Produced by Al Haines
[Illustration: Cover art]
[Transcriber's note: the various sections of this book had
varying page headers. Those headers have been collected
at the start of each section as introductory paragraphs.]
THE WISDOM OF THE EAST
THE INSTRUCTION
OF PTAH-HOTEP AND
THE INSTRUCTION OF
KE'GEMNI: THE OLDEST
BOOKS IN THE WORLD.
TRANSLATED FROM THE EGYPTIAN
WITH AN INTRODUCTION AND APPENDIX
BY BATTISCOMBE G. GUNN
LONDON
JOHN MURRAY, ALBEMARLE STREET
1906
TO
MY MOTHER
VII.NOV.MCMIV
CONTENTS
Page
INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
THE INSTRUCTION OF PTAH-HOTEP . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
THE INSTRUCTION OF KE'GEMNI . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
APPENDIX
NOTE TO APPENDIX . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
THE INSTRUCTION OF AMENEMHE'ET . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
EXPLANATION OF NAMES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72
BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
{10}
EDITORIAL NOTE
The object of the editors of this series is a very definite one. They
desire above all things that, in their humble way, these books shall be
the ambassadors of good-will and understanding between East and West,
the old world of Thought, and the new of Action. In this endeavour,
and in their own sphere, they are but followers of the highest example
in the land. They are confident that a deeper knowledge of the great
ideals and lofty philosophy of Oriental thought may help to a revival
of that true spirit of Charity which neither despises nor fears the
nations of another creed and colour. Finally, in thanking press and
public for the very cordial reception given to the "Wisdom of the East"
series, they wish to state that no pains have been spared to secure the
best specialists for the treatment of the various subjects at hand.
L. CRANMER-BYNG.
S. A. KAPADIA.
4, HARCOURT BUILDINGS,
INNER TEMPLE,
LONDON.
{11}
THE INSTRUCTION OF PTAH-HOTEP
INTRODUCTION
Memorials of the Past--The Land of Darkness--The Time of
Ptah-Hotep--Concerning the Book--The Treatise of Ke'Gemni--Date of the
Manuscript--An Egyptian Chesterfield--Who was Ptah-Hotep?--His
Teaching--Views on Women--The Gods of Egypt--Previous Translations--The
Oldest Book Known
Is there anything whereof it may be said,
See, this is new!
It hath been already of old time,
Which was before us.
There is no remembrance of former things;
Neither shall there be any remembrance
Of things that are to come
With those that shall come after.
In these days, when all things and memories of the past are at length
become not only subservient to, but submerged by, the matters and needs
of the immediate present, those paths of knowledge that lead into
regions seemingly remote from such needs are somewhat discredited; and
the aims of those that follow them whither they lead are regarded as
quite out of touch with the real interests of life. Very greatly is
this so with archaeology, and the study of ancient and curious tongues,
and searchings into old thoughts on high and ever-insistent questions;
a public which has hardly time to {12} read more than its daily
newspaper and its weekly novel has denounced--almost dismissed--them,
with many other noble and wonderful things, as 'unpractical,' whatever
that vague and hollow word may mean.
As to those matters which lie very far back, concerning the lands of
several thousand years ago, it is very generally held that they are the
proper and peculiar province of specialists, dry-as-dusts, and persons
with an irreducible minimum of human nature. It is thought that
knowledge concerning them, not the blank ignorance regarding them that
almost everywhere obtains, is a thing of which to be rather ashamed, a
detrimental possession; in a word, that the subject is not only
unprofitable (a grave offence), but also uninteresting, and therefore
contemptible. This is a true estimate of general opinion, although
there are those who will, for their own sakes, gainsay it.
When, therefore, I state that one of the writings herein translated has
an age of nearly six thousand years, and that another is but five
hundred years younger, it is likely that many will find this sufficient
reason against further perusal, deeming it impossible that such things
can possess attraction for one not an enthusiast for them. Yet so few
are the voices across so great a span of years that those among them
having anything to tell us should be welcome exceedingly; whereas, for
the most part, they have cried in the {13} wilderness of neglect
hitherto, or fallen on ears filled with the clamour of more instant
things.
I could show, if this were a fitting place, that Archaeology is not at
all divorced from life, nor even devoid of emotion as subtle and
strange, as swift and moving, as that experienced by those who love and
follow Art. She, Archaeology, is, for those who know her, full of such
emotion; garbed in an imperishable glamour, she is raised far above the
turmoil of the present on the wings of Imagination. Her eyes are
sombre with the memory of the wisdom driven from her scattered
sanctuaries; and at her lips wonderful things strive for utterance. In
her are gathered together the longings and the laughter, the fears and
failures, the sins and splendours and achievements of innumerable
generations of men; and by her we are shown all the elemental and
terrible passions of the unchanging soul of man, to which all cultures
and philosophies are but garments to hide its nakedness; and thus in
her, as in Art, some of us may realise ourselves. Withal she is
heavy-hearted, making continual lamentation for a glory that has
withered and old hopes without fulfilment; and all her habitations are
laid waste.
As for the true lover of all old and forgotten things, it may justly be
said of him, as of the poet, _Nascitur, non fit_. For the dreams and
the wonder are with him from the beginning; and in early childhood,
knowing as yet hardly {14} the names of ancient peoples, he is
conscious of, and yearns instinctively toward, an immense and
ever-receding past. With the one, as with the other, the unaccountable
passion is so knitted into his soul that it will never, among a
thousand distractions and adverse influences, entirely forsake him; nor
can such an one by willing cause it to come or to depart. He will live
much in imagination, therein treading fair places now enwrapped in
their inevitable shroud of wind-blown sand; building anew temples whose
stones hardly remain one upon the other, consecrate to gods dead as
their multitudes of worshippers; holding converse with the sages who,
with all their lore, could not escape the ultimate oblivion: a
spectator of splendid pageants, a ministrant at strange rites, a
witness to vast tragedies, he also has admittance to the magical
kingdom, to which is added the freedom of the city of Remembrance. His
care will be to construct, patiently and with much labour, a picture
(which is often less than an outline) of the conditions of the humanity
that has been; and he neither rejects nor despises any relic, however
trivial or unlovely, that will help him, in its degree, to understand
better that humanity or to bridge the wide chasms of his ignorance.
Moreover, great age hallows all things, even the most mean, investing
them with a certain sanctity; and the little sandal of a nameless {15}
child, or the rude amulet placed long ago with weeping on the still
bosom of a friend, will move his heart as strongly by its appeal as the
proud and enduring monument of a great conqueror insatiable of praise.
At times, moving among the tokens of a period that the ravenous years
dare not wholly efface in passing, he hears, calling faintly as from
afar, innumerable voices--the voices of those who, stretching forth in
Sheol eager hands toward Life, greatly desire that some memorial of
them, be it but a name, may survive in the world of men....
Ancient Egypt fares perhaps better than other countries of antiquity at
the hands of the 'general reader,' and sometimes obtains a hearing when
they do not, by reason of its intimate contact at certain periods with
the nation that has brought us the _Old Testament_. Because of this
the report of it has been with us constantly, and it has nearly become
a symbol in religion. The stories of Moses and the magicians, and of
the dealings of Abraham and Joseph with Pharaoh, together with the rude
woodcuts of Egyptian taskmasters and cupbearers in family Bibles, have
invested the venerable land with a dreamy mystery; while every one has
heard of 'Rameses, the Pharaoh of the Oppression,' and 'Meneptah, the
Pharaoh of the Exodus.' And it is possible that for the sake of such
{16} association, if not for his own sake, Ptah-hotep will be
considered worthy of notice.
But in spite of the fact that the Ancient Egyptians enjoy rather more
popularity than their contemporaries, it is evident that the books
which they wrote are closed books to those who have not the glamour of
vanished peoples, and the fascination of mighty cities now made
desolate, strong upon them.
Yet in the heterogeneous and pitiful flotsam that reluctant seas have
washed to us piecemeal from a remote past, there are, as will be shown
later, many things which, although proceeding from a culture and modes
of thought as far removed from our own as they may well be,[1] are
worth the reading, which do not require any special knowledge for their
understanding; and of these are the translations in this book.
The following pages, which, although addressed to the 'general reader,'
may yet be of some assistance to those especially interested in Egypt,
give, among other matters, the place of the Instructions of Ptah-hotep
and Ke'gemni in the 'literature' of Egypt; their place--their {17}
unique place--in the literature of the world; their value historically;
a description of the document in which they were found; what is known
of their authors; a discussion of their contents.
The land of which the Father of History declared that no other country
held so many wonders, has bequeathed us, by various channels, the
rumour and remnant of a strange knowledge. She has devised us enigmas
insoluble, and rendered up to us signs and messages whose meaning is
dark for all time. And she has left a religion, 'veiled in allegory
and illustrated by symbol,' as fascinating as impenetrable for those
who approach it. For into our hands the keys of these things have not
been delivered; wherefore much study of them is a weariness to the
flesh, and of the hazarding of interpretations there is no end.
But apart from the mazes of mythology, the broken ways of history and
the empty letter of a dead faith, there are, as is known to some, and
as this little book professes to show, many documents which are
antique, but not antiquated, possessing interest above the purely
archaeological--the interest called human. Of these are the tales
which recall, in incident as in style, those of the immortal
collection, full of the whole glamour of the East, the _Thousand Nights
and a Night_. {18} Such are the love-songs, full of the burning
utterance of desire; the pathetic and even bitter dirges, whose singers
have seen all the works that are done under the sun, and found all to
be vanity and vexation of spirit. And such also are the didactic poems
for the instruction of youth, which--in poetic phrase and in great
detail--inculcate, among other things, the practice of right conduct as
the price of happiness; a courtesy hardly less considerate than our
own; and a charity which, when certain inevitable shortcomings are
allowed for, bears comparison with almost any later system. Out of
these there are many that may properly claim a place in a series
bearing the seal of the Wisdom of the East, though they belong only to
the more objective and 'practical' side of that Wisdom.
But, as touching the books here translated--the Instructions of
Ptah-hotep and of Ke'gemni--they possess, apart from the curious nature
of their contents, a feature of the greatest interest, and an adequate
claim on the notice of all persons interested in literature and its
history. For if the datings and ascriptions in them be accepted as
trustworthy (there is no reason why they should not be so accepted),
they were composed about four thousand years before Christ, and three
thousand five hundred and fifty years before Christ, respectively. And
the significance of those remote dates is, that they are the oldest
{19} books in the world, the earliest extant specimens of the literary
art. They stand on the extreme horizon of all that ocean of paper and
ink that has become to us as an atmosphere, a fifth element, an
essential of life.
Books of many kinds had of course been written for centuries before
Ptah-hotep of Memphis summarised, for the benefit of future
generations, the leading principles of morality current in his day;
even before the Vizier, five hundred years earlier, gave to his
children the scroll which they prized above all things on earth;[2] but
those have perished and these remain. There are lists of titles which
have a large sound, and prayers to the Gods for all good things, on the
tombs and monuments of kings and magnates long before the time of
Ke'gemni; but those are not books in any sense of that word. Even the
long, strange chants and spells engraven in the Royal Pyramids over
against Memphis are later than the time of Ptah-hotep, and cannot be
called books in their present form, although some of them apparently
originated before the First Dynasty.[3]
Nor do the oldest books of any other country approach these two in
antiquity. To draw {20} comparisons between them let us, in
imagination, place ourselves at the period at which Ptah-hotep lived,
that is, about B.C. 3550, 'under King Isosi, living for ever,' and take
a glance at futurity.
The Babylonians are doubtless exercising their literary talents; but
they will leave nothing worthy the name of book to the far posterity of
fifty-four centuries hence. Thirteen centuries shall pass before
Hammurabi, King of Babylon, drafts the code of laws that will be found
at that time. Only after two thousand years shall Moses write on the
origin of things, and the Vedas be arranged in their present form. It
will be two-and-a-half thousand years before the Great King of
Jerusalem will set in order many proverbs and write books so much
resembling, in form and style, that of Ptah-hotep;[4] before the source
and summit of European literature will write his world epics. For the
space of years between Solomon and ourselves, great though it seem, is
not so great as that between Solomon and Ptah-hotep.
The number of extant texts of the class to which the subjoined
immediately belong is not large in proportion to the rest of Egyptian
MSS., {21} but they seem to be representative of the class, being
diverse in date and subject, but similar in form. There is great
uniformity in the arrangement of most of them, in the following
respects. They have as title the word 'Instruction' (_seb'oyet_), and
are written by a father for the advantage of his son; they are very
poetic in their arrangement of words and phrases, and are usually
divided into short sections or paragraphs by the use of red ink for the
first sentence of each. Such is the Instruction of Ptah-hotep on
morality (the finest of its class); the Instruction of King Amenemhe'et
on the hollowness of friendship and other matters; the Instruction of
Deu'of, the son of Kherti, on the excellence of the literary life; and
others. In many respects and in many details they greatly resemble the
didactic works of the _Old Testament_ and _Apocrypha_.
These 'Instructions' were held in high esteem as text-books and writing
exercises in schools--a circumstance to which we owe the preservation
of many of them. For a considerable number of important and
interesting poems, letters, and narratives are only known to us from
school exercise-books. The pupil at the 'Chamber of Instruction' wrote
out about three pages of these each day, as a means of improving his
writing, as a model of style in composition, and for purposes of
edification. These exercises {22} abound in errors of spelling and
grammar, having sometimes the master's corrections elegantly written
above in red. As may be imagined, a schoolboy's scrawl over three
thousand years old is no easy thing to translate; but _faute de mieux_
the Egyptologist welcomes any version, even the most barbarous.
Fortunately, the MS. from which these translations come is not of this
kind; a detailed description of it may interest some of my readers.
The Prisse Papyrus, which is well known by name and a few extracts to
all persons conversant with Egyptian matters, was acquired in Egypt by
M. Prisse d'Avennes, a French archaeologist of distinction, and
published by him in 1847.[5] The exact place of its discovery is
unknown. M. Prisse is said to have bought it of one of the _fellahin_
whom he employed to make excavations at the burial-ground of Thebes.
This man pretended that he had no knowledge of its finding, as he was
trying to sell it for a friend. It is believed that it was actually
taken by the Arab from the tomb of one of the Kings 'Entef;[6] but this
is not certain. If it were, it would perhaps enable us to fix a
_terminus ad que,_ for the writing of this copy, although tombs often
contain objects of later date. The papyrus was presented in about
1847, by M. Prisse, to the {23} Bibliotheque Nationale (in those days
the Bibliotheque Royale) at Paris, where it still is, divided and
glazed in the usual manner.
Spread out flat, it measures about 23 ft. 7 in., with an average height
of 5 7/8 in., which is about the usual height of papyri of the Eleventh
and Twelfth Dynasties. It contains at present eighteen pages of heavy
and bold black and red writing, in the so-called hieratic character.
At first sight it appears to be in perfect preservation, being entirely
free from the cracks and decay which mar many fine manuscripts of far
later date; but an examination of the contents shows that an unknown
quantity has been torn off from the commencement. Originally the roll
contained at least two books, of which we have the latter part of one
and the whole of the other. Between these there is a blank space of
some 53 in.
The characters are clearly and carefully made, but are not always
correct, as though the copyist had a badly written or very cursive copy
before him, and was not always sure of his spelling.
The first of these books, of which only the last two pages remain to
us, is a treatise on deportment, and is here called the _Instruction of
Ke'gemni_. It has always been attributed to this person since its
discovery, but examination of as much of the book as exists will show
that it is not said to have been written by him. Because {24} his is
the only name mentioned, Egyptologists have concluded that he is the
author. The unnamed Vizier, who called his children to him, can hardly
be Ke'gemni, who was not raised to the rank of Vizier and Governor of a
city until afterwards. Ke'gemni may well have been a son of the
author. This is not of material importance, however, as the date of
writing is given as the end of the reign of Heuni, the last King of the
Third Dynasty, who died about 3998 B.C. This book, then, which argues
a society of some refinement, is, so far as it goes, the oldest in the
world.
After a long stretch of blank papyrus, from which a third book has
perhaps been erased, we come upon the _Instruction of Ptah-hotep_ in
its entirety, divided into sections by red writing, as aforesaid.[7]
In this, also, we get a definite date, for we learn in the opening
lines that its author (or compiler) lived in the reign of King Isosi.
Now Isosi was the last ruler but one of the Fifth Dynasty, and ruled
forty-four years, from about 3580 to 3536 B.C. Thus we may take about
3550 as the period of Ptah-hotep.
Of these two kings there is hardly anything to say. Heuni is only
known to us by mention of his name; we have no record of any act of
his. {25} Of Isosi the only exploit that remains is this: that he sent
his Treasurer, Be'werded, to Somaliland[8] to obtain for him a certain
kind of dwarf; this the Treasurer brought back, and received much
reward therefor. That is all that is left of the reigns of two kings,
who ruled long, who perhaps ruled greatly and wisely, having just cause
to hope that their fame and the report of their good deeds might never
pass away. Such is the fate of kings.
The copy of these Instructions that we have, the only complete copy,[9]
is far later than the later of these dates. An examination of the
writing shows that it is not earlier than the Eleventh Dynasty, and is
probably of the Twelfth.[10] More than this cannot be said; where it
was written, by whom, and when, are not stated, as they are in many
cases. The writing lacks the fine regularity of that of the
professional scribes of the Twelfth Dynasty, and has many points of
divergence therefrom; but the papyrus is assigned by the best judges to
this period. This gives it an antiquity of about four thousand five
hundred years; and it looks good to last as long again, if only it be
not examined over-much nor brought out into the light too often. {26}
It is as fresh and readable as in the year after it was written. Will
the books of our time last one-tenth so long? It is not without a
feeling of awe, even of sadness, that one with any sense of the wonder
of things gazes for the first time on the old book, and thinks of all
it has survived. So many empires have arisen and gone down since those
words were penned, so many great and terrible things have been.
And we are fortunate indeed in having such a book as this of Ptah-hotep
for the most ancient complete literary work extant. For not by any
magical texts, or hymns and prayers, should we be so well shown the
conditions of that early time; but our moralist, by advancing counsels
of perfection for every contingency, has left us a faithful record of
his age. The veil of five-and-a-half thousand years is rent, and we
are met with a vivid and a fascinating picture of the domestic and
social life of the 'Old Kingdom.' We read of the wife, who must be
treated kindly at all costs; the genial generosity of the rich man, and
the scowling boor, a thorn in the side of his friends and relations,
the laughing-stock of all men; the unquenchable talkers of every
station in life, who argue high, who argue low, who also argue round
about them, as common as now in the East, and the trusted councillor,
weighing every word; the obstinate _ignoramus_ who sees {27} everything
inverted, listening open-mouthed to the disjointed gossip of those near
him, and the scholar, conversing freely with learned and unlearned
alike, recognising that, measured against the infinite possibilities of
knowledge and skill, we are all much of the same stature; the master of
the estate or province, treated with infinite respect by his
subordinates in rank and wealth, and the paid servants that are never
satisfied, who leave after presents have been made them; the
hard-working clerk who casts accounts all day, and the tradesmen who
will perhaps give you credit when money is dear, if you have previously
made friends of them; the well-bred diner-out, lightly passing on his
favourite dish, contenting himself with plain fare, and the _gourmand_
who visits his friends at meal-times, departing only when the larder is
entirely exhausted.
Not only do we find such characters as these in Ptah-hotep's hand-book,
but interesting scenes are brought near to us by the writing-reed of
that primaeval Chesterfield. We find ourselves taking supper at the
table of a great man. His subordinates sit round, scarcely daring to
raise their eyes from their food, not speaking to their host until
spoken to. He serves the food that is before him according to his
liking for each guest; and the less favoured find solace in the
reflection that even the distribution of food is {28} according to
Providence. We pass on. Now we are in the hall of council with the
other overseers and officials of the province, and our overlord
presiding. We notice with astonishment the extreme solemnity and
strict observance of custom and precedence in this archaic period.
Many of those who have met report on the matters under their charge,
and others debate on them. The one now speaking is discussing a trade
about which he knows nothing, and an expert rises and makes very short
work of his opponent's arguments. Now we are among some people
dividing up property. One of them has tried, of course, to bully his
friends into giving him more than his due share, and, having failed,
leaves the house in a rage. He will regret it later. And so on.
Nothing definite is known concerning these two nobles beyond what is
said of them in their works. A fine tomb of a certain Ke'gemni exists
at Memphis; his titles, so far as can be ascertained,[11] are: _Judge
of the High Court: Governor of the Land unto its Limit, South and
North: Director of every Command_. He has sometimes been supposed to
be identical with our Ke'gemni; {29} but I am assured by those most
competent to judge that this tomb cannot be earlier than the Fifth
Dynasty (a good three hundred years from the date assigned to the
moralist), so that the theory that they are one person may be dismissed
as highly improbable. No other person of the name is known.
The position is much the same with Ptah-hotep. There are near Memphis
the tombs of several nobles of this name, of whom two lived in the
reign of Isosi; and in this case, again, it has been assumed that
one[12] of these two must be the writer of the Instruction. But in
neither instance do the titles coincide with or include those assigned
to him. The highest title which he bears, _Eldest Son of the King_,
does not anywhere appear in these tombs. It is true that one of these
contemporaries was _Hereditary Chief_; but we know that Ptah-hotep was
a common name at this time, and in the absence of more certain proof it
will be well to abstain from the identification of like names upon
insufficient grounds. Thus it is only by the chance discovery of this
{30} scroll that these two princes of old time, whose bodies are blown
about the desert dust these many centuries, are secured from utter
oblivion; men '_such as did bear rule in their kingdoms, men renowned
for their power, giving counsel by their understanding, and declaring
prophecies: Leaders of the people by their counsels, and by their
knowledge of learning meet for the people, wise and eloquent in their
instructions_.' And against such as these, that from remote years
'_have left a name behind them, that their praises might be reported,_'
how many are there '_which have no memorial; who are perished, as
though they had never been; and are become as though they had never
been born; and their children after them_.'[13]
I had intended to make a detailed analysis of the moral sense of
Ptah-hotep and Ke'gemni, but it appears unnecessary; since they give
their advice so clearly and simply, they may safely be left to speak
for themselves. But as especially noteworthy I would point to the
gracious tolerance of ignorance enjoined in Sec. 1 (Ptah-hotep), and the
fine reason given for that injunction, in contrast with the scorn
expressed for the obstinate fool (Ph. 40); the care due to a wife (Ph.
21), which is in signal contrast to the custom of other Eastern nations
in this {31} respect;[14] the great stress laid on filial duties (Ph.
38, 39, 41, 42, 43); the enthusiasm for obedience, expressed in a
jargon of puns (Ph. 38), which, once the high-watermark of style among
Egyptian _literati_, has long since lost its savour; the interesting
matter on manners at table (Kg. 2, 3, Ph. 7, 9), in society (Kg. 4, Ph.
14, 18, 20, 34), and in official positions (Ph. 5, 8, 13, 15, 16, 17,
24, 28). A rough classification including many sections is here given:
Duties toward superiors (Ph. 2, 7, 8, 10, 16, 27, 31).
Duties toward equals (3, 6, 14, 18, 20, 26, 29, 33, 35, 37).
Duties toward inferiors (1, 4, 5, 16, 17, 22). The whole teaching
resolves into the maxim, "Be good, and you will be happy;" not at all
in the sense that virtue is its own reward--I do not think that that
would have seemed an adequate return to Ptah-hotep--but in the sense of
material welfare rewarding, as a matter of course, an honourable life.
Following his reasoning, if a man be obedient as a son, punctilious as
a servant, generous and gentle as a master, and courteous as a friend,
then all good things shall fall to him, he shall reach a green old age
honoured by the King, and his memory shall be long in the land. This
theory, which is not {32} found satisfactory in our day, is insisted on
by most of the ancient moralists, who appear to regard it, not as a
substitute for conscience, but rather as a _raison d'etre_ or
justification thereof. Yet, centuries before a King of Israel had seen
all things that are, and found them vanity, a King of Egypt had left it
on record that he had done all good things for his subjects, and that
'there was no satisfaction therein.'
It has been said with some truth of codes of morals and laws that what
is omitted is almost as important as what is included. But we must not
carry this too far; we should be foolish indeed did we assert that
those things omitted from such a code as Ptah-hotep's were not
practised or not held to be important in his day. For example, he
'knows nothing'--as a Higher Critic would say--of kindness to animals;
but we know from many things that the Egyptians treated animals kindly
and made much of them as pets. In the very tomb of that Ptah-hotep
mentioned above,[15] who may be our author, is depicted the bringing of
three dogs and a tame monkey to him while he is dressing; possibly so
that he may feed them himself. And this kindly feeling obtained
throughout Egyptian history. They treated animals more as 'dumb
friends' in those days than might have been {33} _a priori_ expected,
and more, perhaps, than any other nation of antiquity. Again, he
'knows nothing' of duties to the mother, although he is so insistent on
duties to the father; but the high position of women and their
matriarchal privileges oppose any deduction that Egyptian manners were
somewhat to seek in this direction. Ke'gemni says of the unsociable
man that he is a grief to his mother, and another moralist of uncertain
date (perhaps Twelfth Dynasty, about B.C. 2700), named 'Eney, is
explicit on this matter. He says to his son, '_I gave thee thy mother,
she that bore thee with much suffering.... She placed thee at the
Chamber of Instruction for the sake of thine instruction in books; she
was constant to thee daily, having loaves and beer in her house. When
thou art grown, and hast taken to thee a wife, being master in thy
house, cast thine eyes on the one that gave thee birth and provided
thee with all good things, as did thy mother. Let her not reproach
thee, lest she lift up her hands to the God, and He hear her prayer._'
And, most remarkable of all omissions, there is nothing said as to
duties to the Gods. In Egypt, whose Gods are beyond counting, where
almost everybody was a priest, Ptah-hotep--himself a 'Holy Father' and
'Beloved of the God'--has no word to say on religious obligations,
devoting his work entirely to the principles of charity and duty to
one's neighbour. It is {34} seemingly sufficient to him that one do
the right in this world, without thinking overmuch about the other.
This is the more curious in that other writers of the same class have
many injunctions regarding worship and sacrifice; and so complete is
his reserve touching this matter, so important in the eyes of other
Egyptians, that it is easy to believe that it was intentional. We may
even discern in him a protagonist of the modern 'Ethical School,' whose
adherents may be interested to find their views implicitly held so long
ago.
Notwithstanding this singularity, he is by no means unmindful of Deity.
We notice that he has occasion to speak several times of 'the God'[16]
in His relation to humanity and human affairs. If we collect these
references to the God, we shall find that the following qualities are
attributed to Him. He rewards diligence (9, 10) and punishes sin (6,
10; also Kg. 5); He is the giver of good things (Ph. 22, 30, 43),
dispenses fate and preordains events (6, 7, 9, 26), loves His creation
(26), observes men's actions (10), desires them to be fruitful and
multiply (12). All this is in complete accord with the belief of other
religions--including Christianity--regarding the Godhead. And here we
touch another pleasing characteristic of this most ancient of
books--its catholic spirit and disregard of those {35} mythological and
esoteric riddles that most Egyptian works propound to us continually.
It will be noticed that 'the God' is not anywhere mentioned by name.
Osiris (5) and Horus (41) are alluded to, but only historically, in
respect of their rule upon earth, not as present powers. The reason is
this, that at that time the Gods, even the great Gods, were only local,
that is to say, their worship was confined to certain towns or
districts ('nomes'), and beyond the boundaries of these their names
lost that power and influence which they exerted in their peculiar
provinces. A book, therefore, which spoke of one God only--by
name--would have been found much limited as to popularity and use.
Hence the old moralists and didactic writers, whatever God they might
themselves worship, forebore to mention Him, since by many readers He
would not be recognised as paramount; they wrote instead, 'The God,'
that is, 'the God of your allegiance, whoever He may be.' Thus, were
the reader a native of Heliopolis, his God would be Atomu, the Setting
Sun; of Memphis, Ptah, the Revealer; of Hermopolis, Thoth, Master of
Divine Words and Chief of the Eight. It was for this reason that the
unknown author of what is called the 'Negative Confession'[17] makes
the deceased say, '_I have not scorned the {36} God of my town_.' And,
indeed, so simply and purely does Ptah-hotep speak of the God that the
modern reader can, without the least degradation of his ideals,
consider the author as referring to the Deity of monotheism, and if he
be of Christendom, read God; if of Islam, read Allah; if of Jewry,
Jehovah.[18]
No doubt the gulf fixed between teaching and practice was as great then
as now. We have the teaching, we know that the teaching was current
all over Egypt in various forms, but of the practice we know very
little. Human nature being much the same at all times and places, we
must beware of measuring the one by the other, the unknown by the
known, and must be content to take such counsels as showing the
Egyptian--
Not what he was, but what he should have been.
It is established that they were a kindly, peace-loving people, genial
and courtly; but whether law-abiding is another matter. We know
nothing about their laws, but we know {37} that the law-courts were
busy, and that legal officials were numerous; and we know, further,
that their duplicity and lack of straightforwardness were proverbial
among the Greeks and Romans, and persists to this day.
I have noted above the resemblance of the Egyptian Instructions to the
Jewish didactic books (_Proverbs and Ecclesiastes_ in the _Old
Testament_, _Wisdom of Solomon_ and _Ecclesiasticus_ in the
_Apocrypha_); this will be obvious to all readers. Compare, e.g., the
opening of Ptah-hotep (Sec.B) with the opening of Proverbs. It is not
necessary to point out all the parallels in detail.
I come, lastly, to speak of other translations.[19] The first into any
language was that of the Rev. D. I. Heath, Vicar of Brading, Isle of
Wight. This version, which first appeared in 1856, was ruined by the
translator's theory that the Prisse Papyrus contained references to the
Exodus, and was written by the 'Shepherd-King,' Aphobis. How he
obtained that name from Ptah-hotep, how he read the Exodus into his
book, or how he got three-fourths of his translation, it is not
possible to say. Written in a style which is in itself a matter for
decipherment, it is full of absurdities and gratuitous mistakes, and
{38} is entirely worthless. It is one more instance of the lamentable
results that arise when a person with a preconceived Biblical theory
comes into contact with Egyptian records. In the following year M.
Chabas did part of the papyrus into French, and, as might be expected
of an Egyptologist of such attainments, his version was infinitely more
accurate than the foregoing. In 1869 Herr Lauth made a
translation--also partial--into Latin, and in 1884; M. Philippe Virey
published a careful study and complete translation of both books. His
rendering[20] was subsequently translated into English and published
(with some alterations) in _Records of the Past_, 1890, and has
remained the only complete translation in English. It has been taken
bodily (even the footnotes) into Myer's _Oldest Books in the World_,
and has been put into charming verse by Canon Rawnsley in his _Notes
for the Nile_. Thus it appears to be, in a sense, the standard
version. Nevertheless, it leaves very much to be desired in point of
accuracy, although the general sense of each section is usually caught.
Of later years Mr. Griffith has done important work on this text, and I
am indebted to his translations for several readings.
As regards the version here offered, I will only say that it has been
done with considerable care, {39} without prejudice, and, it is
thought, in accordance with scientific methods of translation; and that
it has been compared with all previous renderings, and will be found to
be, on the whole, the most accurate that has yet appeared.
And now I will leave Ptah-hotep to speak for himself. It may be
thought that he has been introduced at too great length; but I would
point out that his book has been strangely overlooked by the educated
public hitherto, although it would be difficult to over-estimate its
importance, to literature as the oldest complete book known, to ethics
and theology as the earliest expression of the mystery we name
Conscience, and to lovers of antiquity as one of the most instructive
and touching relics of a people and a power that once were great and
are now brought to nothing. By a happy chance the words of our sage
have been justified, in that he said, '_No word that hath here been set
down shall cease out of the land for ever_.' Would indeed that we had
more of such books as this, whereby we may a little lighten the
darkness that lies behind the risings of a million suns; and learn how
little the human heart, and the elements of human intercourse, alter
throughout the ages. And what of the other writers of that time, whose
works and whose very names are entirely swept away? To this there is
no better answer made than in the lamentation made by the harper close
upon five {40} thousand years ago, which was written up in the tomb of
King 'Entef:
_Those that built them tombs_, he sang, _have now no resting-place.
Lo! what of their deeds? I have heard the words of Yemhotep and of
Hardedef, whose sayings men repeat continually. Behold! where are
their abodes? Their walls are over-thrown, and their places are not,
even as though they had not been._'
The burden of Egypt.
BATTISCOMBE G. GUNN.
3, PARK HILL ROAD,
CROYDON.
[1] Much ingenuity has been expended to show that Egyptian manners and
customs, books, and other things, were "much the same" as our own, as
though the supposed similarity reflected any credit either on them or
on us. Except in customs which are common to all times and places, as
drinking beer, writing love-letters, making wills, going to school, and
other things antecedently probable, the Egyptian life can show very few
parallels to the life of to-day.
[2] The monuments leave no doubt of this. Pen and ink were used in the
First Dynasty, and speech had been reduced to visible signs before that.
[3] About B.C. 1770. In all Egyptian dates given in this book I follow
Professor Petrie's chronology.
[4] These are round figures, of course, and in the case of Solomon and
Moses traditional dates. Modern criticism places _Genesis_ and
_Proverbs_ much later than 1500 and 1000 B.C.
[5] See Appendix for the literature of this papyrus.
[6] These were kings of the Eleventh Dynasty, about 2986 B.C.
[7] In the translation these divisions are indicated, for purposes of
reference, by numbers and letters, which are not, of course, in the
original. So also in the Instruction of Amenemhe'et (Appendix).
[8] Pwenet: the identification is not certain.
[9] Fragments of another are in the British Museum.
[10] It has been thought to be as late as the Seventeenth (about 1600
B.C.), but the balance of opinion favours the above-mentioned period.
[11] The inscriptions and sculptures from this tomb have not yet been
published, but a work dealing with it will shortly appear. The above
titles, excepting the first, are from Lepsius, _Denkmaeler aus Aegypten
und Aethiopien_, Abth. II. 48, Berlin, 1849-68.
[12] Called Ptah-hotep I. by Egyptologists. For a description of his
tomb, see Mariette, A., _Les Mastabas de l'Ancien Empire_, Paris, 1889,
D. 62. For the other Ptah-hotep under Isosi, see Quibell, J. E., and
Griffith, F. L., _Egyptian Research Account; The Ramesseum and the Tomb
of Ptah-Hotep_, London, 1898. Also Davies, N. de G., and Griffith, F.
L., _Egypt Exploration Fund; The Mastaba of Ptahhetep and Akhethetep at
Saqqara_, 2 vols., London, 1900, 1901. The little figure on the cover
of this book is from this tomb.
[13] _The Wisdom of the Son of Sirach_, chap. xliv.
[14] The Egyptians were monogamists at this time, and the wife enjoyed
social equality with her husband.
[15] Page 29, footnote.
[16] _Noter_.
[17] This is an arbitrary name not existing in the original. It would
be better named 'The Declaration of Innocence.'
[18] It has been thought by many Egyptologists that 'the God' mentioned
in this and other texts is a nameless monotheistic abstraction
transcending all named gods. Although this theory has the support of
many great names, I venture to say that the evidence for such an
important doctrine is in the highest degree unsatisfactory.
[19] The books mentioned here are set forth in detail in the
Bibliography.
[20] Only of Ptah-hotep.
{41}
THE INSTRUCTION OF PTAH-HOTEP
The Ethics of Argument--Manners for Guests--From Father to Son--A Just
Judge--The Treatment of Servants--Duties of the Great--The Test of
Friendship--The Beauty of Obedience--One Generation to Another--Whom
the King Honoureth
The Instruction of the Governor of his City, the Vizier, Ptah-hotep, in
the Reign of the King of Upper and Lower Egypt, Isosi, living for ever,
to the end of Time.
A. The Governor of his City, the Vizier, Ptah-hotep, he said: 'O
Prince, my Lord, the end of life is at hand; old age descendeth [upon
me]; feebleness cometh, and childishness is renewed. He [that is old]
lieth down in misery every day. The eyes are small; the ears are deaf.
Energy is diminished, the heart hath no rest. The mouth is silent, and
he speaketh no word; the heart stoppeth, and he remembereth not
yesterday. The bones are painful throughout the body; good turneth
unto evil. All taste departeth. These things doeth old age for
mankind, being evil in all things. The nose is stopped, and he
breatheth not for weakness (?), whether standing or sitting.
'Command me, thy servant, therefore, to make over my princely authority
[to my son]. Let me speak unto him the words of them that hearken to
the counsel of the men of old time; those that {42} hearkened unto the
gods. I pray thee, let this thing be done, that sin may be banished
from among persons of understanding, that thou may enlighten the lands.'
Said the Majesty of this God:[1] 'Instruct him, then, in the words of
old time; may he be a wonder unto the children of princes, that they
may enter and hearken with him. Make straight all their hearts; and
discourse with him, without causing weariness.'
B. Here begin the proverbs of fair speech, spoken by the Hereditary
Chief, the Holy Father,[2] Beloved of the God, the Eldest Son of the
King, of his body, the Governor of his City, the Vezier, Ptah-hotep,
when instructing the ignorant in the knowledge of exactness in
fair-speaking; the glory of him that obeyeth, the shame of him that
transgresseth them.
He said unto his son:
1. Be not proud because thou art learned; but discourse with the
ignorant man, as with the sage. For no limit can be set to skill,
neither is there any craftsman that possesseth full advantages. Fair
speech is more rare than the emerald that is found by slave-maidens on
the pebbles.
2. If thou find an arguer talking, one that is well disposed and wiser
than thou, let thine arms {43} fall, bend thy back,[3] be not angry
with him if he agree (?) not with thee. Refrain from speaking evilly;
oppose him not at any time when he speaketh. If he address thee as one
ignorant of the matter, thine humbleness shall bear away his
contentions.
3. If thou find an arguer talking, thy fellow, one that is within thy
reach, keep not silence when he saith aught that is evil; so shalt thou
be wiser than he. Great will be the applause on the part of the
listeners, and thy name shall be good in the knowledge of princes.
4. If thou find an arguer talking, a poor man, that is to say not
thine equal, be not scornful toward him because he is lowly. Let him
alone; then shall he confound himself. Question him not to please
thine heart, neither pour out thy wrath upon him that is before thee;
it is shameful to confuse a mean mind. If thou be about to do that
which is in thine heart, overcome it as a thing rejected of princes.
5. If thou be a leader, as one directing the conduct of the multitude,
endeavour always to be gracious, that thine own conduct be without
defect. Great is Truth, appointing a straight path; never hath it been
overthrown since the {44} reign of Osiris.[4] One that oversteppeth
the laws shall be punished. Overstepping is by the covetous man; but
degradations (?) bear off his riches, for the season of his evil-doing
ceaseth not. For he saith, 'I will obtain by myself for myself,' and
saith not, 'I will obtain because I am allowed.' But the limits of
justice are steadfast; it is that which a man repeateth from his father.
6. Cause not fear among men; for [this] the God punisheth likewise.
For there is a man that saith, 'Therein is life'; and he is bereft of
the bread of his mouth. There is a man that saith, 'Power [is
therein]'; and he saith, 'I seize for myself that which I perceive.'
Thus a man speaketh, and he is smitten down. It is another that
attaineth by giving unto him that hath not; not he that causeth men
dread. For it happeneth that what the God hath commanded, even that
thing cometh to pass. Live, therefore, in the house of kindliness, and
men shall come and give gifts of themselves.
7. If thou be among the guests of a man that is greater than thou,
accept that which he giveth thee, putting it to thy lips. If thou look
at him that is before thee (thine host), pierce him not {45} with many
glances. It is abhorred of the soul[5] to stare at him. Speak not
till he address thee; one knoweth not what may be evil in his opinion.
Speak when he questioneth thee; so shall thy speech be good in his
opinion. The noble who sitteth before food divideth it as his soul
moveth him; he giveth unto him that he would favour--it is the custom
of the evening meal. It is his soul that guideth his hand. It is the
noble that bestoweth, not the underling that attaineth. Thus the
eating of bread is under the providence of the God; he is an ignorant
man that disputeth it.
8. If thou be an emissary sent from one noble to another, be exact
after the manner of him that sent thee, give his message even as he
hath said it. Beware of making enmity by thy words, setting one noble
against the other by perverting truth. Overstep it not, neither repeat
that which any man, be he prince or peasant, saith in opening the
heart; it is abhorrent to the soul.
9. If thou have ploughed, gather thine harvest in the field, and the
God shall make it great under thine hand. Fill not thy mouth at thy
neighbours' table....[6] If a crafty man be the {46} possessor of
wealth, he stealeth like a crocodile from the priests.