyf-ed-Dowleh, chief of the guard, who very readily agreed to her plans. Ten slaves, bribed by 500 deenars each, having received their instructions, went forth on the appointed day to the desert tract southward of Cairo, where El-Hakim, unattended, was in the habit of riding, and waylaid him near the village of Hulwan, where they put him to death.
He was succeeded by his son, Edh-Dhahir (commonly pro. nounced Ez-Zabir) bidlab Abu-h-Hasan 'Alec, who ruled with justice and moderation for nearly sixteen years. In 414 Aleppo was taken by Salih ibn-Idardas ; and although he was defeated and slain by an Egyptian force sent against him, a son, ShibbedDowleh, yet retained possession of that city. At this time also Hasan, of the tribe of Tei, before mentioned, had made himself master of Ramleh ; and indeed from this caliph's reign we may-date the decline of the Fatimee power, especially in Syria, In the year 427, El-Mustansir bi-llah Aboo-Temeem Ma'add came to the throne at the age of seven years. His reign occupied a long period, rendered remarkable by the unparalleled troubles which befell Egypt. It commenced prosperously with the defeat and death of Shibbed-Dowleh. Aleppo was taken, and the submission of the rest of Syria followed ; and the general who had conducted the expedition against that province assumed its government. On his death, Mo'izz-ed-Dowleh, a brother of Shibbed-Dowleh, retook Aleppo in 433 ; but the various fortunes of this prince and his nephew Mahmood, from this time and during the calamities of Egypt, are too complicated and subordinate to claim a place here. In the western provinces, the rebel El-Mo'izz (the third successor of Yoosuf lbn-Zeyree, who was appointed governor on the conquest of Egypt), was punished by an irruption of wild Arab tribes in the pay of El-Mustansir.
In the year 450 (A.D. 1058), the Fatimee caliph was publicly prayed for in Baghdad, - a remarkable event, of which the immediate cause was briefly as follows. El-Besiseeree, a powerful Turkish chief exercising unbounded authority in that city, had fallen into disgrace, and received supplies of men and money from the caliph of Egypt ; and while the Seljookee sultan Tughril-Beg espoused the cause of the 'Abbasee caliph, his brother Ibraheem Eynal revolted, joined El-Besaseerce, and defeated Tughril-Beg. Eh-Besdseeree entered Baghdad, in which the combat continued to rage ; and the unfortunate city was devastated by massacre and pillage. EI-Mustansir was solemnly declared Prince of the Faithful, and the insignia of the legitimate caliph was sent to El-Kdhireh. The success of El-Besaseeree, however, was but transient ; TughrilBeg had, in the meantime, defeated and killed his brother Ibraheem ; he then entered Baghdad in Dhu-l-Kaadah 451, and despatched a force against EI-Besaseeree, who fell in a battle near El-Koofeh.
A persecution of the Christians of Alexandria occurred about this time ; and in 454 commenced a desolating struggle between the blacks and the Turks, both of whom had become numerous in Egypt. The former were succoured by the mother of El-Mustansir, herself a negress, while the command of the latter was taken by Nasir-ed-Dowleh Ihn-liannifin, a general of El-Mustansir, more than once governor of Damascus, and at this period governor of Lower Egypt. To this man's unscrupulous ambition was due much of the trouble which ensued. After many battles the Turks succeeded in destroying the power of their adversaries, and their leader assumed almost absolute authority, while they not only extorted from the caliph immense sums of money and treasure, but even rifled the tombs of his predecessors for the valuables which they contained. At the same time the bulk of the valuable library of the Ffithnees was dispersed by these brigands. But the very power of Nasir-ed-Dowleli threatened his overthrow. His sense of security in his position rendered hint regardless of the support of the Turks ; and when at length his schemes for the deposition of El-Mustansir brought matters to a crisis, a large portion of the army declared against him. Defeated and driven from the metropolis, he succeeded in possessing himself of Lower Egypt, and a terrible civil war raged between the contending parties. But an even heavier calamity afflicted Egypt. For seven successive years the inundation of the Nile failed, and with it almost the entire subsistence of the country, while the rebels intercepted supplies of grain from the north. El-Makreezee informs us that El-'Askar and El-Katie' were depopulated, and that half the inhabitants of El-Fustat perished, while in El-Kahireh itself the people were reduced to the direst straits. Bread was sold. for 14 dirhems the 1 lb loaf ; and all provision being exhausted, the worst horrors of famine followed. The wretched people resorted to cannibalism, and oraanized. bands kidnapped the unwary passenger in the desolate streets by means of ropes furnished with hooks and let down from the latticed windows. In the year 462 the famine reached its height. It was followed by a pestilence ; • and in the midst of these horrors, Nasir-ed-Dowleh advanced on El-Kalairch at the head of an enormous army ; he was induced to withdraw by the promise of large concessions, only to repeat the attack, and finally to make himself master of the city, after having inflicted a signal defeat on the caliph, who became only the nominal ruler of Egypt, a condition which lasted until the assassination of this powerful rebel in the year 465.
While these events were occurring in Egypt, Syria was in a continual state of anarchy and war. A distinguished general, the emeer El-Guyoosh Bedr-ed-Deen El-Gemeilee, held the government of Damascus during these times ; and now El-Mustansir wrote, recalling him to assume the office of vizir of Egypt. On the condition of being allowed to bring with him a veteran force, he., happily for the country, obeyed the summons, and to his talents was owing the restoration of order and even prosperity which followed. By a massacre of emeers at a grand banquet shortly after his arrival, and by numerous executions, he subdued all opposition in the capital ; and in a series of brilliant victories he annihilated the savage hordes who infested the eonntry throughout its whole extent, leaving either been called to the aid of the contending parties, or voluntarily taken advantage of the universal confusion to commit their lawless ravages.
In concluding this necessarily extended notice of the reign of ElMustansir, the invasion of Aksees with an army of TurkinAns, Kurds, and Arabs, in the year 469, must be mentioned. Spreading devastation around them, they encamped near El-Kithireh; and in the first engagement defeated the forces of EI-Gemtilee ; but fortune favouring him in a second battle, the enemy was totally milted with immense carnape.
El-Mustansir reigned 60 years, and died in the year 487. He was a weak prince, solely given up to pleasure. El-Gemitlee had governed with almost absolute authority and great ability for a period of 20 years, dying only a few days before the caliph. While admiring El-Gemalee's talents, we cannot but condemn his severity. lie built the mosque which gives its name to the mountain immediately S.E. of the citadel of FA-Ktihireh (Gebel-ElGnyooshee), and the second wall of the city, with its three principal gates, Bab-Zuweylell, Iltib-en-Nasr, and Bab-el-Futooh. These gates, which are very fine specimens of architecture, are said to be the work of three Greek brothers.
El-Mustaalee bi-llah Abu-l-Kasim Ahmed succeeded his father ; but a son of El-Gemalee, El-Afdal, had the principal management of the affairs of the kingdom. This caliph's reign is memorable for the First Crusade. El-Afdal had taken Jerusalem from the Turks in the year 491 (A.n. 1098) ; and a few months later it yielded to the Crusaders, after a siege of 40 days. El-Afdal arrived. shortly after its fall with a reinforcement of 20,000 men, but he was defeated in the battle of Ascalon. Later, an Egyptian army, commanded by Saad-ed-Dowleh, was worsted by Baldwin, count of Edessa, and the general was killed in the action. From this period, with the exception of some efforts made in the next reign, to the time of Saliii-ed-deen ("Saladin"), Egypt was too much occupied. with intestine troubles to equip expeditious against the various parties who now struggled for the possession of Syria. ElMustaalee died in the year 495. He is stated to have been a Sunnee, a strange anomaly in a dynasty of Ship: us.
His son EI-i'mir Aboo-'Alee Mansoor came to the throne at the age of five years, and until his arrival at manhood the government was conducted by El-Afdal. The first act of the caliph, however, on taking it into his own hands, was to put his minister to death, and appoint in his stead a man whose wickedness obliged him to imprison him and afterwards condemn him to death. The rule of El-A'mir was chiefly remarkable for his impiety and tyranny, and for the successes of the Crusaders, who, having reduced many of the principal coast-towns in Syria, meditated the conquest of Egypt, and crossed the frontier, but were deterred from the prosecution of their enterprise by the illness of 13aldwin, whose death took place at El-Arcesh, on his way back to Jerusalem. El-A'inir was put to death in 524, at the town of ElGeezch, it is said by partisans of El-Afdal, whose son then usurped the entire government, setting up, as caliph, El-Ilafi5111 Bah Abd-EI-111egeed, a grandson of El-Mustansir (El-Amir having left no male issue), but without the usual ceremonies of installation. This vizir, Aboo-'Alee Ahmed, even forbade the mention of ElHafidh in the public prayers, and inserted his own name in his stead. He perished in a popular tumult, roused by his extortions and arbitrary rule, and Emiandh was duly declared caliph and received the oaths of allegiance. After the death of Ahmed, he successively appointed three other vizirs ; but these proving equally refractory, he at length dispensed with that office altogether. He reigned. nearly 20 years. The licentiousness of his some and successor, Edli-DhAfir Aboo-Mansoor Isma'eel, occasioned his death in four years and seven months at the hand of his vizir El= Abbas.
hi-111th Abu-l-Kitsim 'Eesa Ibn-'Alee was, on his accession in 549, only five years of age, and the history of his times presents merely the contentions of rival vizirs, of whom the chief were El-Melik Es-Salill Tata Ibn-Ruzzey-k, and his competitor El-'Ablitis, before named. The latter, finding his power failing, gathered together the wealth he had amassed and fled to Syria, where he fell into the hands of the Crusaders, who stripped him of all that lie had and detained him a prisoner. Eventually he was given up to Tat6.6 and crucified over the gates of the palace.
El-Falz died in the year 555, and El-'Adid Mohammad Abd-Allah, a grandson of El-Hafidh, and the last of the Fatimee caliphs, was raised to what was then but the shadow of a throne, the entire power being in the hands of who by his oppression and cruelty well-nigh rendered by nature benevolent and wise, as tyrannical as himself. He was assassinated after a year by the secret orders of the caliph, and the latter to conceal his agency in this act installed his son El-'Adil in his place. At this time the IA-Al-known Shawir was governor of the Sa'eed (or Upper Egypt), a post next in importance to that of prime minister. During the last three reigns the vizirs had been rapidly increasing in power ; and the annals of the period are entirely occupied with the rise and fall of potent grandees, all eager for a post which conferred on its possessor the supreme authority. At length, in the reign of this unfortunate prince, they consummated the ruin of the dynasty and overwhelmed themselves in its fall. In 558 E1-'Adil dispossessed Shawir of his government, and the latter had immediate recourse to arms, marched against his enemy, and succeeded in putting him to death. He then constituted himself vizir, but in his turn was compelled to flee from a more powerful rival, Ed-Dirgham. Noor-ed-Deen (Noureddin), the sultan of Damascus, received the fugitive with favour ; and in the course of the next year (559) despatched an army to Egypt, under the command of Asad-ed-Deen S.heerkoolt, to reinstate him. In the meantime FA-Dirgham had been busy putting to death the great men of the empire ; and having thus weakened his power, lie offered but a feeble resistance, was overthrown in a battle near the tomb of the Seyyideh Nefeeseli, on the S. of and Shiwir was restored. No sooner, however, was this effected, than he forgot the engagements into which he had entered with Nonreddin, and threw off his allegiance to him. Sheerkooh retired to the Sharkeeyelt and occupied the town of Bilbeys, and thence threatened Shiwir. In this position of affairs the latter had recourse to the Crusaders,"who willingly responded to his call, and Amaury, king of Jeruseflem, arrived with a considerable force. With these allies, Shawir besieged his former protector in Bilbeys, until, hearing of Noureddin 's successes over the Franks in Syria, they negotiated a peace, and permitted Sheerkooll to withdraw from Egypt. About two years later, Noureddin, determined on punishing the treachery of Sliiiwir, again sent Sheerkooh into Egypt with a great army, and accompanied by his nephew, the famous Saladin. Shawir again sought to strengthen himself by an alliance with Amaury, from whops he received the first intelligence of the meditated invasion. Apprised of this knowledge of his movements, Sheerkooll changed his course from Bilbeys, entered the valley of the Nile at some distance above Cairo, and crossing the river marched northwards to El-Geezelt Here he endeavoured to raise the people against Shawir and his Frank confederates ; and had in some measure succeeded when time superior forces of the enemy compelled him to retreat southwards as far as El-Babeyn, near Ashinooneyn, where he risked an engagement, and gained a complete victory. This success opened to the invaders the greater part of Egypt, and Alexandria itself fell into their hands. Saladin was placed in that city with a numerous garrison, and his uncle departed to subdue the rest of Egypt. The Crusaders, however, at once closely invested Alexandria, and so pressed the siege for three months, as to oblige Sheerkooh to come to its relief. An honourable compromise was effected, by which the Syrians agreed to resign their conquests and evacuate Egypt. But fresh troubles were in store for this unfortunate country. Amaury, irritated at the result of a campaign in which he had only lost, determined on an expedition against his recent ally ; and, entering Egypt, took Bilbeys, putting its inhabitants to the sword, and laid siege to El-Kiihireh, his course being marked by the most dreadful barbarities. On his approach, the ancient city of El-Fustitt was set on fire by order of the vizir, to prevent it falling into the enemy's hands, and it continued burning somewhat more than fifty days. El-'Adid now earnestly sought the aid of Noureddin ; and that monarch, actuated by religious zeal against the Franks, who had already felt his power in Syria, and by the desire of conquest, once more despatched Sheerkooh. In the meantime negotiations had been opened with Amaury to raise the siege of El-Kahireh, on payment of an enormous sum of money; while, however, the conditions were yet unfulfilled, the approach of the Syrian army induced him to retreat in all haste. Sheerkooh and Saladin entered the capital in great state, were received with honour by the caliph and with obsequiousness by the perfidious Shawir, who was contriving a plot which was fortunately discovered and for which he,paid With his head. Sheerkooh was then appointed vizer by El-'Adid, but dying very shortly, he was succeeded in that dignity by Saladin 564 (A.D. 1169).
For the short period which elapsed before Saladin's assumption of the title of sultan a few words will suffice. One of his first acts was to put to death the chief of the eunuchs, and a revolt of the blacks resulted ; a combat took place in El-Kithireh in the street called Beyn-el-Kasreyn ; and the malcontents being worsted, the disturbances were quelled. Bali-ed-Deen Karakoosh, a white eunuch, who afterwards played a prominent part in the reign of Saladin, was appointed to the vacant post. This gave the vizir great influence in the palace, of which he judiciously- availed himself. In 565 we hear of Amaury with Greek allies unsuccessfully besieging Damietta ; and in the following year, Saladin conducted an expedition against the Franks to Ascalon and Rainleb. In, 567, by order of Noureddin, he sup- pressed the name of El-'Adid in the congregational prayers, and substituted that of the 'Abbasee caliph, a masterly stroke of policy to secure the adhesion of the orthodox Muslims. The last of the Fdtimees was lying dangerously ill, and his relations concealed from him his degradation. He died without the knowledge of it, and with him perished an illustrious but unfortunate dynasty.
Saladin was thus relieved of the most serious obstacle on his way to the throne ; yet he dared not throw off his allegiance to the sultan of Damascus, but prudently waited for a favourable opportunity. Noureddin's suspicion was immediately proclaimed himself sultan of Egypt, and inaugurated his reign with a series of brilliant successes. With the conquest of El-Mo'izz, Egypt again took an important place among the nations ; and by the wars of Saladin it became the nucleus of a great empire. But military glory was not the sole aim of this prince and his successors. The patronage they continued to extend to letters and the arts had the most beneficial effect upon the civilization of the country.
Saladin, whose full appellation was El-Melik En-Nasir Salah-ed-deen Yoosuf Ibn-Eiyoob,' acquired his greatest renown by his campaigns against -the Crusaders in Syria. As these belong, however, more properly to the history of those wars than to that of Egypt, they will be more briefly noticed in this place than would otherwise be necessary. The youth of El-Melik Es-Salih Isma'eel, the son and successor of Noureddin, and the consequent confusion which prevailed in his dominions, gave Saladin a fair pretext to occupy Damascus, as the guardian of the young prince, and enabled him to wrest from him his kingdom. He thus considerably enlarged his territory, made himself master of Philip, count of Flanders, laid siege to Antioch, and Saladin entered Palestine. Having encamped before Ascalon, the Egyptian troops ravaged the neighbouring country, and set fire to Joppa, until at length Baldwin the Leper, king of Jerusalem, issued from Ascalon and gave them battle. The result was disastrous to Saladin : his army was totally routed, and he himself fled alone on a dromedary. After this, however, he gained some partial advantages over the Christians, till a terrible famine induced him two years later to conclude a truce with the king of Jerusalem and to retire to Egypt.
In the year 576 he again entered Syria and made war on Kilij-Arslan, the Seljookee sultan of Anatolia, and on Leon, king of Armenia, the Cilicio-Armenian kingdom, both of whom he forced to make terms of peace. Not long after his return, Saladin departed from Egypt (A.u. 578) to prosecute a war with the Crusaders in which neither side desired peace. Their hostility was aggravated by the following circumstances. A vessel bearing 1500 pilgrims had been wrecked near Damietta, and its passengers captured; and to the remonstrances of the king of Jerusalem the sultan replied by complaining of the constant inroads made by Renaud de Chfttillon. At this time the latter turbulent chief undertook an expedition against Eyleh, and for this purpose constructed boats at Karak and conveyed them on camels to the sea ; but this flotilla was repulsed, and the siege raised by a fleet sent thither by El-'Adil (" Saphedin "), the brother of Saladin, and then his viceroy ; and a second attempt was still more unfortunate, the Christian captives on that occasion were sacrificed in the valley of Mina. Having threatened Karak, Saladin encamped at Tiberias, and ravaged the territory of the Franks ; he then besieged Beyroot, but in vain; and thence turned his arms against Mesopotamia and subdued the country, but the city of Mosul successfully resisted him. In the meanwhile, the Crusaders contented themselves with miserable forays across the enemy's borders, and made no serious preparations for the return of their redoubtable antagonist. The latter, having been almost everywhere successful in Mesopotamia, took Tell-Khalid and 'Eyn-Tab in Syria and obtained possession of Aleppo ; he again besieged Karak, ravaged the territory of Samaria, and later received the fealty of the lord of Mosul, but not the keys of the city.
In the year 582 (1186 of our era) war again broke out between Saladin and the Crusaders. The sultan had respected a truce into which he had entered with Baldwin the Leper, and Renaud, before named, was the first to break it. The capture by the latter of a rich caravan enraged Saladin, who despatched orders to all his lieutenants and vassals, summoning them to assist in the " Holy War." He marched (A.D. 1187) from Damascus to Karak, and there laid close siege to Renaud ; at the same time a large body of cavalry under the command of his son, El-Afdal, advanced on Nazareth; and here a body of 130 Knights Hospitallers and Templars, seconded by a few hundred foot soldiers, and encouraged by the heroic Jacques de Maine, marshal of the Temple, by their devotion immortalized their memory. Only the Grand Master of the Temple and two of his knights escaped from the unequal struggle. Soon after, Saladin approached in person at the head of an army of 80,000 men ; and the Christians with their whole force encountered him on the shore of the Lake of Tiberias. The result of the battle which ensued was the heaviest blow which had yet fallen on the Crusaders. Weakened by thirst, shaken by the flight of a part of their troops on the second day of combat, and overwhelmed by numbers, the knights fought with desperate courage, but at length were forced_ to the hills of Hitteem. A multitude fell in this bloody fight, and among the prisoners were Guy do Lusignan (the king of Jerusalem and successor of Baldwin), with his brother and Renaud de Chdtillon. The number of prisoners is almost incredible; and the massacre of many of them is an indelible stain on the glory of the generally merciful Saladin. Tiberias, Ptolemais (Acre), Nabulus, Jericho, Rainleh, Ciesarea, Arsoor, Joppa, Beyroot, and many other places successively fell into the hands of the conqueror. Tyre resisted his attacks; but Ascalon surrendered on favourable terms, and the fall of Jerusalem crowned these victories. The great clemency of Saladin on this occasion is chronicled by Christian historians, though it is but slightly mentioned by the Muslims, who took offence at the mercy shown to the enemies of their faith.
After these events Tyre was again besieged, and when about to capitulate was relieved by the arrival of Conrad, son of the marquis of Montferrat. The valiant defence of the town wearied Saladin, who turned his arms against Tripoli ; but here he met with no better success. Bohemond, prince of Antioch, and at that time possessor of Tripoli also, was, however, glad to obtain a truce of eight months; and some strongholds (among others Karak) were taken. But now the fortune of war turned against the sultan. The ever-memorable siege of Acre, maintained with equal constancy by both Christians and Muslims, lasted upwards of two years, and attracted the attention of the whole western world. At length the immense reinforcements received by the besiegers, and the presence of Richard Cceur de Lion of England and of Philip II. of France, enabled them to overcome all resistance, and the standards of the Cross floated on the ramparts of the city (A.D. 1191). A horrible act of barbarity was here perpetrated : 2700 Muslim captives were massacred in cold blood, in consequence of Saladin's having failed to fulfil the terms of the capitulation ; and the palliative plea of the heat of an assault cannot be urged in extenuation of this enormity. Richard has been accused of being its author ; but Michaud believes with reason that it was decided on in a council of the chiefs of the Crusade. On another occasion, however, that king was certainly guilty of similar cruelty.
After a period of repose and debauchery, the army of the Crusaders, commanded by Richard, directed its march towards Jerusalem. Saladin harassed his advance on every point, rendered the cities and strongholds defenceless, and ravaged the country. Richard, nevertheless, was ever victorious ; his personal bravery struck terror into the Muslims, and he gained a signal victory over the sultan in the battle of Arsoor. But dissensions among the chiefs of his army and the uncertain temper of the commander himself debarred the Crusaders from the attainment of their great object, the deliverance of the Holy City ; and when all the coast from Joppa to Tyre was in the hands of the Christians, and the army of Saladin was threatened with disorganization, a treaty was concluded, and Richard set sail on his return to England. The glory acquired by Saladin, and the famous campaigns of Cceur de Lion, have rendered the Third Crusade the most memorable in history, and shed a lustre on the arms of both Muslims and Christians greater than they ever attained in those wars, either before or afterwards.
Saladin died about a year after the conclusion of this peace (A.u. 589 or 1193 of our Era) at Damascus, at the age of fifty-seven years. Ambition and religious zeal appear to have been his ruling passions; he was courageous, magnanimous, and merciful, possessed of remarkable military talents and great control over himself. His generosity to the vanquished and his faithful observance of his passed word are lauded by the historians of the Crusades; the former brought on him much obloquy among his own fierce soldiers, and is a trait in his character which is worthy of note in the annals of a time when this of his continual wars, he was not unmindful of the welfare of Egypt, and during his reign many public works were executed. Of these. we may mention especially the citadel of Cairo, with the magnificent buildings which, until very recently, it contained ; the third wall of the city ; and the repair of the great canal called the Bahr Yoosuf, a very important and useful work-. From the year 578 until the period of his death lie had not entered Egypt ; but his brother El-Melik El-'Adil Seyf-ed-deen (Saphedin) and other princes of his family successively governed that country, and the eunuch Kardkoosh, who also defended Acre, held a large share of authority.
On the death of Saladin, his extensive dominions were divided chiefly among his sons, and Egypt fell to the lot of one of them, El-Melik El-'Azeez Micl-ed-Deen 'Othman. The grandees supported his claim to the throne, and he. proved himself worthy of their choice. In conjunction with El-'Adil, we find him warring against the leaders of the Fourth Crusade. lie reigned nearly six years, and was succeeded (in 595) by his son El-Mansoor Mohammad, whose uncle El-Afdal was compelled to relinquish the government of Damascus and assume the regency of Egypt. Disagreement among- the sons of Saladin had occurred soon after that monarch's death, and now hastened the rise of El-'Adil, who, by his military talents and other remarkable qualities, had excited the fears of even his brother. With the view of checking his growing ascendancy, El-Afdal formed an alliance against him with Edb-' another son of Saladin and lord of Aleppo, and besieged him in Damascus ; but coming to strife, they raised the siege in 597. This attempt proved fatal to the power of El-Afdal. Ile was pursued to Egypt, in his turn besieged in El-Ktildreh, and forced to flee, and El-'Adil was proclaimed sultan. Having dethroned El-Mansoor, he speedily recovered Damascus from the hands of the confederate brothers, and Syria with Egypt acknowledged his supremacy. El-'Adil (as Saphedin) is especially known by his opposition to the Fourth and Sixth Crusades, the former of which took place before his accession to the throne. Tie repulsed the Christians neat Ntibulus, captured Joppa, and encountered the enemy between Tyre and Sidon. He was there defeated with heavy loss, and Sidon, Laodicea, Gibleh, and Beyrout were taken. But the Crusaders wasted their strength before the fortress of Thoron. El'Adil raised the siege of that place, and although afterwards he met with a reverse near Joppa, his adversaries bought a dear victory ; and, having come to terms of peace, they returned to Europe. In the year 600 (A.D. 1204) he departed to Syria with the object of securing Jerusalem againet threatened attacks, and concluded a truce which lie offered to renew when about to expire ; and to prove his good faith, he strengthened that offer by promising to cede ten castles to the Christians. These overtures were refused, and the Muslim army drove the newly arrived king of Jerusalem, Jean de Brienne, back to Europe. Those who remained then professed their willingness to accede to conditions of peace, and we do not again hear of in Palestine until 614 (A.D. 1217), when he was once more called thither to oppose the Crusaders ; but a serious invasion of Egypt by these troublesome adventurers hastily recalled its king, and lie died of grief, it is said, on hearing of the advantages gained by them.
El-Kamil immediately (615) came to the throne, and. took the most energetic measures for the protection of his kingdom. In the meantime, the Franks had besieged Damietta both by sea and land ; and, notwithstanding every effort for the relief of the place, its garrison was forced to capitulate. summoned to his aid the princes of Ids family, and with every available man watched the enemy's movements. Flushed with success, Jean de Brienne commenced his march on the capital ; and with the characteristic carelessness of the Crusaders lie took no measures to secure supplies. Ills advance was stopped at the junction of the canal of Ashmoon with the Nile, where he found El-K6mil in a very strong position. Encamped on the opposite shore, the invaders depended for supplies on Damietta and its immediate district; but the inundation of the Nile gradually obstructed land-carriage, and El-Kiimil, skilfully availing himself of this natural ally, caused boats to be carried overland to the enemy's rear, and, thus cut off by land and water, they were compelled to attempt a retreat. At Beymmoon, however, all further progress was found to be impossible, the inundation had covered the level country, and the sultan's boats blockaded the Nile. The Franks surrendered, and evacuated Damietta, but not before Egypt had suffered severely from the ravages they committed. The town of El-Mansoorah was founded on the site of El-Kamil's camp, and commemorates his energy and sagacity. The Seventh Crusade was invited by the same sultan who had thus suffered by an invasion of the Franks. In A.D. 1223, Ei.Kiimil invoked the aid of Frederick II. against his brother El-Moadhdham, lord of Damascus, and, in consequence of this alliance, Jerusalem, with Bethlehem and the places between it and Joppa and Acre, Nazareth and the territory of Tho•on and Sidon, with its dependencies, was ceded to Frederick on the 20th of Feb. 1229. Between these two monarchs existed the most friendly relations, presenting a curious spectacle in the midst of the intrigues and hatred of their subjects for each other, and endangering their popularity and even their lives. After various expeditions against his brother and his successors, El-Kamil gained possession of Damascus, and died there in the year 635 (A.D. 1238). He was distinguished by military talents and rare moderation, and was also a learned man, a patron of the arts, and a good king.
Ills son, El-Melik EI:Adil the Younger, was declared sultan of Egypt and Syria, with the consent of the nobles, and he speedily banished those ministers whose counsels he feared, and appointed creatures of his own. Oppressed by his tyranny, and impoverished by his extravagance, the people called his brother Es-Salih Negmed-Deen Eiyoob to the throne ; and he deposed and imprisoned El'Adil in the year 637, and to replenish his exhausted treasury, ordered all who had received presents from the late sultan to restore them to his successor. In the next year serious disturbances nroke out in Syria; 'Innid-ed-Deen, who had taken Damascus in the reign of El-'Adil, formed an alliance with the Franks, and purposed the conquest of Egypt ; the hostile armies met at Acre, and the Muslim soldiers of 'Imarbed-Deen deserting to the banner of Es-Salih Eiyoob, the Franks were routed. Negotiations for peace were then attempted, but these failing, the Franks were again induced to take the field by the cession of Jerusalem and other places. The king of Egypt, on his part, called to his assistance the. Tatars of Kharesm, who took Jerusalem and overran Syria. In the next campaign (642) they were joined by the army of Es-Salih, under the command of his favourite slave Beybars, or Bibars, who was destined to play a conspicuous part in Egyptian history. At Gaza the allied army met the Franks, eager to avenge themselves on the IChaxesmees for the horrible atrocities of which they had been guilty in the preceding campaign, and willingly joined by the Muslim princes of Damascus, Ilirns, and Karak ; on the first day the battle raged with unabated fury from daybreak to sunset, and was continued on the morrow until the prince of Dims, having lost 2000 men, gave way and fled towards Damascus. The Christians maintained the unequal tight with great constancy, and were only vanquished after the greater number had fallen. In these encounters 30,000 men (Christians and Muslims) were either killed or taken prisoners. Various successes followed this victory, Jerusalem was taken by the Egyptians, and Es-Salih laid siege to Damascus in person. The city having capitulated on favourable conditions, his fierce allies, enraged at the loss of pillage, quarrelled with him, and soon after joined his rebellious subjects. Damascus was reduced to the direst straits, but again fortune favoured Es-Salih. He hastened from Egypt, whither he had retained, and totally defeated the enemy. Other advantages were gained by his commander Fakhr-ed-Deen over the Franks in 645.
Although attacked by illness, the sultan was once more called to Syria to quell fresh troubles ; but at Damascus news reached him of the threatened invasion of Egypt by the Crusaders under St Louis, and he travelled back in great suffering from his malady. Damietta, which he rightly judged would be the first point of attack, was strengthened and well stored, and its defence was intrusted to Fakhr-ed-Deen. On Friday, June 4, A.D. 1249, the French anchored before the place, and the next day landed opposite the camp of the Egyptian general, who offered but slight opposition, and in the course of the next night betrayed his trust and retreated southwards. His army was precipitately followed by the entire population of Damietta, and this important town with its stores fell into the hands of the invaders without a blow. Fakhr-ed-Deen nearly lost his life for this act of cowardice, and fifty-four of his principal officers were put to death. In the meantime the sultan's illness gradually increased, but nevertheless he caused himself to be removed to the town of El-Mansoo•ah, which he fortified, and there he expired on Nov. 21, at the age of forty-four, and after a reign of ten years. Ile it was who introduced the Bahree Memlooks, a body of Turkish slaves, who composed his body-guard, and eventually usurped the supreme power. Their name Dahree (or " of the river ") originated in their being trained and quartered on the island of Er-Rodah, where the sultan had built a palace.
The French were advancing southwards, and, notwithstanding the precautions of Sheger-ed-Durr (the widow of Es-Salih, who assumed the re,encyi), were apprised of the death of the sultan. Many partial actions took place on the march, and on Dec. 19, their army appeared before El-Mansoo•ah, the scene of the disaster of Jean de Brienne. Skirmishing continued until Shrove Tuesday, when, a traitor having shown the enemy a ford over the canal of Ashmoon, they surprised the camp and town. Very severe fighting ensued, Fakhr-ed-Deen fell early in the struggle, and the place was nearly lost, when the llahree Memlooks led by Beybars furiously charged. the assailants, and completely turned the fortune of the day. The morrow witnessed another battle, also disastrous to the Crusaders, mud a sneeession of inisforttmefioaeweci, 'roman-S.11(th, on hearing of the death of his father, travelled in all haste from Mesopotamia to Egypt, and having reached the camp aszumed the command. Ile had recourse to the stratagem which had proved so successful under the direction of El-Kamil, and cut off the supplies of the enemy. This, coupled with disease, soon reduced St Louis to great straits, and he sent to propose a truce, but not coming to terms he resolved on retreating to Damietta. A memorable conflict took place by land and water, and St Louis with his troops surrendered themselves prisoners of war.
Tooran-Shah now gave himself up to debauchery, offended his nobles by bestowing hie favours only on certain creatures whom lie had brought with him from Mesopotamia, and alarmed the queen by forcing her to 'render him an account of his father's wealth. Sheger-ed-Durr appealed to the Iliemlooks, a conspiracy was formed, and the sultan was attacked in his palace. He fled to a pleasure-tower built on the banks of the Nile, Which was set on fire in the presence of his army, the wretched king, from the summit, in vain promising to abdicate. De perished miserably, and his corpse lay unburied for many days on the batik. On his accession he had strangled a brother, and his fate deserves no pity.
Slieger-ed-Derr (vulgarly called Shegeret-ed-Durr), herself a slave, and the first of the Dynasty of the Dahree, or Turkish Memlooks, succeeded to the throne ; and 'Izz-ed Deems Eybek was appointed commander of the forces. After ninny delays, St Louis agreed to may 400,000 livres as a ransom for himself and Ids army, 200,000 to lie paid in Egypt, and the remainder on the fulfilment of certain stipulations at Acre : Damietta was surrendered and Egypt evacuated. Thus ended the last invasion of Egypt by the Crusaders. Slieger-ed-Durr, in order to strengthen herself on the throne, shortly after married the emeer Eybek, and caused him to be proclaimed sultan, with the title of El-Melik El-ho'izz, in the year 648. The followers of the late Es-Salih, however, obliged Eybek to associate with himself in the sovereignty a young prince of the family of Eivoob, El-Melik El-Ash•af Mudhafrar-ed-Deen Moosh. En-Nasir, a son of El-'Azeez, invaded Egypt, and after many combats was driven back to Syria, but the country continued in a very unsettled state. The chief of the adherents of the fallen dynasty was arrested by Eybek ; and Beybars and other leading men having repaired to the citadel to demand satisfaction, his bloody head was thrown to them from the ramparts, and in terror they fled to Syria. El-Ash•af was then cast into prison, and there lie (lied. But Eybek soon roused the jealousy of his beautiful and ambitious wife ; and lie was assassinated by her orders (655, A. D. 1257). In her turn she was beaten to death, not many days after, by the wooden clogs of the female slaves of another wife of Eybek, and her corpse was exposed for three days in the moat of the citadel.
El-Melik El-Mansoor Noor-ed-Dcen 'Alec, son of Eybek, was now raised to the throne, and Beybars being apprised of time death of his rival attempted to regain his power in Egypt ; but Rutz, the viceroy of Eybek and also of his soil, attacked and routed him ; and he soon after (657) desposed El-Mansoor, and declared himself sultan. El-Melik Elr]f4udhafl:ar Butz began his reign by putting to death El-Mansoo• and Sharaf-ed-Deen, the able minister of the last Eiyoobee kings and of the first of this dynasty. A reign thus cruelly commenced ended tragically. Kurtz was diverted from these severe measures by the advance of llooligoo, grandson of Genghis-Khan, who, with a formidable army, overran El-'lrak and Syria. By great Obits limits raised a considerable force and marched to meet him. The intelligence of the death of the Moghul emperor had, however, in the meantime recalled Hooligoo, who left lietbooghlt to encounter the Egyptian sultan. The battle declared in favour of the latter, and Syria was restored to his rule. Ileturning in triumph to Egypt, he was assassinated ou the frontier by Beybars in the year 658, and this Mendook (who had but recently fought ender his banner against the Tatars) was forthwith chosen by the eineers to be his successor.
The brilliant reign of El-Melik Beybars El-Thmdukdaree is so perplexed and full of incident as to render a concise account of it very difficult. It began with the reduction of a revolt in Syria. The rebels were supported by a Tatar army under Hoolagoo, hut Beybars was everywhere victorious, fled - Damascus surrendered at discretion. Having subdued all opposition in this quarter, he endeavoured to improve the condition of Egypt, abolished the exorbitant imposts under which the people groaned, and welcomed to the court Ahmad, some of the caliph who was declared Prince of the Faithful with the title of ElMustansir and furnished with a small force, by which he hoped to establish himself in Baghdad. lie was, however, repulsed by the Tatars and put to death. The succeeding line of caliphs, possessed of spiritual, but no temporal authority, remained at the court of the Memlook sultans until the Turkish conquest. From this time, Beybars continued to extend and confirm his rule. his first expedition was to Syria against the Christians, and the Church of the Nativity at Nazareth was destroyed. Thence he went to the fortified town of 1Carak, which had more than once resisted the attacks of Saladin, but opened its gates to the Memlook conqueror, and its territory was added to his dominions. A great scarcity afflicted Cairo in 662, and Beybars threw open the Government stores, and strove in every way to alleviate the sufferings of his subjects.
In 663 he again entered Syria, and took Caesarea and Ursoof ; and in the next year he commenced a series of campaigns against the Christians, notwithstanding the earnest remonstrances of the kings of France, of Aragon, and of Armenia. To raise the necessary funds for the expenses of the war, he took occasion from the occurrence of many incendiary fires in Cairo, during his absence, to mulct their co-religionists of the sum-of 500,000 deemirs, ostensibly to repair the damage caused by these fires. He threatened Acre, and took Sidad ; and relieved from the apprehensions caused by the advance of the Tatars by the death of Hoolagoo and the retreat of his army, 13eybars despatched a force which effected the conquest of Armenia, and penetrated to the borders of Anatolia, a transient success which was speedily annulled by the advent of Abaka Khan, the son of Hoolagixl. In the next war, 13eybars again attacked the Christians, burning their churches and enslaving the people. Ile took Antioch, with horrible carnage, advanced to Wins and Hamill, and thence returned to Cairo. After a campaign against the Tatars, he ravaged the country around Acre the constant object of his attacks), and the "Assassins," so long the terror of dynasties, submitted to his power. About this time the Tatars renewed their inroads and besieged Dural'; and in the year 671 Beybars took the field against them with two armies, one commanded by himself in person, the other by Kali-oon El-Elfee. In the battle of Beymh the sultan was completely victorious, and the Tatars fled to the mountains of Kurdistan. In consequence of this victory, Armenia again fell into Ids hands, and was given up to pillage. Abaka Klein afterwards was again repulsed at Beyrah. Nubia also about this time acknowledged the authority of Beybars. He died at Damascus in the year 676, after another expedition against Anatolia, attended with various success, in which the Tatars were leagued against him. Great military talents, coupled with the most indefatigable activity, Beybars certainly possessed, but he used his conquests unmercifully; on many occasions he ravaged whole provinces, and sacked many towns, putting great numbers of the inhabitants to the sword. The melancholy annals of the Crusades bear ample testimony to this fact ; and while the example of other monarchs, and of the Franks themselves, may be urged as some palliation, nevertheless his barbarity remains an indelible blot on his character. In Egypt he endeavoured to reform abuses and suppress vice ; and numerous public works were executed by his orders. Damietta was razed and rebuilt farther inland; and the mouth of the Nile was protected by a boom against sudden invasion. He repaired the fortifications of Alexandria and the Pharos, the mosque El-Azhar in Cairo, and the walls of the citadel, and built the great mosque known by his name to the north of the city.
The son and successor of Beybars, El-Melik Es-Sa'eed Barakeh Khan, was exiled after a short reign of two years, and a younger brother El-'Adil Selamish, raised to the throne, Kali-oon El-Elfee acting as regent. This Menilook had married a daughter of Bey-bars, and was consequently nearly allied to the sultan. He nevertheless conspired against him, and was soon proclaimed king by the title of El-Melik El-Mansoor. Distinguished in former wars, be achieved many successes during his reign of ten years. On his accession he despatched an army to reduce disturbances in Syria, and took Damascus. Peace was thus established in that province ; and in the year 680 he in person defeated a very superior force of Tatars and raised the siege of Rahabeh. Later in his reign (in the year 688) he besieged Tripoli, which for nearly two centuries had been in the possession of the Christians and was very rich and flourishing. The town was sacked and its unfortunate inhabitants put to the sword. His memory is still preserved in Cairo by his hospital and mad-house adjoining his fine mosque in the principal street of the city. This charitable institution he is said to have founded as an expiation for great severity towards the citizens in enforcing an obnoxious edict. His son, El-Ashraf Khaleel, rendered himself famous by the siege and capture (in the year 690) of Acre, the last stronghold of the Crusaders in Syria. Many thousands of its inhabitants were massacred; and 10,000 who presented themselves before the sultan and demanded quarter were slaughtered in cold blood. He also took Erzeroom in 691, and two years after was assassinated in Egypt (A.D. 1294).
El-Melik En-Nasir Mohammad, another son of Kalii-oon, succeeded him at the age of nine years. The regent Ketboogha, however, followed the example of Kali-oon, and usurped the covereignty, with the title El-Melik El-'Adil. Pestilence and famine were followed by war with the Tatars, who again ravaged. Syria. Ketboogha despatched an army against them, but the valour of his troops was unable to withstand overpowering numbers, and Lageen, Kalti-oon's governor in Syria, was driven into Egypt with en immense crowd of fugitives. Ketboogha was deposed on the ellegation that he had not commanded in person, and El-Melik EI.Mansoor Lageen was elevated in his stead. In little more than two years this king was deposed hi a Conspiracy. I lis character was amiable, and he deserved a better return for the equity and kindness he showed to his subjects.
A short period of confusion then ensued, during which an emeer was proclaimed king. En-Nasir Mohammad, however, was at length recalled from his exile at Karak, and restored in the year 698. having firmly established himself in Egypt, he led an army against the Tatars, but met with a severe reverse in the plains of Mims ; a second expedition proved more fortunate, and En-Nasir, then only nineteen years of age, gained a bloody and decisive victory over the enemy near Damascus, in the year 702. The battle lasted three days ; during the first two the result was not decisive, although En-Nasir held the field ; on the third day the Tatars were utterly routed and pursued for many hours. The sultan on his entry into Cairo after this achievement was preceded by 1600 prisoners, each one carrying the head. of a comrade slain in the combat, and 1000 other heads were borne on lances in the procession. En-Nasir reigned until the year 707, when he went to Karak and voluntarily abdicated. He had long struggled against the control of two powerful eineers, Beybars and Silar ; and in despair of throwing off their ascendency, he then openly yielded the reins of government to those who had long really held them. Since this prince's accession the Christians and Jews of Egypt suffered the most severe persecution (excepting that of El-Hakim) which had yet befallen them. In the year 700, they were ordered to wear blue and yellow turbans respectively, and forbidden to ride on horses or mules, or to receive any Government employment. '[he people took advantage of these measures to destroy many churches and synagogues. The churches continued shut for about a year ; but some of those which had been destroyed were afterwards rebuilt at the request of Lascaris and other princes.' Another event of this period was a great earthquake which half ruined Cairo, giving it the appearance of a city demolished by a siege ; Alexandria and other towns of Egypt, as well as Syria, also suffered from it considerably.
On the abdication of En-Nasir, Eitsoffk El-Mudhaffar Rulined-Deen liey bars II. was saluted sultan ; but ere long En-Nasir recovered Ids courage, and having collected an army marched to Damascus, where he was acknowledged, and thence to Egypt, entering Cairo without opposition. El-Mndliafibr had fled at his approach, and, never a favourite of the people, he was attacked on his exit from the metropolis, by a crowd of the citizens, who loaded him with abuse, and pelted him with stones. El-Nasir now for the third time ascended. the throne of Egypt, and took the entire authority into his own hands. The remainder of his life was a period of profound peace, during which he occupied himself in improving his dominions, and in embellishing Cairo. But another persecution of the Christians occurred in 721, and all the principal churches in Egypt were destroyed. by certain fanatical Moslems. The sultan threatened a general massacre of the inhabitants of Cairo and El-Ens-tat ; the Christians, however, took revenge themselves by setting fire to very many mosques and houses in the metropolis; much tumult ensued, and many Christians and Muslims were executed. The threats of the mob induced EnNasir to permit the people to murder and plunder any Christian whom they might meet in the streets ; and the oppressive rules before enacted were rigorously enforced, and made even more degrading.
The sons of En-Nasir followed. him in succession, but the reigns of most of them were short and troublous. El-Mansoor Seyf-edDeen Aboo-I3ekr, El-Ashraf 'Ala-cd-Deen Koojook, En-Niisir Sidhab-ed-Deen Ahmed, Es-Sarni 'Invid-ed-Deen lsmmreef, El-Kamil Zeyn-ed-Decn Shiaban, and El-Mudhaffar Zeyn-ed-Deen Ilaggee were only raised to time throne to be either exiled or put to death. After these, the sultan Ilasan deserves notice. He was deposed by his brother, Es- Sahli Salah-ed-Deen, whose minister was Sheykhoon, a man well known to students of Egyptian subjects ; but he soon regained his authority, reigned seven years, and at length fell by swords of his memlooks in the splendid. mosque which lie built in the open space beneath the citadel of Cairo. Four more Memlook kings bring the history to the accession of a new dynasty. These were k1-Mansoor Nasir-ed-Deen Haggee (son of El-Mudhatfar), deposed in six months ; El-Ashraf Sliaaban (son of ilasaii), an unfortunate prince, whose reign passed away amid the intrigues of the faineant caliphs and the struggles of the now too powerful emeers,by whom he was ultimately strangled ; his son, El-.Mansoor 'Ala-ed-Deen, the victim of similar troubles, in whose time the celebrated Barkook rose to the regency ; and Es-Sahli Ilaggee, a brother of the last king. Exiled by Barkook, who was proclaimed sultan, he unsuccessfully endeavoured to recover his throne in the year 784 ; in 790 (A.D. 1388) ho was restored, but he was soon once more dethroned, this time with the loss of his life.
The sultan Edh-Dhaliir Seyf-ed-Deen Aboo-Sa'eed Barkook was now undisputed master of Egypt. lie was the first prince of the Dynasty of Burge or Circassian Memlooks. As the preceding dynasty was founded by the Turkish Memlooks of Es-Ssilili Eiyoola so this dynasty was composed of the Circassian slaves whom those kings from time to time bought with the view of Strengthening their power. They were originally placed in garrison-towns, and hence their name Burgec, signifying "of a tower or castle." It is worthy of remark that, while many of the sultans of both these dynasties held an insecure tenure of power, many of the former met with a violent death, but few of the latter. The reign of Barkook is memorable for his war with Teemoor, or Teemoor-leng, 3ommonly called by us Tamerlane, who had extended his conquests towards ins dominions, but found him not unprepared, for he had foreseen the threatened danger. In the year 795, Kara-Yoosuf, lord of El-Medeeyeh, and Ahmad Ibu-15.,veys, sultan of Baghdad, lied to his court for succour. The inhabitants of Edessa had been put to the sword, and Aleppo was menaced with a similar catastrophe, when Barkook at the head of his army came to its relief. Ahmad was reinstated in Baghdad, as a vassal of Barkook; and soon after the 'Othmatilee Bayezeed, commonly called byes Bajazet, concluded a treaty with the sultan of Egypt. His designs against India diverted Teemoor from his projects in Syria, but Barkook con-tinned vigilant and by every means sought to insure the safety of his kingdom. He died suddenly in 801, much beloved by Isis subjects and regarded by less powerful chiefs as their strongest bulwark against the Tatar monarch. He was called. "Sheykh" for his wisdom and learning, and combined with these qualities those of a skilful general and a good king. He was active, wary, and provident, and possessed the military talents of Beybars without his severity. He seems to have been fond of riches and display, and he certainly left his treasury in a very flourishing condition, besides much wealth in stores, slaves, horses, and the like.
His son, El-Melik En-Nasir Abu-s-Sa'adat Farag, fell a prey to intestine troubles and the inroads of the invader. lie had overcome a revolt of the governor of Syria, when Teemoor again threatened that province. Earh-Yoosuf and Ahmad sought refuge with the son of their former protector, and Farag's refusing to betray his guests gave occasion to the enemy to continue the war ; a battle was fought, Farag was defeated, Aleppo and Hims fell into the hands of the victor, and the Egyptian forces returned and were concentrated in Egypt. Intimidated, however, by the fall of his ally Bajazet, Farag sent an embassy to Teemoor with presents and oilers of amity, and at length concluded a peace at the sacrifice of territory. Teemoor died in the year 807 (a.D. 1405), and Farag was preparing an expedition to recover his Syrian possessions, when he was surprised i sa his palace by an insurrection, headed by his brother, 'Abd-el-'Azeez, and compelled to take to flight. The people believing that he had perished proclaimed El-Maar-3°0r 'Abd-el-'Azeez his successor. In the space of less than three months, however, he was deposed in favour of Farag, who thenceforth reigned at Damascus, until the caliph El-Musta'een bi-llah, at the instigation of the emeer Sheykls El-Malunoodee, who had raised an army, boldly declared himself sultan, by an appeal to religion gained numbers to his side, instituted criminal proceedings against Farag on the plea of the exactions which he had been forced to levy for the conduct of the war against Teemoor, and accomplished his death. Farag was beheaded in the month of Safar in the year 815, and his corpse was left unburied. Abud-Malrisin gives him the character of an extravagant, cruel, and voluptuous king._ El-Musta'een with the title of El-Melik Abu-lFadl, began his reign well; but he bad appointed El-Mahmoodee Isis vizir as a reward for his services, and this powerful and vigorous chief soon obliged him to abdicate and eventually exiled him to Alexandria, where he passed the remainder of his days.
El-Melik El-Mu-eiyad Abu-n-Nasr Sheykh El-Mahmoodee ally a memlook of Barkuok's) waged three successful wars in Syria, in the first of which he was guilty of a breach of faith in putting to death the governor of Damascus and part of the garrison of that city, after they had surrendered on promise of safety. He reigned peacefully in Egypt, and his name is recorded as that of a king who studied the happiness of his subjects and favoured the learned, who counted ham among their number. But he was avaricious ; although one might judge the contrary from his beautiful mosque and the minarets over the Bab-Zuweyleh in Cairo, held to be among the chief ornaments of the city.
Three kings followed in rapid succession : - El-Mudhaffar Ahmad, a son of El-Mu-eiyad, under two years of age at his accession, EdhDhahir Tatar, and his infant son, Es-Salili Mohammad, who was deposed by Barsabay Ed-Dukmakee. This Memlook assumed the title of El-Melik EI-Ashraf, and worthily continued the prosperous reign of El-Mu-eiyad. In power and virtue he ranks second only to Barkook among all the kings of this dynasty. He is known in European history by his expedition in 827 (a.n. 1424) against John III., king of Cyprus, who became his vassal, and by the part he took, about seven years later, in the dissensions of the house of Savoy and the government of Cyprus. He ruled for seventeen years with great clemency, and died in 841. El-'Azeez Yoosuf, his son, was deposed by El-Mansoor Aboo-Sa'eed Jakmak El-'Ala-ee, a good prince, and a patron of the learned. After a peaceful reign he abdicated at the age of about eighty years in favour of his son, El-Mansoor Abu-s-Sa'adat 'Othmdn, who was overthrown by the intrigues of the caliph El-Kahn Li-amid-116h, and was succeeded by an aged Memlook, El-Ashraf-Abn-n-Nasr Eynal, followed by his son, El-Mu-eiyad Shillab-ed-Deen Abu-IAhmad. Edh-Dhahir Seyf-ed-Deen-laoshkadam, a Greek by birth, superseded him, reigning himself for seven years, with equity and benignity, presenting a contrast to the cruelty and oppression of his appointed successor, Ed-Dhahir Aboo-Sa'eed Bilbay El-Ala-es, which caused the latter's fall and the elevation of the sultan Aboo-Sa'eed Temerbeg Edh-Dhahiree, who, in his turn, was deposed to make room for El-Ashraf Kait Bey, a prince who deserves especial notice for his struggles with the Turks, whereby the conquest of Egypt by the Porte was deferred for a few years. After a period of quiet which followed his accession, he was alarmed by the victory gained by Mehemet II. over his ally the king of Persia, and posted a considerable force on the frontier of Syria. The successes of the conqueror of Constantinople made him desire to abdicate; but the emeers prayed him to defend his rights, and he consequently prepared for the war. The death of Mehemet, and the dissensions between Bajazet II. and Jena (or Zizim) temporarily relieved him of these apprehensions. The fall of Jena, however, and his arrival at the Egyptian court, implicated the Mendook sultan in the quarrel ; and on the final overthrow of this prince licit Bey made sure of a war with the more fortunate Bajazet, and himself began aggressive measures, intercepted the Turkish caravan of pilgrims, and an ambassador from India who eves on his way to Constantinople with presents, and took Tarsus and Adaneh. A remonstrance from Bajazet was answered by a successful attack on his Asiatic commander, 'Alti-ed-Dowleh. In the meantime Tarsus and Adaneh were recovered from him; but the emeer El-Ezbekee, to whom was entrusted the conduct of all future wars, being despatched against these towns, retook them, defeated an army sent to chastise him, and annexed Karamania. Another force was speedily equipped, and took the field in 893 ; conditions of peace were refused, and considerable success attended the Turkish arms. El-Ezbekee was, therefore, again ordered to Syria ; a Turkish squadron conveying troops was dispersed, and at Tarsus lie gave battle. The result was at first unfavourable to the Memlooks, whose commander, however, rallied them under cover of the night, and succeeded in surprising and totally defeating the Turks. Long negotiations followed this victory; and at length Raft Bey, who was always most anxious for peace, ceded the disputed towns of Tarsus and Adana, and secured repose during the rest of his days. He died in 901, having designated ElMelik En-Nsisir Abu-s-Sa'adat Mohammad as his successor. This weak and barbarous king was put to death after four years, during which he was deposed, and Kansooh, surnamed Khamsameeyeli, and Edh-Dhahir Abu-n-Nasr Kdnsooh were successively installed. The first reigned lint eleven days, and the latter abdicated after five months of great difficulty and danger. On the death of EnNasir, El-Ashraf Kansooh Janbalat eves elevated to the throne, but six months sufficed to accomplish his fall, and he eves fortunate in, preserving his life. The next sultan, El-Melik El-'Adil Too- man Bey, was acknowledged both in Egypt and Syria. He, however, was overthrown and killed in a few months.
The Ilemlooks now compelled Ktinsooli EI-Choo•ee to assume the dangerous dignity, with the title of El-Melik El-Ashraf. This prince very unwillingly yielded. His previous life shows him to have been both virtuous and learned ; and he proved himself to be an able ruler. After an unsuccessful expedition against the Portuguese in the East, he reigned in peace until the year 915, when Kurkood, the father of Selim 1., the Turkish sultan, obtained his protection and assistance. Events similar to those which accompanied the end of Jena followed; and Selina availed himself of a pretext to declare war against Egypt. The first reverse which the Egyptians suffered occurred to an army commanded by 'Ala-ed. Dowleh, formerly defeated by Mit Bey, but now in the pay of ElGhooree. The winter was passed by the latter in preparing energetically for the inevitable struggle, and in the spring he advanced in person. Selim, on his part, pretended to march towards Persia ; but at the same time he sent to demand of El-Ghooree wherefore he opposed his passage and commanded in person on the frontier. El-Ghooree replied that his was merely an army of observation, and that he was desirous of mediating between Selina and lsinti'eel Shah. Selim, however, rapidly advanced, refused to listen to an attempt at negotiation, and was met by El-Ghooree on the plain of Marj-Dabik, near Aleppo. A long and sanguinary battle ensued, and victory declared for neither side, until Kheyr Bey, commanding the right wing, _and EI-Ghazalee the left, of the Egyptian army, basely deserted to the enemy with their troops. The centro then gave way and fled in utter confusion, notwithstanding the efforts of the sultan to rally them. He eras trampled to death by his routed cavalry, while (according to some) in the act of prayer.
This event took Owe on the 26th of Regeb 922 (A.D. 1516). With ' his death Egypt lost her independence. The shattered remains of the army collected in Cairo. Toonuin Bey, a nephew of the deceased king, was elected sultan, and at once determined on every resistance to the conqueror. His general in Syria, El-Canbardee, dis- ' pnted the road with Selim step by step, and Toonnin Bey awaited his arrival near Cairo. Between El-Khankah and the metropolis, at the village of Er-Reydaneeyeh, the opposing armies joined battle, en the 29th of Zu-l•lleggeli (January 1, 1517). The fall of a favourite general, Simin Pasha, infuriated. the Turks, and the brilliant bravery of the Memlooks availed them not. immense numbers of them were slain by their enemies in the pursuit, and the survivors reunited in Cairo. El-Ganhardee, however, sacrificed his fame by joining the victor. The Turkish army paused for rest ; and time was thus given to Tooman Bey to hire Arabs at a great cost to replenish his thinned. ranks. Selim now passed to the west of Cairo. A night surprise conducted by Tooman but he succeeded in putting to the sword a great many Turks. He fortified himself in the city, and a house-to-house combat enmted, the Memiooks defending every foot with the energy of despair ; the citadel fell by assault, and the unfortunate Tooman effected his escape towards Alexandria ; but on the way he was taken by Arabs, given up to El-Ganbardee and another, and brought in chains to &dim, who at first received him with honour, but afterwards falsely accused him of conspiring against him, and, with the cruelty and perfidy characteristic of his race, hung him over the Bah-Zuweyleh, the Itlace of execution for common malefactors. Thus miserably perished the last independent ruler of Egypt, who possessed the best qualities of his line, and whose noble defence of his kingdom would. have secured. to him the commiseration of any but a Turk.
In reviewing the period during which Egypt was governed by independent Muslim princes, it is necessary to consider the spirit of the times and the people over whom they ruled. They succeeded to the government of countries worn out by incessant warfare, overrun by savage hordes, and debased by the rule of the Lower Empire. Egypt had long struggled against the slavery to which it was condemned, and the history of the last three dynasties of Pharaohs evinces the patriotism which yet animated her people. But the successive tyranny of the Persians, the Greeks, and the Romans appears to have annihilated their nationality; and when the Arabs invaded the country, these causes, combined with religious strife, induced the people to afford to the conquerors every assistance in their power. But the changeful rule of the lieutenants and the troubles of the caliphs debarred Egypt (except at times under the Benee-Tooloon and the Ikhsheedeeyels) from profiting by the enlightenment of the race who held the dominion over it, until the conquest by the Fdtimees. The caliphs of that dynasty contributed in a great degree to restore to Egypt some portion of its ancient prosperity, and with the house of Eiyoob it attained its greatest military glory under the Muslims ; but the edifices erected during the rule of the two dynasties of Memlook kings, the libraries collected in Cairo at that period, and the learned men who then flourished would point to it as the age in which literature and the arts were cultivated with the most success, a sure evidence of the internal prosperity of any country. This is the more surprising when we consider the state of Syria, which had long before their accession fallen a prey to intestine wars and the ravages of the Tatars, the Crusaders, and other invaders, and also bear in mind the constitution of their government, in which the more powerful chiefs were constantly aiming at the supreme authority ; and the practice of purchasing memlooks, and rearing them in the households of the great to enable their masters to maintain their ascendency augmented the number of these aspirants to the throne. These slaves were, unlike the Bahrees (who were the Turkish Memlooks of Es-Sdlih Eiyoob), chiefly Circassians, who afterwards composed the Second (or Bargee) Dynasty. Many of the Memlook sultans rivalled in military achievements the great Saladin, and even penetrated further than lie in their foreign expeditions. In Cairo are still seen the finest specimens of Arab architecture, almost all dating during the period comprised under the domination of the two Memlook dynasties ; the libraries of the mosques, and the private collections of that city, though grievously injured since the Turkish conquest, are or very recently were the best and most considerable of those of Egypt or Syria and, as before remarked, the university El-Azhar is still, owing to the fostering care of these sultans, the principal seat of learning of the Eastern world. In this sketch of the history of Egypt we have given no account of the state of commerce, taxation, &c., under the Muslims. Those only who have read the Arab histories of this and other Eastern countries can appreciate the general fallacy of the conclusions based on their authority.
It would be tedious and unprofitable to follow the details of Turkish misrule and tyranny which are from this time presented to the student of Egyptian history. Although Selim had apparently destroyed the power of the Memlooks, he thought it wise to conciliate them, and to appoint twenty-four beys over the military provinces of that number into which he divided Egypt, subject to the supreme control of a pasha, whose council was formed of seven Turkish chiefs (6jaltlees), while one of the beys held the post of Sheykh el-Beled, or Governor of the Metropolis, an officer who because an object of hatred to the other chiefs. ThiS system was begun by Sens, and completed by Isis successor. For nearly two centuries the successive pashas were mostly obeyed; but the ambition of becoming Sheykh el-Beled was the fruitful cause of intrigue and murder. The Metalooks who then held power in Egypt were called the Ghuzz, that being the name of the tribe to which they are said to have at first generally belonged ; and they continually bought slaves, of Circassian or Georgian race, to supply the place of children, for they did not intermarry with natives of Egypt, and women of more northern climates are generally either barren or bear sickly offspring in that country. Thus they lacked the surest source of power ; few possessed any family ties; but at the same time the slaves in general were remarkably faithful] to their patrons. After two centuries, the beys gradually increased in power, until the authority of the pasha was almost nominal, and the government became a military oligarchy. This brings us to the rise of the celebrated Ali Bey. He was created Sheykh el-Beled in AJL 1177; but, having revenged himself on an old enemy who had assassinated Ali's master, to whom he owed his elevation to the rank of bey, he shortly after fled to Syria, and took refuge with the governor of Jerusalem, and thence went to Acre, where the Sheykh Dhahir became his friend; and that same year he returned to Cairo in his former capacity of Sheykh el-Beled. In 1179 his enemies again compelled him to flee, and he betook himself this time to El-Yemen, once more to retinas to Egypt; after which lie gained increased power. His favourite memlook, Mohammad Aboo-Dhalmb, proved ungrateful, and, while enjoying the highest power, entered into a conspiracy against his life ; but after receiving the presents of the hostile bays, lie denounced them to his master, who would not listen to warnings of his meditated treachery.
In the year 1182 (A.D. 1768) the Porte demanded the assistance of Ali Bey in the Russian war, an order which he was about to obey, when he was apprised of the departure of a messenger with a finnan demanding his head, he having been falsely accused at Constantinople of intending to aid the Russians and throw off his allegiance. lie caused the bearer of this order to be waylaid and putt to death, and having possessed himself of the finnan, he convened the beys, showed them the document, and aided by those of his own household persuaded the council to expel the pasha, and declare Egypt independent. The Sheykli Dhahir took part in this rebellion, and the pasha of Damascus was beaten by him between Mount Lebanon and Tiberias. A period of good but vigorous government and of tranquillity followed these events in Egypt, notwithstanding the very heavy imposts levied for the replenishment of the treasury ; and Ali's generals gained for him extended power abroad. Mohammad Aboo-Dhahab was despatched to Arabia, and entered Mecca, where the Shereef was deposed; and another bey traversed the eastern shores of the Red Sea. After the expedition to Arabia, Mohammad Bey marched into Syria to assist the Sheykh Dhithir against the Porte, and the co-operation of the Russians was demanded. A successful campaign terminated before the walls of Damascus, the siege of which was abandoned when nearly brought to a close, and Mohammad Bey returned with large forces to Egypt. This man, loaded with benefits by his patron, now openly rebelled ; and being joined by Ali's enemies, at the head of whom was Ismail, chief of the guard, he advanced on Cairo, and Ali escaped to his steady ally, Sheykh Dhahir, the prince of Acre. These events took place the year 1186. Mohammad Bey was then declared Sheykh el-Beled. Ali Bey, in the meanwhile, in conjunction with his ally, gained various advantages in Syria, and, on the information that his return was desired in Egypt, he collected a small force, assisted by Sheykh Dhahir and a Russian squadron, and determined on attempting to recover his power. He, however, fell into an ambuscade near Es-Saliheeyeh, and was wounded by one of his memlooks named Murad (afterwards Murad Bey), carried to the citadel, and poisoned by Mohammad Bey. Thus terminated the career of the famous Ali Bey, a man whose energy, talents, and ambition bear a strong resemblance to those of the later Mehemet Ali.
Mohammad Bey continued Sheykh el-Beled, tendered his allegiance to the Porte, and was invested with the pashalik. He then entered Syria, and severely chastised Sheykh Dhahir, taking Gaza, Joppa, and Acre itself. Joppa was taken by assault, and suffered a massacre of its inhabitants, and Acre was pillaged. At the latter place the pasha suddenly died. His mosque in Cairo is the latest fine specimen of Arab architecture, and is not unworthy of its better days.
The chief competitors for power were now Ismail, Ibrahim, and Murad, the first of whom was speedily expelled, the contest continuing between the two latter beys. Ibrahim at length succeeded in causing himself to be proclaimed Sheykh el-Beled, and Murad contented himself with the office of Emeer el-flagg, or chief of the pilgrims ; but this arrangement was not destined to be of long continuance ; a violent quarrel resulted in a recourse to arms, and that again in a peace of three years' duration, during which the two beys held an equal sway. In the year 1200 the Porte despatched Hassan Capi tan (properly Kapoodan) Pasha (or High Admiral), with a Turkish force, to reduce the turbulent Memlooks to obedience, and to claim the annual tribute. Muted Bey was defeated at Er-Rahmaneeyeh, and the Turks advanced to Cairo, desolating the country, and acting according to their almost invariable practice on such occasions. The metropolis opened its gates to Hasan Pasha, who determined on pursuing the boys to Upper Egypt, whither lie despatched a large portion of his army, and a sanguinary conflict took place. But a war with Russia recalled this commander to Constantinople. Ismail was again created Sheykh el-Beled, and he held that post until the terrible plague of the year 1205, in which he perished, and hence it is commonly called the "Plague of Ismail." His death caused the return of Ibrahim and Murad ; and eight years after, intelligence of the arrival at Alexandria of a French army of 36,000 men, commanded by General Bonaparte, united these chiefs in a common cause.
On the 18th May 1798, this expedition, consisting of 13 sail of the line, 6 frigates, and 12 vessels of a smaller size, sailed from Toulon, and made the coast of Egypt on the 1st July. The troops were landed near Alexandria, and the city fell by assault on the 5th of that month. The French conquest and occupation of Egypt belong to European history ; a recapitulation of the principal events of the period will therefore suffice in this place. The Memlooks affected to despise their antagonist, and hastened to chastise him: at Shibirrees they attacked the French and were repulsed; but, nothing discouraged, they collected all their forces, exceeding 60,000 men, under the command of Murad, and entrenched themselves at Embabeh, opposite Cairo. Here was fought the battle which has been dignified with the name of that of the Pyramids. European tactics completely bewildered the Memlooks : their famous cavalry was received on the bayonets of the French squares ; a galling fire of grape and musketry mowed down their ranks; and of this great army only about 2500 horse escaped with Murad Bey, while 15,000 men of all arms fell on the field of battle. Having made himself master of Cairo, Bonaparte despatched General Desaix to effect the conquest of Upper Egypt, and the success of the Eastern expedition seemed secured. But, ten days after the victory of Embabeh, the battle of the Nile annihilated the French fleet in AbooKeer (Aboukir) Bay, and most materially influenced the future conduct of the war. On this point, Napoleon himself says, "La perte de la bataille d'Aboukir cut une grande influence sur les affaires d'Egypte et memo sur celles du monde; in flotte Francaise sauvee, Pexpedition de Syde. n'eprouvait point d'obstacles, Partillerie de siege se transportait sfirement et facilement au-dela du desert, et SaintJean-d'Acre n'arretait point Parmee Francaise. La flotte Francaise detruite, le divan s'enhardit a declarer la guerre h la France. L'armee perdit un grand appui, sa position en Egypte changea, totalement, et Napoleon dut renonecr h l'espoir d'asseoir k jamais la puissance Francaise dans l'Occident par les resultats de l'expedition d'Egypte."1 The disastrous expedition into Syria, undertaken for the.purpose of frustrating the efforts of Sir Sydney Smith before Alexandria, and of Jezzar Pasha, who was advancing from Acre, still further obscured Napoleon's prospects in the East, and the victory soon after obtained by him over the Ottoman army at Aboo Keer, the second defeat of Murad Bey, and various successes over the Turks, enabled the French general Kleber (Napoleon having left for Europe after the first of these events) to set on foot negotiations for an honourable evacuation of the country. But when the convention was already signed, and the French were about to quit Cairo, Lord Keith signified to Kleber that Great Britain would not consent to the terms of the treaty ; and although this refusal was afterwards rescinded, Kleber considered that the withdrawal came too late : he totally defeated 70,000 men under the grand vizir at Heliopolis, and returned to Cairo to quell an insurrection of the inhabitants. This distinguished officer was about this time assassinated in the garden of his palace by a fanatic, who was impaled in the great square (then a lake) called the Ezbekeeyeh, in Cairo, and miserably lingered for the space of three days before death put an end to his sufferings. Under Kleber's administration, Egypt began to resume its former prosperity ; by his conciliatory and good govern. meat much prejudice against the French was overcome ; by ceding a part of Upper Egypt to Murad, he gained the good will of that chief, who gave him no cause to regret this politic step ; while under his auspices the " savans" of the Institute of Egypt collected the valuable mass of information embodied in the " great French work," the Description, de gypte.
On the death of Kldber, General Mellon succeeded to the command, and although he afterwards conducted the defence of the country with much valour, yet to his injudicious administration, and his want of military- talent, we must mainly ascribe the determination of the British Government to attempt the expulsion of the French from Egypt, and the rapid success of the campaign that ensued. On the 2d of March 1801 an army under Sir Ralph Abercromby arrived in Aboo-Keer Bay, and made good a landing in the face of a well-disposed French force, which offered every possible resistance. The memorable battle of Alexandria, in which Abereromby fell, decided the fate of the war. A bold march, executed with talent, effected the capitulation of Cairo ; Alexandria surrendered on the 1st of September, and the French sailed from the shores of Egypt in the course of that month.1 General Hutchinson had taken the command of the English expedition, afterwards reinforced by a detachment from India under General Baird ; and the army of the grand vizir, and that of the eapitan-pasha, with the troops of Ibrahim Bey (Murad having died of the plague), had co-operated in the measures which led to the evacuation of the country by Menou.
The history now requires that we should mention the early career of a man who subsequently ruled the destinies of Egypt for a period of nearly forty years. 'Mehemet Ali Pasha was born in A.R. 1182 (A.D. 1768-9) at Cavalla, a small sea-port town of Albania. On the death of his father, in early life, he was brought up in the house of the governor of the town, who, as a reward for military prowess, gave him his daughter in marriage. By her lie had, it is said, his three eldest sons, Ibrahim,2 Toosoon, and Ismail. Having attained the rank of bniuk-bashee (or head of a body of infantry), be became a dealer in tobacco, until, in his thirty-third year, he was despatched to Egypt with his patron's son, Ali Aglia, and 300 men, the contingent furnished by his native place to the Turkish expedition against the French; and soon after his arrival in that country he succeeded, on the return of Ali Aglia, to the command, with the nominal rank of beefibashee (or chief of a thousand men).
Soon after the evacuation of Egypt by the French, that unfortunate country became the scene of more severe troubles, in consequence of the unwarrantable attempts of the Turks to destroy the power of the Ghuzz. In defiance of promises to the English Government, orders were transmitted from Constantinople to Hoseyn Pasha, the Turkish high admiral, to ensnare and put to death the principal beys. Invited to an entertainment, they were, according to the Egyptian contemporary historian El-Gabartee, attacked on board the flag-ship; Sir Robert Wilson and M. Mengin, however, state that they were fired on, in open boats, in the bay of Aboo-Keer. They offered an heroic resistance, but were overpowered, and some made prisoners, some killed, while some, including the afterwards celebrated 'Osman Bey El-Bardeesee, escaped in a boat, and sought refuge with the English, who at that time occupied Alexandria. General Hutchinson, informed of this treachery, immediately assumed threatening measures against the Turks, and in consequence, the killed, wounded, and prisoners were given up to him. Such was the commencement of the disastrous struggle between the Memlooks and the Turks.
Mohammad Khusruf was the first pasha after the expulsion of the French. The form of government, however, was not the same as that before the French invasion, for the Ghuzz were not reinstated. The pasha, and through him the sultan, endeavoured on several occasions either to ensnare them or to beguile them into submission ; but these efforts failing, Muhammad Khusruf took the field, and a Turkish detachment 14,000 strong, despatched against them to Demenhoor, whither they had descended from Upper Egypt, was defeated by a small force under El-Elfee; or, as Mengin says, by 800 men left by El-Elfee under the command of El-Bardeesee. Their ammunition and guns fell into the hands of the Memlooks.
In March 1803 the British evacuated Alexandria, and Mohammad Bey El-Elfee accompanied them to England to consult respecting the means to be adopted for restoring the former power of the Ghuzz. About six weeks after, the Arnaoot (or Albanian) soldiers in the service of Khusruf tumultuously demanded their pay, and surrounded the house of the defterdar, who in vain appealed to the pasha to satisfy their claims. The latter opened fire from the artillery of his palace on the insurgent soldiery in the house of the defterdar, across the Ezbekeeyeli. The citizens of Cairo, accustomed to such occurrences, immediately closed their shops, and the doors of the several quarters, and every man who possessed any weapon armed himself. The tumult continued all the day, and the next morning a body of troops sent out by the pasha failed to quell it, the commander of the Albanians, then repaired to the citadel, gained admittance through an embrasure, and, having obtained possession of it, began to cannon the pasha over the roofs of the intervening houses, an, then descended with guns to the Ezbekeeyeli, and laid close siege to the palace. On the following day, Muhammad Khusruf made good his escape, with his women and servants and his regular troops, and fled to Damietta by the river. This revolt marks the commencement of the rise of Mehemet Ali to power in Egypt, and of the breach between the Arnaoots and Turks which ultimately led to the expulsion of the latter.
'Mir Pasha assumed the government, but in twenty-three days he met with his death from exactly the same cause as that of the overthrow of his predecessor. He refused the pay of certain of the Turkish troops, and was immediately assassinated. A desperate conflict ensued between the Albanians and Turks ; and the palace was set on fire and plundered. The masters of Egypt were now split into these two factions, animated with the fiercest animosity against each other. 'Mehemet Ali became the head of the former, but his party was the weaker, and he therefore entered into an alliance with Ibrahim Bey, and 'Osman Bey El-Bardeesee. A certain Ahmad Pasha, who was about to proceed to a province in Arabia, of which he had been appointed governor, was raised to the important post of pasha of Egypt, through the influence of the Turks and the favour of the sheykhs; but Mehemet Ali, who with his Albanians held the citadel, refused to assent to their choice; the Memlooks moved over from El-Geezeh, and Ahmad Pasha betook himself to the mosque of EzZaltir, which the French had converted into a fortress. He was compelled to surrender by the Albanians; the two chiefs of the Turks who killed Tapir Pasha were taken with him and put to death, and he himself was detained a prisoner. In consequence of the alliance between iNlehemet Ali and El-Bardeesee, the Albanians gave the citadel over to the Memlooks: and soon after, these allies marched against Khusruf Pasha, who having been joined by a considerable body of Turks, and being in possession of Damietta, was enabled to offer an obstinate resistance. After much loss on both sides, he was taken prisoner and brought to Cairo ; but he was treated with respect. The victorious soldiery sacked the town of Damietta, and were guilty of the barbarities usual with them on such occasions.
A few days later, Ali Pasha El-Taritbulnsee lauded at Alexandria with an imperial firmAn constituting him pasha of Egypt, and threatened the Beys, who now were virtual masters of Upper Egypt, as well as- of the capital and nearly the whole of Lower Egypt. Mehemet Ali and ElBardeesee therefore descended to Rosetta, which had fallen into the hands of a brother of All Pasha, and having recovered the town and captured its commander, ElBardeesee purposed to proceed against Alexandria ; but the troops required arrears of pay which it was not in his power to give, and the pasha had cut the dyke between the Lakes of Aboo-Keer and Mareotis, this rendering the approach to Alexandria more difficult. El-Bardeesee and Mehemet All therefore returned to Cairo. The troubles of Egypt were now increased by an insufficient inundation, and great scarcity prevailed, aggravated by the exorbitant taxation to which the beys were compelled to resort in order to raise money to pay the troops; while murder and rapine prevailed to a frightful extent in the capital, the riotous soldiery being under little or no control. In the meantime, Ali Pasha, who had been behaving in an outrageous manner towards the Franks in Alexandria, received a khatt-i-shereef from the sultan, Which he sent by his secretary to Cairo. It announced that the beys should live peaceably in Egypt, with an annual pension each of fifteen purses and other privileges, but that the government should be in the hands of the pasha. To this the beys assented, but with considerable misgivings; for they had intercepted letters from All to the Albanians, endeavouring to alienate them from their side to his own. Deceptive answers were returned to these, and Ali was induced by them to advance towards Cairo at the head of 2500 men. The forces of the beys, with the Albanians, encamped near him at Shalaktin, and he fell back on a place called Zufeyteh. They next seized his boats conveying soldiers, servants, and his ammunition and baggage ; and, following him, they demanded wherefore he brought with him so numerous a body of men, in opposition to usage and to their previous warning. Finding they would not allow his troops to advance, forbidden himself to retreat with them to Alexandria, and being surrounded by the enemy, lie would have hazarded a battle, but his men refused to fight. He therefore repaired to the camp of the beys, and his army was compelled to retire to Syria. In the hands of the beys, All Pasha again attempted treachery. A horseman was seen to leave his tent one night at full gallop ; he was the bearer of a letter to 'Osman Bey Hasan, the governor of Kine. This offered a fair pretext to the Memlooks to rid themselves of a man whose antecedents and present conduct proved him to be a perfidious tyrant. lie was sent under a guard of forty-five men towards the Syrian frontier ; and about a week after, news was received that in a skirmish with some of his own soldiers he had fallen mortally wounded.
The death of All Pasha produced only temporary tranquillity; in a few days the return of Mohammad Bey El-Elfee (called the Great or Elder) from England was the signal for fresh disturbances, which, by splitting the Ghuzz into two parties, accelerated their final overthrow. An ancient jealousy existed between El-Elfee and the other most powerful bey, El-Bardeesee. The latter was now supreme among the Ghuzz, and this fact considerably heightened their old enmity. While the guns of the citadel.
those at Masr El-'Ateekall, and even those of the palace of El-Bardeesee, were thrice fired in honour of El-Elfee, preparations were inunecliately commenced to oppose him. His partisans were collected opposite Cairo, and El-Elfee the Younger held El-Geezeh ; but treachery was among them; Hoseyn Bey El-Elfee was assassinated by emissaries of El-Bardeesee, and Mehemet Ali, with his Albanians, gained possession of El-Geezeh, which was, as usual, given over to the troops to pillage. In the meanwhile El-Elfee the Great embarked at Rosetta, and not apprehending opposition, was on his way to Cairo, when a little south of the town of Manoof he encountered a party of Albanians, and with difficulty mule his escape. 1-le gained the eastern branch of the Nile, but the river had become dangerous, and lie fled to the desert. There lie had several hairbreadth escapes, and at last secreted himself among a tribe of Arabs at Ras-el-Wadee. A change in the fortune of ElBardeesee, however, favoured his plans for the future. That chief, in order to satisfy the demands of the Albanians for their pay, gave orders to levy heavy contributions from the citizens of Cairo ; and this new oppression roused them to rebellion. The Albanians, alarmed for their safety, assured the populace that they would not allow the order to be executed ; and Mehemet Ali himself caused a proclamation to be made to that effect. Thus the Albanians became the favourites of the people, and took advantage of their opportunity. Three days later they beset the house of the aged Ibrahim Bey, and that of El-Bardeesee, both of whom effected their escape with difficulty. The Memlooks in the citadel directed a fire of shot and shell on the houses of the Albanians which were situated in the Ezbekeeyeh ; but on hearing of the flight of their chiefs, they evacuated the place ; and Mehemet Ali, on gaining possession of it, once more proclaimed Mahomet Khusruf pasha of Egypt. For one day and a half he enjoyed the title ; the friends of the late 'Mir Pasha then accomplished his second degradation,1 and Cairo was again the scene of terrible enormities, the Albanians revelling in the houses of the Memlook chiefs, whose hareems met with no mercy at their hands. These events were the signal for the reappearance of El-Elfee.
The Albanians now invited Ahmad Pasha Khursheed to assume the reins of government, and he without delay proceeded from Alexandria to Cairo. The forces of the partisans of El-Bardeesee were ravaging the country a few miles south of the capital and intercepting the supplies of corn by the river ; a little later they passed to the north of Cairo and successively took Bilbeys and Kalyoob, plundering the villages, destroying the crops, and slaughtering the herds of the inhabitants. Cairo was itself in a state of tumult, suffering severely from a scarcity of grain, and the heavy exactions of the pasha to meet the demands of his turbulent troops, at that time augmented by a Turkish detachment. The shops were closed, and the unfortunate people assembled in great crowds, crying Ya, Lateef ! Ya Lateef ! "0 Gracious [God] !" El-Elfee and 'Osman Bey Hasan had professed allegiance to the pasha; but they soon after declared against him, and they were now approaching from the south ; and having repulsed Mehemet Ali, they took the two fortresses of Tura. These Mehemet All speedily retook by night with 4000 infantry and cavalry; but the enterprise was only partially successful. On the following day the other Memlooka north of the metropolis actually penetrated into the suburbs; but a few days later were defeated in a battle fought at Shubr, with heavy loss on both sides. This reverse in a measure united the two great Meinlook parties, though their chiefs remained at enmity. El-Ilardeesee passed to the south of Cairo, and the Ghuzz gradually retreated towards Upper Egypt. Thither the pasha despatched three successive expeditions (one of which was commanded by Mehemet Ali), and many battles were fought, but without decisive result.
At this period another calamity befell Egypt ; about 3000 Delees arrived in Cairo from Syria. These troops had been sent for by Khursheed in order to strengthen himself against the Albanians ; and the events of this portion of the history afford sad proof of their ferocity and brutal enormities, in which they far exceeded the ordinary Turkish soldiers and even the Albanians. Their arrival immediately recalled Mehemet Ali and his party from the war, and instead of aiding Khursheed was the proximate cause of his overthrow.
Cairo was ripe for revolt; the pasha was hated for his tyranny and extortion, and execrated for the deeds of his troops, especially those of the Delees : the sheykhs enjoined the people to close their shops, and the soldiers clamoured for pay. At this juncture a finnan arrived from Constantinople conferring on Mehemet Ali the pashalic of Jiddeh; but the occurrences of a few days raised him to that of Egypt.
On the 12th of Safar 1220 (May 1805) the sheykhs, with an immense concourse of the inhabitants, assembled in the house of the kadee; and the 'Ulemh, amid the prayers and cries of the people, wrote a full statement of the heavy wrongs which they had endured under the administration of the pasha. The 'Ulemh, in answer, were desired to go to the citadel; but they were apprised of treachery; and on the following day, having held another council at the house of the kadee, they proceeded to Mehemet Ali, and informed him that the people would no longer submit to Khursheed. " Then whom will ye have?" said he. " We will have thee," they replied, " to govern us according to the laws ; for we see in thy countenance that thou art possessed of justice and goodness." Mehemet Ali seemed to hesitate, and then complied, and was at once invested. On this, a bloody struggle commenced between the two pashas. Cairo had before experienced such conflicts in the streets and over the housetops, but none so severe as this. Khursheed, being informed by a messenger of the insurrection, immediately laid in stores of provisions and ammunition, and prepared to stand a siege in the citadel. Two chiefs of the Albanians joined his party, but many of his soldiers deserted. Mehemet Ali's great strength lay in the devotion of the citizens of Cairo, who looked on him as their future deliverer from their afflictions; and great numbers armed themselves, advising constantly with Mehemet Ali, having the seyyid 'Omar and the sheykhs at their head, and guarding the town at night. On the 19th of the same month, Mehemet Ali besieged Khursheed. Retrenchments were raised, and the lofty minaret of the mosque of the sultan )Jasau was used as a battery whence to fire on the citadel ; while guns were also posted on the mountain in its rear. After the siege had continued many days, Khursheed gave orders to cannonade and bombard the town; and for six days his commands were executed with little interruption, the citadel itself also lying between two fires. Mehemet All's position at this time was very critical: his troops became mutinous for their pay ; the silandar, who had commanded one of the expeditions against the Ghuzz, advanced to the relief of Khursheed; and the latter ordered the Delees to march to his assistance. The firing ceased on the Friday, but recommenced on the eve of Saturday and lasted until the next Friday. On the day following; news came of the arrival at Alexandria of a messenger from Constantinople. The ensuing night in Cairo presented a curious spectacle ; many of the inhabitants gave way to rejoicing, in the hope that this envoy would put an end to their miseries, and fired off their weapons as they paraded the streets with bands of music. The silAhdar, imagining the noise to be a fray, marched in haste towards the citadel, while its garrison sallied forth, and commenced throwing up retrenchments in the quarter of 'Arab-el-Yesar, but were repulsed by the armed inhabitants and the soldiers stationed there ; and during all this time, the cannonade and bombardment from the citadel, and on it from the batteries on the mountain, continued unabated.
The envoy brought a finnan confirming Mehemet Ali, and ordering Khursheed to repair to Alexandria, there to await further orders ; but this he refused to do, on the ground that he had been appointed by a lehatt-i-slwre,ef. The firing ceased on the following day, but the troubles of the people were rather increased than assuaged ; murders and robberies were daily committed by the soldiery, the shops were all shut and some of the streets barricaded. While these scenes were being enacted, El-Elfee was besieging Demenhoor, and the other beys were returning towards Cairo, Khursheed having called them to his assistance.
Soon after this, a squadron under the command of the Turkish high admiral arrived in Aboo-Keer Bay, with despatches confirmatory of the finnan brought by the former envoy, and authorizing Mehemet Ali to continue to discharge the functions of governor for the present. Khursheed at first refused to yield ; but at length, on condition that his troops should be paid, he evacuated the citadel and embarked for Rosetta.
Mehemet Ali now possessed the title of Governor of Egypt, but beyond the walls of Cairo his authority was everywhere disputed by the beys, who were joined by the army of the silandar of Khursheed ; and many Albanians deserted from his ranks. To replenish his empty coffers he was also compered to levy exactions, principally from the Copts. An attempt was made to ensnare certain of the boys, who were encamped north of the metropolis. On the 17th of August 1805, the dam of the canal of Cairo was to be cut, and some chiefs of Mehemet Ali's party wrote, informing them that he would go forth early on that morning with most of his troops to witness the ceremony, inviting them to enter and seize the city, and, to deceive them, stipulating for a certain sum of money as a reward. The dam, however, was cut early in the preceding night, without any ceremony. On the following morning, these beys, with their memlooks, a very numerous body, broke open the gate of the suburb El-Hoseyneeyeh, and gained admittance into the city from the north, through the gate called Bab el-Fntooh. They marched along the principal street for some distance, with kettle-drums behind each company, and were received with apparent joy by thy citizens. At the mosque called the Ashrafeeyeh they separated, one party proceeding to the Azhar and the houses of certain sheykhs, and the other continuing along the main street, and through the gate called Bab Zuweyleh, where they turned up towards the citadel. Here they were tired on by sonic soldiers from the houses; and with this signal a terrible massacre commenced. Falling back towards their companions, they found the bye-streets closed; and in that part of the main thoroughfare called Beyn-elKasreyn, they were suddenly- placed between two fires. Thus shut up in a narrow street, some sought refuge in the collegiate mosque El-Barkookeeyeh, while the remainder fought their way through their enemies, and escaped over the city-wall with the loss of their horses. Two memlooks had in the meantime succeeded, by great exertions, in giving the alarm to their comrades in the quarter of the Azhar, who escaped by the eastern gate called Bab elGhureiyib. A horrible fate awaited those who had shut themselves up in the Barkookeeyeh. Having begged for quarter and surrendered, they were immediately stripped nearly naked, and about fifty were slaughtered on the spot ; and about the same number were dragged away, with every brutal aggravation of their pitiful condition, to Mehemet Ali. Among them were four beys, one of whom, driven to madness by Mehemet Ali's mockery, asked for a drink of water ; his hands were untied that he might take the bottle, but he snatched a dagger from one of the soldiers and rushed at the pasha, and fell covered with wounds. The wretched captives were then chained and left in the court of the pasha's house ; and on the following morning the heads of their comrades who had perished the day before were skinned and stuffed with straw before their eyes. One bey and two others paid their ransom and were released ; the rest, without exception, were tortured and put to death in the course of the ensuing night. Eighty-three heads (many of them those of Frenchmen and Albanians) were stuffed and sent to Constantinople, with a boast that the Memlook chiefs were utterly destroyed. Thus ended Mehemet Ali's first massacre of his too confiding enemies.
The beys, after this, appear to have despaired of regaining their ascendency ; most of them retreated to Upper Egypt, and an attempt at compromise failed. El-Elfee offered his submission on the condition of the cession of the Feiyoom and other provinces ; but this was refused, and that chief gained two successive victories over the pasha's troops, many of whom deserted to him.
At length, in consequence of the remonstrances of the English, and a promise made by El-Elfee of 1500 purses, the Porte consented to reinstate the twenty-four beys, and to place El-Elfee at their head ; but this measure met with the opposition of Mehemet Ali and the determined resistance of the majority of the Mcmlooks, who, rather than have El-Elfee at their head, preferred their present condition ; for the enmity of El-Bardeesee had not subsided, and he commanded the voice of most of the other beys. In pursuance of the above plan, a squadron under Salih Pasha, shortly before appointed high admiral, arrived at Alexandria on the 1st of July 1806, with 3000 regular troops, and a successor to Mehemet Ali, who was to receive the pashalik of Salonica. This wily chief professed his willingness to obey the commands of the Porte, but stated that his troops, to whom he owed a vast sum of money, opposed his departure. He induced the 'Ulemh to sign a letter, praying the sultan to revoke the command for reinstating the beys, persuaded the chiefs of the Albanian troops to swear allegiance to him, and sent 2000 purses contributed by them to Constantinople. El-Elfee was at that time besieging Demenhoor, and he gained a signal victory over the pasha's troops ; but the dissensions of the beys destroyed their last chance of a return to power. EI-Elfee and his partisans were unable to pay the sum promised to the Porte ; Sahli Pasha received plenipotentiary powers from Constantinople, in consequence of the letter from the 'Ulemh; and, on the condition of Mehemet Ali's paying 4000 purses to the Porte, it was decided that he should continue in his post, and the reinstatement of the beys was abandoned. Fortune continued to favour the pasha. In the following month, El-Bardeesee died, aged forty-eight years ; and soon after, a scarcity of provisions excited the troops of El-Elfee to revolt. That bey very reluctantly raised the siege of Demenhoor, being in daily expectation of the arrival of an English army ; and at the village of Shubra-ment ha was attacked by a sudden illness, and died on the 30th of January 1807, at the age of fifty-five. Thus was the pasha relieved of his two most formidable enemies ; and shortly • after he defeated Shaheen Bey, with the loss to the latter of his artillery and baggage and 300 men killed or taken prisoners.
On the 17th of March 1807, a British fleet appeared off Alexandria, having on board nearly 5000 troops, under the command of General Fraser ; and the place, being disaffected towards Mehemet Ali, opened its gates to them. Here they first heard of the death of El-Elfee, upon whose co-operation they had founded their chief hopes of success ; and they immediately despatched messengers to his successor and to the other bays inviting them to Alexandria. The British resident, Major Misset, having represented the importance of taking Rosetta and Er-Rahmaneeyeh, to secure supplies for Alexandria, General Fraser, with the concurrence of the admiral, Sir John Duckworth, detached the 31st regiment and the Chasseurs Britanniques, under Major-General lArauchope and Brigadier-General Meade, on this service ; and these troops entered Rosetta without encountering any opposition ; but as soon as they had dispersed among the narrow streets, the garrison opened a deadly fire on them from the latticed windows and the roofs of the houses. They effected a retreat on Aboo-Keer and Alexandria, after a very heavy loss of 185 killed and 262 wounded, General Wauchope and three officers being among the former, and General Meade and seventeen officers among the latter. The heads of the slain were fixed on stakes on each side of the road crossing the Ezbekeeyeh in Cairo.
Mehemet Ali, meanwhile, was conducting an expedition against the beys in Upper Egypt, and he had defeated them near Asyoot, when he heard of the arrival of the British. In great alarm lest the boys should join them, especially as they were far north of his position, he immediately sent messengers to his rivals, promising to comply with all their demands, if they should join in expelling the invaders ; and this proposal being agreed to, both armies marched towards Cairo on opposite sides of the river.
To return to the unfortunate British expedition. The possession of Rosetta beirb, deemed indispensable, Brieu- dier-General Stewart and Colonel Oswald were despatched thither, with 2500 men. For thirteen days a cannonade of the town was continued without effect ; and on the 20th of April, news having come in from the advanced guard at El-Hamad of large reinforcements to the besieged, General Stewart was compelled to retreat ; and a dragoon was despatched to Major Macleod, commanding at El Hamad, with orders to fall back. The messenger, however, was unable to penetrate to the spot ; and the advanced guard, consisting of a detachment of the 7 1st, two companies of the 78th, one of the 35th, and De Bolles's regiment, with a picquet of dragoons, the whole mustering 733 men, was surrounded, and, after a gallant resistance, the survivors, who had expended all their ammunition, became prisoners of war. General Stewart regained Alexandria with the remainder of his force, having lost, in killed, wounded, and missing, nearly 900 men. Some hundreds of British beads were now exposed on stakes in Cairo, and the prisoners were marched between these mutilated remains of their countrymen.
The beys became divided in their wishes, one party being desirous of co-operating with the British, the other with the pasha. These delays proved ruinous to their cause ; and General Fraser, despairing of their assistance, evacuated Alexandria on the 14th of September. From that date to the spring of 1811, the beys from time to time relinquished certain of their demands ; the pasha on his part granted them what before had been withheld; the province of the Feiyoom, and part of those of El-Geezeli and Benee-Suweyf, were ceded to Shaheen ; and a great portion of the Sa'eed, on the condition of paying the land-tax, to the others. Many of them took up their abode in Cairo, but tranquillity was not secured ; several times they met the pasha's forces in battle, and once gained a signal victory. Early in the year 1811, the preparations for an expedition against the Wahhabees in Arabia being complete, all the Memlook beys then in Cairo were invited to the ceremony of investing Mehemet Ali's favourite son, Toosoon, with a pelisse and the command of the army. As on the former occasion, the unfortunate Memlooks fell into the snare. On the 1st of March, Shaheen Bey and the other chiefs (one only excepted) repaired with their retinues to the citadel, and were courteously received by the pasha. Having taken coffee, they formed in procession, and, preceded and followed by the. pasha's troops, slowly descended the steep and narrow road leading to the great gate of the citadel; but as soon as the Memlooks arrived at the gate it was suddenly closed before them. The last of those who made their exit before the gate was shut were Albanians under Salih Koosh. To these troops their chief now made known the pasha's orders to massacre all the Memlooks within the citadel ; therefore, having returned by another way, they gained the summits of the walls and houses that hem in the road in which the Memlooks were incarcerated, and some stationed themselves upon the eminences of the rock through which that road is partly cut. Thus securely placed, they commenced a heavy fire on their defenceless victims; and immediately the troops who closed the procession, and who had the advantage of higher ground, followed their example. Of the betrayed chiefs, many were laid low in a few moments ; some, dismounting, and throwing off their outer robes, vainly sought, sword in hand, to return, and escape by some other gate. The few who regained the summit of the citadel experienced the same cruel fate as the rest (for those whom the Albanian soldiers made prisoners met with no mercy from their chiefs or from Mehemet Ali), but it soon became impossible for any to retrace their steps even so far ; the road was obstructed by the bleeding bodies of the slain Memlooks, and their richly caparisoned horses, and their grooms. 470 Memlooks entered the citadel ; and of these very few, if any, escaped. One of these is said to have been a bey. According to some, he leapt his horse from the ramparts, and alighted uninjured, though the horse was killed by the fall; others say that he was prevented from joining his comrades, and discovered the treachery while waiting without the gate. He fled and made his way to Syria. This massacre was the signal for an indiscriminate slaughter of the Memlooks throughout Egypt, orders to this effect being transmitted to every governor ; and in Cairo itself, the houses of the bays were given over to the soldiery, who slaughtered all their adherents, treated their women in the most shameless manner, and sacked their dwellings. During the two following clays, the pasha and his son Toosoon rode about the streets, and endeavoured to stop these atrocious proceedings; but order was not restored until 500 houses had been completely pillaged. In extenuation of this dark blot on Mehemet Ali's character, it has been urged that he had received the order for the destruction of the Memlooks from Constantinople, whither the heads of the bays were sent. It may be answered to this plea, that on other occasions lie scrupled not to defy the Porte.
A remnant of the Memlooks fled to Nubia, and a tranquillity was restored to Egypt to which it had long been unaccustomed, and which has rarely been interrupted since. In the year following the massacre, the unfortunate exiles were attacked by Ibrahim Pasha, the eldest son of Mehemet Ali, in the fortified town of Ibreem, in Nubia. here the want of provisions forced them to evacuate the place ; is few who surrendered were beheaded, and the rest went further south and built tire town of New Dongola (correctly Dunkulah), where the venerable Ibraham Bey died in 1816, at the age of eighty. As their numbers thinned, they endeavoured to maintain their little power by training some hundreds of blacks ; but again, on the approach of Ismail, another son of the pasha of Egypt, sent with an army to subdue Nubia and Sennar, some returned to Egypt and settled in Cairo, while the rest, amounting to about 100 persons, fled in dispersed parties to the countries adjacent to Selman Mehemet Ali, being undisputed master of Egypt, at the reiterated commands of the Porte despatched in 1811 an army of 8000 men, including 2000 horse, under the command of Toosoon Pasha, against the Walifiabees. After a successful advance, this force met with a serious repulse at the pass of Safra and Judeiyicleh, and retreated to Yembo'. In the following year Toosoon, having received reinforcements, again assumed the offensive, and captured Medinah after a prolonged siege. He next took Jiddeh and Mecca, defeating the Wahliabees beyond the latter place and capturing their general. But some mishaps followed, and Mehemet Ali, who had determined to conduct the war in person, left Egypt for that purpose in the summer in 1813. In Arabia he encountered serious obstacles from the nature of the country and the harassing mode of warfare adopted by his adversaries. His arms met with various fortune ; but on the whole his forces proved superior to those of the enemy. He led a successful expedition in the Hijaz, and, after concluding a treaty with the Wahhabee chief, 'Abd-Allah, in 1815, lie returned to Egypt on hearing of the escape of Napoleon from Elba.
He now confiscated the lands belonging to private individuals, merely allowing them a pension for life, and attempted to introduce the European system of military tactics. A formidable mutiny, however, broke out in the metropolis, the pasha's life was endangered, and he sought refuge by night in the citadel, while the soldiery committed many acts of plunder. The revolt was reduced by presents to the chiefs of the insurgents, and Mehemet Ali very honourably- ordered that the sufferers by the late disturbances should receive compensation from the treasury. The project of the " Nizam Gedeed," as the European system is called in Egypt, was, in consequence of this commotion, abandoned for a time, Soon after Toosoon returned to Egypt, but Mehemet Ali, dissatisfied with the treaty which bad been concluded with the Wahhabees, and with the non-fulfilment of certain of its clauses, determined to send another army to Arabia, and to include in it the soldiers who bad recently proved unruly. This expedition, under Ibrahim Pasha, left in the autumn of 1816. After several unimportant advantages, Ibrahim sat down before the town of Er-Rass ; but three mouths' exertions proving unavailing, lie raised the siege, with the loss of nearly half his army. v Notwithstanding, be advanced on the capital, Ed-Dir'eeyeli, by slow but sure steps. The last place before reaching that city offered a brave resistance, and Ibrahim, in revenge, caused all its inhabitants to be put to the sword, except a number of women and children, the former of whom were spared not from motives of pity. Ed-Dieeeyeh fell after a five months' siege, in the course of which an explosion destroyed the whole of the besiegers' powder ; and had the Wahhabees been aware of the extent of the disaster, few, we may believe, would have escaped to tell the tale. 'Abd-Allah, their chief, was taken, and with his treasurer and secretary was sent to Constantinople, where, in spite of Ibrahimn's promise of safety, and of Mehemet Ali's intercession in their favour, they were paraded and put to death. At the close of the year 1819, Ibrahim returned to Cairo, having conquered all present opposition in Arabia, but without having broken the spirit of the Wahhabees.
The pasha, since his return from Arabia, had turned his attention to the improvement of the manufactures ofEgypt, and engaged very largely in commerce. The results of these attempts are stated in other places, but the important work of digging the new canal of Alexandria, called the Mahmoodeeych, must here be again mentioned. The old canal had long fallen into decay, and the necessity of a safe channel between Alexandria and the Nile was much felt. Such was the object of the canal then excavated, and it has on the whole well answered its purpose ; but the sacrifice of life was enormous, and the labour of the unhappy fellahs was forced. Towards the accomplishment of a favourite project, the formation of the Nizam Gedeed, a force was ordered to the southern frontier of Egypt, and the conquest of Sennar was contemplated in order to get rid of the disaffected troops, and to obtain a sufficient number of captives to form the nucleus of the new army. The forces destined for this service were led by Ismail, then the youngest sou of Mehemet Ali ; they consisted of between 4000 and 5000 men, Turks and Arabs, and were despatched in the summer of 1820. Nubia at once submitted, the Shageeyeb Arabs immediately beyond the province of Dongola were worsted, and Sennar was reduced without a battle. Mohammad Bey, the defterdar, with another force of about the same strength, was then sent by Mehemet Ali against Kurdufan with a like result, but not without a hard fought engagement. In 1822 Ismail was, with his retinue, put to death by an Arab chieftain named Nimr; and the defterdar, a man infamous for his cruelty, assumed the command in those provinces, and exacted terrible retribution from the innocent inhabitants.
In the years 1821 and 1822 Mehemet All despatched both ships and men (the latter about 7000 or 8000 Albanians and Turks) to the Morea, Cyprus, and Candia, to aid the Porte in reducing the Greek insurrection; and lie continued to take part in that struggle, his fleet being engaged at Navarino, until the English insisted on the evacuation of the Morea in 1828 by Ibrahim Pasha. In 1822 an army of disciplined troops was at length organized: 8000 men (chiefly slaves, from Sennar and Kurdufan) were trained by French officers at Aswan. Of the vast numbers seized in the countries above named, many died on the way ; those who were not eligible were, with the women, sold in Cairo, and in the remainder were incorporated many fellahs. Colonel Seves (Suleyman Pasha), a Frenchman who after wards became a Moslem, superintended their organization; great numbers of the blacks died, but the Egyptians proved very good troops. Many thousands were pressed in consequence, and they now constitute the bulk of the army. In 1823 the new conscripts amounted to 24,000 men, com• posing six regiments of infantry, each regiment consisting of five battalions of 800 men, and the battalions of eight companies of 100 men.
In 1824 a native rebellion of a religious character broke out in Upper Egypt, headed by one Ahmad, an inhabitant of Es-Salimeeyeh, a village situate a few miles above Thebes. He proclaimed himself a prophet, and was soon followed by between 20,000 and 30,000 insurgents, mostly peasants, but some deserters from. the Nizam, for that force was yet in a half-organized state and in part declared for the impostor. The insurrection was crushed by Mehemet Ali, and about one-fourth of Ahmad's followers perished, but he himself escaped and was never after heard of. Few of these unfortunates possessed any other weapon than the long staff (nebboot) of the Egyptian peasant ; still they offered an obstinate resistance, and the combat resembled a massacre. In the same year war was once more made on the Wahlthbees, who had collected in considerable numbers. The 2d regiment was sent on this service, and it behaved in a very creditable manner.
But the events of the war with the Porte are perhaps the most important of the life of Mehemet Ali. The campaign of 1831 had ostensibly for its object the castigation of 'Abd-Allah, pasha of Acre ; the invading force consisted of six regiments of infantry, four of cavalry, four field-pieces, and a greater number of siege-guns, the whole under the command of Ibrahim Pasha, while the fleet, conveying provisions, ammunition, &e., was to accompany the army by sea. The terrible cholera of 1831, however, stayed the expedition when it was on the eve of departing ; 5000 of its number died, and it was not until early in October of the same year that it started. Little opposition was encountered on the way to Acre, whither Ibrahim had gone by sea, and that place was invested on the 29th of November. The artillery of the besieged was well served ; an assault in the following February was repulsed,. and the cold and rain of a Syrian winter severely tried the Egyptian troops. A second assault in like manner failed, and Ibrahim was called away to repel 'Osman Pasha, governor of Aleppo. The latter, however, hastily decamped without giving him battle, and Ibrahim, deeming this advantage sufficient, retraced his steps towards Acre. He then pushed the siege with fresh vigour, and stormed the city on the 27th of May ; 1400 men fell in the breach, and the garrison was found to be reduced to about 400 men. The fall of Acre was followed by negotiation. Mehemet Ali evinced a disposition for peace, but demanded the government of Syria, and the Porte, in consequence, denounced him as a traitor. On his part, Ibrahim pushed his successes ; Damascus was evacuated at his approach, and the battle of Hims, fought on the 8th of July 1832, decided the superiority of the Egyptian army, and the advantage of disciplined troops over an irregular force, although very disproportionate in numbers. The enemy composed the advanced guard of the Turkish army, 30,000 strong, and the Egyptians numbered only 16,000 men.
Alter this victory, Ibrahim marched to Harrah, and thence to Aleppo (which had just before closed its gates against the Turkish general-iu-chief, Hoseyn Pasha, whose troops became rapidly disorganized), forced the defiles of Beylan, and pursued the fugitive Turks to Adaneh. About the same time an Egyptian squadron had chased the sultan's fleet into Constantinople. Diplomacy was, at this point, again resorted to, but without any resat; the sultan depended on his fleet to protect the capital, and determined to risk another engagement with the victorious enemy. The charge of this venture was intrusted to Resheed Pasha, the grand vizir. In the meantime, Ibrahim Pasha had gained the pass of Taurus, and having beaten the Turks at Oulou-Kislak, he hesitated not to give battle to Resheed Pasha at the head of about 60,000 men, his own army being less than half that strength; the battle of Kooniyeh, on the plains of Anatolia, proved utterly disastrous to the Porte; in the confusion of the fight, and the darkness of a thick day, the grand vizir was made prisoner, his army routed, and Constantinople was within six marches of the victor, without an army to oppose his passage. The capital of the Ottoman Empire, in imminent danger by sea and land, was then intrusted to the keeping of its hereditary enemy, as the last resource of the sultan Mahmood, and a Russian fleet and army were sent thither. Negotiations were in consequence opened, and on the 14th of May 1833 a treaty was concluded between Mehemet Ali and the Porte, by which the whole of Syria and the district of Adaneh were ceded to the former, on condition of his paying tribute. With this terminated the war, but not the animosity of the sultan. Ibrahim, by excessive firmness and rigour, speedily restored security and tranquillity to the greater part of Syria ; but some years later, the attempt of Mahmood to get the better of his vassal, and the consequent disaster experienced by his arms at Nezeeb, entailed fresh complications, and the interference of Great Britain ended in the restoration of Syria to the Porte in 1841. Mehemet Ali had placed all his reliance on the co-operation of France, and to its desertion of his cause, and his confidence in its assistance, either moral or material, must be ascribed the unfortunate issue of the war. That the Syrians, in general, preferred the rule of Mehemet Ali to the tyranny of pashas appointed from Constantinople may be safely averred ; but we cannot close this account of his possession of that province without animadverting on the horrible cruelties perpetrated by Ibrahim Pasha, or warning our readers not to give credence to the unmeasured praise bestowed by many on the Egyptian troops there engaged. Conceding that they were superior soldiers to the Turks, it must be borne in mind that they were veterans, disciplined and led by the French officers and an able general ; their opponents were destitute of any European discipline, badly officered, and discouraged by the disasters in Greece. It has, moreover, been stated on good authority, that Ibrahim owed much of his success to the placiug of artillery in the rear of his troops, with orders to fire on them should they show symptoms of wavering.
After the peace of 1841 Mehemet Ali gave up all great palitical projects, and solely occupied himself in improveinents, real or imaginary, in Egypt. He continued to prosecute his commercial speculations, and manufacturing, educational, and other schemes. The barrage of the Nile, still uncompleted, was commenced by his direction, and in 1847 he visited Constantinople, where he received the rank of vizir. In the year 1848, however, symptoms of imbecility appeared; and after a short space Ibrahim was declared his successor, but died after a brief reign of two months.
Mehemet All survived Ibrahim, and died on the 3d of August 1849. Many and conflicting have been the opinions entertained of this remarkable man, for such at least all acknowledge him to have been. His massacre zf the Memlooks has been the great point of attack by his enemies; but that, as well as many of his other acts, must be ascribed to his boundless ambition, not to innate cruelty; for he proved himself to be averse to unnecessary bloodshed. That he really esteemed European civilization may be doubted ; but his intelligent mind could not fail to perceive that therein lay his great strength, and of this he availed himself with consummate ability. To his firm government Egypt is indebted for the profound tranquillity which it has long been its good fortune to enjoy. A traveller of any nation or faith may traverse it in its length and breadth with greater safety than almost any other country out of Western Europe ; and the display of fanaticism has been rigorously punished. While, however, Egypt has benefited by the establishment of order, the people have suffered most severe exactions. The confiscation of private lands has been before mentioned; to that arbitrary act must be added the seizure of the lands of the mosques, the imposition of heavy taxation, and a system of merciless impressment. In fact, the condition of the Egyptian fella!' has rarely been as wretched as it is at the present g.ay. Mehemet All also misunderstood the real resources of Egypt, which are certainly agricultural ; he dealt a severe blow to native produce by endeavouring to encourage manufacturing industry, and by establishing enormous Government monopolies, a measure which crushed the spirit of the agriculturists. His military and governing abilities were assuredly very great, and his career is almost unequalled in Turkish history. Had it not been for the intervention of Great Britain, his Syrian successes over the Porte would probably have rescued Egypt from the wretched condition of a Turkish province. But the firman of 1841 entailed the loss of all his military power, the army was reduced to 18,000 men, and the navy condemned to rot in the harbour of Alexandria ; while Mehemet Ali, failing to gain the great object of his ambition, the establishment of an independent dynasty, and being compelled to look on his then living family as his only heirs, thenceforth confined himself to measures of less importance, and did not prosecute even these with his former energy.
The entire constitution of the government of Egypt is the work of Mehemet Ali. With a few exceptions, he destroyed all former usages, and introduced a system partly derived from European models. The army and navy are of his creation, so are the taxation, the regulation of import and export duties, &c., quarantine laws, the manufactories, colleges, and the ministry. Some of these institutions are useful, others both vexatious and ill-calculated for the country. The colleges of languages and medicine, and the printing-press at Boolak, are among the former, and are exceedingly praiseworthy efforts in a right direction ; and in the same category must be placed many minor improvements, in which Mehemet Ali showed himself to be far in advance of his countrymen ; while, weighing his chequered life and numerous disadvantages of position and nation, his moral character, enlightened mind, and distinguished ability must place him high among the great men of modern Ibrahim was succeeded by his nephew 'Abbas, son of Toosoon. This miserable voluptuary, and withal bigoted though ignorant Muslim, utterly neglected the affairs of government and solely consulted his own gratification. During his reign all the great works begun by Mehemet Ali were suspended. It was a time of deliberate retrogression, and his sudden death in July 1854 was welcomed by all true Egyptians as the removal of the country's curse. His successor, Said Pasha, the fourth son of Mehemet Ali, endeavoured to pursue his great father's policy and to carry out his aims. lie had not, however, the strength of character or the health needed to meet the serious difficulties of the task, and he will chiefly be remembered for the abolition of some of the more grinding Government monopolies, and for the concession of the Suez Canal. It was reserved for his nephew, the present khedive, to attain all and more than all that Mehemet All had designed for his country.
The reign of Ismail promises to be the beginning of a new era for Egypt. A man of undoubted ability, possessed of unusual energy in administration, fully appreciative of the importance of Western civilization, fired with the ambition proper to a grandson of Mehemet Ali, the khedive is a ruler such as Egypt has scarcely seen since the Arab conquest. His first step was to remove, as far as possible, the irksome control of the Porte. At great cost he obtained an imperial finnan in 1866, removing almost all the old treaty restrictions, granting him the title of khedive (pron. khedeev), and settling the succession on the eldest sun ; and in 1872 another firman made him virtually an independent sovereign.
Having thus obtained for himself and his dynasty a settled regal rank, Ismail turned his attention homewards, and began a series of reforms such as no previous governor of Egypt ever contemplated. He re-established and improved the administrative system organized by Mehemet Ali, and which had fallen into decay under 'Abbas's indolent rule ; he caused a thorough remodelling of the customs system, which was in an anarchic state, to be made by English officials ; in 1865 he bought the Egyptian post-office, and placed it under the direction, with full powers, of an official from St Martin's le Grand, who has brought it into admirable working order; he reorganized the military schools of his grandfather, and lent his willing support to the cause of education in every way. Pablic works have largely engaged the attention of the khedive. Railways, telegraphs, lighthouses, the harbour works at Suez, the breakwater at Alexandria, have been carried out under his personal auspices by seine of the best contractors of Europe. if there is a fault to be found in this Europeanizing of Egypt, it is that the practical zeal for modern civilization leaves no room for the honourable respect clue to the unique antiquities of the country. It is true that ancient Egypt is protected by the care of Mariette Bey, but the art of the Arabs is suffered to decay, nay, is even purposely demolished, to make room for modern French gewgaws, A recent writer tells us that a new street cuts through about a mile of the "old Arab rookeries," and gravely advances the opinion that the opera house and the public gardens and the other meretricious abominations that have been set up in Cairo are worthy of a second class European city! Still, terrible as is the vandalism now going on in Egypt, there can be little doubt that the present policy of the khedive will add greatly to the prosperity and health of the people. At the same time, future generations will gain at the fearful expense of the present. The funds required for these public works, as well as the actual labour, have been remorselessly extorted from a poverty-stricken population ; and there is probably no peasant now existing whose condition is worse than that of the long-suffering Egyptian fella.
One of the greatest reforms that Egypt owes to its present ruler is the abolition of the old system of consular jurisdiction, and the substitution of mixed courts, where European and native judges sit together to try all mixed cases without respect to nationality. These courts were established in 1876 on the suggestion of the wisest of Egypt's statesmen, Nubar Pasha, and on the recommendation of en international commission. A code based on the Muhammadan law and the Code Napoleon has been drawn up, which seems thoroughly suited to the needs of the position; and the best results may be looked for from this reform. It were greatly to be desired that the jurisdiction of these courts should be extended so as eventually to supersede the old native system. At present they only take the place of the consular courts.
In recent times the khedive has annexed a large territory to the south of Khartoum; now extending about as far as Gondokoro, and which will doubtless shortly include the lakes of Victoria and Albert Nyanza, The expedition was at first commanded by Sir Samuel Baker, with very unsatisfactory results ; and great relief was felt when the continuation of the work of conquest was intrusted to Colonel Gordon, an officer in whose character and ability the fullest confidence is placed. The khedive has professed himself anxious to put down the Nile slave-trade, and that he is really desirous of seeing the traffic ended is shown by the full powers he has given Colonel Gordon for the suppression of it in the heart of the slave-country. What the result will be it is hard to foretell ; but the good faith of the khedive and the determination of Colonel Gordon are now beyond a doubt. Quite recently (Aug, 14, 1877) a convention between the British and Egyptian Governments for the suppression of the slave-trade has been signed, imposing stringent penalties on the importation of slaves into Egypt, and extending the power of search in the case of suspected vessels.
Altogether it may be believed that a better time is beginning for Egypt: (E.S.P. - S.L.P.)]