Egypt is the monumental land of the earth, as the Egyptians are the
monumental people of history.--BARON BUNSEN.
The history of civilisation is very largely the history of a few great
cities.
There has been no great people without its great metropolis. The
overthrow of such a city, as in the case of Nineveh, or Babylon, or
Tyre, or Sardis, often meant the subjugation or destruction of a
nation. And the mere transfer of supremacy from one city to another
within the same country meant the beginning of a new era. It was so in
Egypt when the centre of authority shifted from Memphis to Thebes. By
common consent, historians mark the period in which Thebes became the
home of the ruling monarch, and hence the capital of Egypt, as a new
era in Egyptian history. This new era is commonly designated the Old
Theban Kingdom, or the Middle Kingdom.
This era of the Theban supremacy was by no means a homogeneous epoch.
It saw many dynasties established and overthrown; it even witnessed
the conquest of the country by a strange horde from the east, a horde
spoken of as the Shepherd invaders, whose leaders, seated upon the
throne of Egypt for some generations, have passed into history as the
Hyksos or Shepherd kings. These outsiders held the power so long,
indeed, that they may very well have felt entitled to call themselves
Egyptians. The later generations had as good claim to that name as,
for example, any Caucasian has to call himself an American. Yet when
the Hyksos kings were finally overthrown, the feat seems to have been
regarded as the expulsion of intruders, and the verdict of posterity is
that the governmental power passed back to its rightful possessors. It
would be difficult, however, to say how much the ethnic status of the
race may have been modified by the influence of these many generations
of outsiders. Be that as it may, the Egyptians who expelled the
Hyksos kings and established anew the “native” dynasties were in some
respects a very different people from the Egyptians whom the Hyksos
had overthrown. But before expanding this point we had best follow the
fortunes of the Old Theban Kingdom itself.
THE ELEVENTH DYNASTY
[Sidenote: [_ca._ 2700-2500 B.C.]]
For the XIth Dynasty we have as yet no good list; the total number
of kings even is unknown, but the best authorities agree that there
were probably about nine. But since this dynasty undoubtedly ruled at
Thebes simultaneously with the Xth at Heracleopolis, whence it had
been driven from Memphis, the question as to just which Theban prince
so far overcame the legitimate government in the struggle that had been
long going on, as to be acknowledged the ruler of Egypt, will probably
never reach solution. Professor Petrie begins with Antef I and follows
him with Mentuhotep I, Antef II, Antef III, Mentuhotep II, Antef IV,
and then Nub-kheper-Ra (or Antef V). Concerning the latter and his
two successors, there is no question; we emerge once more into the
daylight. After Nub-kheper-Ra comes Neb-kher-Ra whose other name was
Mentuhotep, and we designate him as the third of his name. He stands
fifty-seventh on the Abydos list.[a]
The princely line from which the commanding figure of King Mentuhotep
III stood forth to the healing of the reunited kingdom was of Theban
origin. The feeble ancestors of his race bore alternately the names
of Antef and Mentuhotep. They had set up their regal dwelling in that
city of Thebes which afterward became of such world-wide importance,
and their tombs (simple, homely tiled pyramids) lay at the foot of
the “Western Mountain” of the Theban necropolis. Here a few ruins of
ancient date indicate the names of the rulers. It was here too that,
more than twenty years ago, two quite modest sarcophagi belonging to
these Pharaohs were brought to light by some Arabs in search of gold,
and unconscious of what a treasure they had found.
In that part of the city of the dead which nowadays goes among the
inhabitants by the name of Assassif, those sarcophagi were found, only
lightly covered with sand and rubble and one of them containing the
embalmed body of a king, his head adorned with a royal circlet. The
cover of the casket was richly gilded, and the sacred symbols which
decked the central strip soon revealed the name of Pharaoh Antef in the
royal cartouche.
In the year 1854, when Brugsch for the first time stayed on the banks
of the Nile, he had the unhoped-for good fortune to stumble, in a
lumber room in the house of the Greek consul, across the coffin of a
second Antef, which was notably distinguished from the first by his
cognomen of “the Great.” The coffin is now preserved in the Louvre, a
precious and valuable relic of the ancient kingdom of the Pharaohs.
The black rocks of the island of Konosso, near Osiris’s favoured
island of Philæ above the First Cataract, preserve the memory of the
Mentuhotep (II) who bore the royal name of Neb-taui-Ra, “Sun of the
Lord of the Country.” A sculpture chiselled in the hard stone shows the
Pharaoh as the conqueror of thirteen peoples, and as the devout servant
of his original progenitor Khem or Amsu, the famous god of Coptos. The
place of this name (Qobt it was actually called among the Egyptians)
had at that time a great reputation.
This Mentuhotep also appears perpetuated on the wall in the rocky
valley, together with his mother, Ama. He had, so his inscription
distinctly says, caused a deep well, ten cubits in diameter, to be sunk
in the waterless, desolate waste, in order to provide reviving draughts
of fresh water for all pilgrims with their beasts of burden and all men
whom the king had commissioned to quarry stone in the hot valley.
Another inscription, dated the 15th of Paophi in the second year of the
reign of our Mentuhotep, next commemorates the god Khem, “the Lord of
the Peoples of this Wilderness,” then renders homage to other heavenly
beings, and informs us how it was marvellously contrived to convey the
gigantic blocks of stone Nileward to serve for the future housing of
the royal corpse. A high dignitary, Amenemhat by name, and appointed
to superintend all works of the kind for Pharaoh, received an express
order to forward the heavy load of the sarcophagus and its cover from
the mountains to the ruler’s eternal resting-place.
Long was the way and hard the labour of the task, for the mighty mass
of hewn stone measured eight cubits in length, whilst the proportion of
this to the breadth and height was as four to two. When rich offerings
had been made to the gods, three thousand strong men succeeded in
moving the gigantic weight of stone from its place, and in rolling it
down the valley to the river.
We have less information respecting the other Mentuhotep, whose pyramid
bears the name of Khu-asu, “the most shining place.” A tombstone found
in the carefully explored valley of Abydos commemorates the priest who
presented the offerings of the dead to the departed king at the pyramid.
The list of kings closes with Sankh-ka-Ra, the fifty-eighth of the
long series of Abydos. The rock valley of Hammamat commemorates him in
an inscription of the highest value. From Coptos the way led through
waterless deserts toward the coast of the Red Sea, and was much
frequented by merchants, who, for the sake of profit, ventured life and
limb, and after painful wanderings on desert paths trusted themselves
in the harbour to frail vessels, that they might steer for the southern
regions of the farther coasts and bring valuable goods, principally
costly spices full of sweet savours, back from the land of Punt to
their native country and the temples of the gods.
THE VOYAGE TO PUNT
Under the name of Punt, the ancient inhabitants of Kamit understood a
distant country, washed by the great sea, full of valleys and hills,
rich in ebony and other valuable woods, in incense, balsam, precious
metals and stones; rich also in animals, for there are camelopards,
cheetahs, panthers, dog-headed apes, and long-tailed monkeys. Winged
creatures with strange feathers flew up to the boughs of wonderful
trees, especially of the incense tree and the cocoanut palm. Such was
the conception of the Egyptian Ophir, doubtless the coast of the modern
Somaliland, which lies in view of Arabia, though divided from it by the
sea.
According to the old dim legend, the land of Punt was the primeval
dwelling of the gods. From Punt the heavenly beings had, headed by
Amen, Horus, and Hathor, passed into the Nile Valley. The passage of
the gods had consecrated the coast lands, which the waters of the Red
Sea washed as far as Punt and whose very name “God’s land” (Ta-neter)
recalls the legend. Amen is called Haq, that is, “King of Punt,” Hathor
similarly, “Lady and Ruler of Punt,” while Hor was spoken of as “the
holy morning star which rises westward from the land of Punt.” To this
same country belongs that idol of Bes, the ancient figure of the deity
in the land of Punt, who in frequent wanderings obtained a footing, not
only in Egypt, but in Arabia and other countries of Asia, as far as the
Greek islands. The deformed figure of Bes, with its grinning visage, is
none other than the benevolent Dionysus [Bacchus], who, pilgrimaging
through the world, dispenses gentle manners, peace, and cheerfulness to
the nations with a lavish hand.
[Sidenote: [_ca._ 2500 B.C.]]
It was under Sankh-ka-Ra that the first Ophir-voyage to Punt and Ophir
was accomplished. According to the words of the inscription, everything
which might be serviceable to the expedition was wisely arranged
before-hand, and Pharaoh selected as its leader and guide the noble
Hannu, who gives the following account of it:
“I was despatched to conduct the ships toward the land of Punt, to
fetch Pharaoh sweet-smelling spices, which the princes of the red
country collect with the fear and anxiety which he inspires in all
peoples. And I started from the city of Coptos.”--“And his majesty gave
the order that the armed men who were to accompany me should come from
the southern land of the Thebaïd.”
After a defaced portion in the inscription, which was fairly long, and
of which enough had been preserved to show that in the course of the
story there was some account of how the armed force was provided for
offence and defence against the enemy, and how the king’s officers,
with stone-cutters and other work-people, accompanied the train, Hannu
continues:
“And I journeyed thence with a host of three thousand men, and came
through the place of the red hamlet, and through a cultivated land. I
had skins prepared and barrows to convey the water-jars to the number
of twenty. And every one of my people carried a burden daily … and
another adjusted the load. And I had a reservoir dug twelve rods in
length in a wood, and two basins at a place called Atahet, one of them
a rod and twenty cubits, and the other a rod and thirty cubits. And I
made another in Ateb, ten cubits by ten each way, that it might hold
water a cubit deep. Thereafter I came to the harbour town of Seba (?),
and I had cargo vessels built to bring commodities of every kind. And
I made a great sacrifice of oxen, cows, and goats. And when I returned
from Seba (?) I had fulfilled the king’s command, for I brought him all
kinds of commodities, which I had found in the harbours of the sacred
country. And I descended into the street of Uak and Rohan, and took
with me valuable stones for the statues of the houses of God. The like
has never been since there were kings, and such things were never done
by any blood relations of the king who were sent to those places since
the time (the rule) of the sun-god Ra. And I did thus for the king on
account of the great favour he cherished for me.”
M. Chabas, who first rendered this important inscription and its
contents intelligible, has joined to his translation some valuable
remarks concerning the direction of the desert road from Coptos to
the Red Sea. By this means we may satisfy ourselves that already in
those remote times, the ancient Egyptians had opened a road by which
to establish communication with the land of Punt, and to transport its
products--rare and costly commodities--to the valley of the Nile.
In his description of the journey, Hannu speaks of five principal
camps, at which the wanderers rested, and men and animals (then only
donkeys, the only beast of burden referred to, at least at this period)
fortified themselves for the toilsome journey in the enjoyment of the
fresh drinking-water. It is, moreover, this same road which, even in
the time of the Ptolemies and Romans, led from Coptos in the direction
of the sunrise, to the harbour of Leukos Limen (now Kosseir), on the
Red Sea, the great highway and commercial route of the merchants of all
countries, who carried on a trade in the wondrous products of Arabia
and India, the bridge of nations which once connected Asia and Europe.
Although, in view of the most recent discoveries, we must no longer
regard Punt and the oft referred to “sacred country” as the exclusive
designation of the southern and western coasts of Arabia itself, still
nothing is more probable than that, already in the reign of King
Sankh-ka-Ra, five and twenty centuries before the beginning of our era,
the Egyptians had some knowledge of the coasts of Yemen and of the
Hadramaut on the opposite side of the sea, which lay in sight of the
incense-bearing mountains of Punt and of the sacred country. Here,
in these regions, should, as it seems to us, that mysterious place be
sought which, in remotely prehistoric times, sent forth the restless
Cushite nations oversea from Arabia, like swarms of locusts, to plant
themselves on the highly favoured coasts of Punt and the “sacred
country,” and to extend their wanderings further inland in a westerly
and northerly direction.[b]
THE TWELFTH DYNASTY
It is hard to keep in mind the long sweep of these meagre Egyptian
chronicles, but it must not be forgotten that we are handling dynasties
of long duration and not single reigns.
[Illustration]
[Sidenote: [_ca._ 2466 B.C.]]
It was not without a struggle that the XIIth Dynasty was established,
and the first years of the reign of the Theban king Amenemhat were
harassed by the conspiracies and plots of those who contested his claim
to the throne.
In the _Instructions_ to his son, Usertsen I, the king says: “When
night came I took an hour of ease. I stretched myself on the soft
couch in my palace and sought repose, my spirit had nearly succumbed
to sleep, when lo! they gathered themselves together in arms against
me, and I became as weak as a serpent of the field. Then I arose to
fight with my own hands, and I found I had but to strike to conquer.
If I attacked an armed foe, he fled before me, and I had no reverse of
fortune.” And it was to this force of character that the king owed his
success. “Never in my life have I given way,” he continues, “either in
a grasshopper plague or in conspiracies set afoot in the palace, or
when, taking advantage of my youth, they banded together against me.”
The south of Memphis was the final scene of struggle against the new
dynasty, but after the surrender of the fortified town of Titui, the
whole of Egypt surrendered to the sway of Amenemhat, who now devoted
himself to the reparation of the evils of war and to expeditions
against the Libyans, Nubians, and Asiatics, whose invasions were so
ruinous to the country. “I caused the mourner,” says the king in the
same _Instructions_, “to mourn no longer, and his lamentation was no
longer heard. Perpetual fighting was no more seen, whereas, before my
coming, they fought together as bulls who think not of the past, whilst
the welfare of the wise and unwise was equally ignored. I have had the
land tilled as far as Abu [Elephantine]. I have spread joy as far as
Adhu [the Delta]. I am the creator of the three kinds of grain, I am
the friend of Nopu [the god of grain]. In answer to my prayer the Nile
has inundated the fields; nobody hungers or thirsts under my sway,
for my orders have been obeyed. All that I said was a fresh source
of love; I have overthrown the lion and killed the crocodile. I have
conquered the Uauat, I have taken the Mazau captive, and I have forced
the Sati [Asiatics] to follow me like harriers.”
[Sidenote: [_ca._ 2466-2370 B.C.]]
In Nubia the king had the gold mines reopened which had been abandoned
since the time of Pepi.
As Amenemhat was not young when he ascended the throne, he began to
feel the effects of age after reigning nineteen years, and this led to
his making his son, Usertsen I, co-regent with himself with all the
titles and prerogatives of royalty. “I raised thee from a subject,”
he writes in the _Instructions_, “I granted thee the free use of thy
arms that thou mightest be feared on that account. As for me, I arrayed
myself in the fine stuffs of my palace so as to look like one of the
flowers of my garden. I perfumed myself as freely as if the essences
were drawn like water from the cisterns.”
At the end of some years the king took so little active part in the
government, that his name was often omitted in the monuments beside
that of his son; but he still gave wise counsels from the palace
where he lived in retirement. To the wisdom of his advice much of the
prosperity of Egypt was due, and such a reputation for ruling did the
old king acquire, that in a treatise, composed by a contemporary, on
the art of governing, the writer represents him rising like a god and
addressing his son: “Thou reignest over two worlds, thou dost govern
three regions. Act better than thy predecessors, maintain harmony
between thy subjects and thyself lest they succumb to fear; sit not
by thyself in their midst, do not take to thy heart and treat as thy
brother only him that is rich and of high degree, neither accord thy
friendship to newcomers whose devotion is not proved.”
[Illustration: AMENEMHAT WORSHIPPED AS A GOD BY A SUBJUGATED PRINCE]
In support of his _Instructions_ the old king gives a résumé of his
life, of which some extracts have been already given. Although only
three pages long, this little work became quite a classic, and kept
its place a thousand years, for at the time of the XIXth Dynasty, it
was still copied in the schools and studied as an exercise of style by
young scribes.
Nothing is more illustrative of the state of Egypt and the neighbouring
countries at this period than certain passages from the memoirs of
an adventurer named Sineh. Arrived at the court of a little Asiatic
chief, who asks for an account of the power of the Egyptian sovereign,
and who was surprised at hearing that a death had taken place in
the palace of Amenemhat without his knowledge, the traveller gives a
poetical panegyric of the king and his son: “My exile into that country
was arranged by God, for Egypt is under the control of a master, who
is called ‘the benevolent god’; and the terror of him extends to all
the surrounding nations, as the power of the goddess Sekhet extends
over the earth in the season of sickness. I told him my thoughts and
he replied, ‘We grant thee immunity.’ His son, Usertsen, entered the
palace, for he manages his father’s business; he is an incomparable
god, he has never had his equal, he is a counsellor wise in his
designs, benevolent in his decrees, who goes and comes at his will. He
conquers foreign states and reports his conquests to his father, who
remains in the palace. He is a brave man, who rules by the sword, his
courage is unequalled; when he sees barbarians, he rushes forward and
scatters the predatory hordes. He is the hurler of javelins who makes
the hand of the enemy feeble, those whom he strikes never more lift
the lance. He is formidable in shattering skulls, and has never been
overcome. He is a swift runner who kills the fugitive, and no one can
overtake him. He is alert and ready. He is a lion who strikes with his
claws, nor ever lets go from his grip; he is a heart girded in armour
at the sight of the hosts, and leaves nothing standing behind him; he
is a valiant man rushing forward at the sight of battle. He seizes his
buckler, he bounds forward and kills without a second blow. Nobody can
withstand his arrow; before he bends his bow, the barbarians flee in
front of him like hares, for the great goddess has commanded him to
slay those who ignore her name, and when he attacks, he spares not.
All are laid low. He is a wonderful friend, who knows how to win love;
his country loves him more than herself, and rejoices in him more than
in a god; and both men and women are prompt to render him homage.
He is king; he has commanded ever since he was born; the nation has
multiplied under him, the unique being of a divine essence by whom this
land rejoices to be governed. He has enlarged the frontiers of the
South, whilst not coveting the region of the North. He has subjugated
the Asiatics and conquered the Nemashatu.”
[Illustration: USERTSEN I
(From a statue)]
[Sidenote: [_ca._ 2370-2250 B.C.]]
The co-regency of Usertsen I with Amenemhat I, instituted ten years
before the king’s death, led to Usertsen’s being accepted as successor
to his father without any opposition. And following his parent’s
example, this king (after forty-two years) appointed his son, Amenemhat
II, to be co-regent with himself; and he, thirty-two years later, did
the same with Usertsen II; Amenemhat III and Amenemhat IV also reigned
a long time together. The only reigns in which there is no proof of
co-regency are those of Usertsen III and Queen Sebek-neferu-Ra (the
Schemiophris of Manetho), who was the last of the dynasty, which had
lasted 213 years, 1 month, and 27 days.
The history of the XIIth Egyptian dynasty is certainly given with
greater accuracy and completeness than that of any of the others. In
spite of the deficiencies in the biographies of the eight monarchs,
and the accounts of their wars, we have an uninterrupted survey of the
development of their policy, and even after the lapse of four thousand
years and more, we can form a fair idea of the Egypt of the period. As
engineers, soldiers, friends of art, and patrons of agriculture, they
were indefatigable in their work of aggrandising the country. With the
enlargement of the boundaries of the kingdom, the hordes of barbarians
on the frontiers were dispersed, Nubia was conquered; the valley of the
Middle Nile, from the First Cataract to the Fourth, was colonised; the
supply of water was more equalised by the creation of Lake Mœris and
a system of canals; and towns like Heliopolis, Thebes, Tanis, and a
hundred others of less repute, were adorned with fine buildings. Egypt,
in fact, at this time, was in a most prosperous state, and if later
she obtained more renown by her Asiatic wars and distant conquests,
the period of this dynasty, when each generation of Pharaohs followed
in the other’s steps of good administration, was the most happy and
peaceful of all.
The two scenes of warfare of the Pharaohs at this period were Syria
on the east of the Delta, and Nubia, properly so called, on the south
of Elephantine. One would have thought that the large tracts of sand,
separating the Syrians from Egypt, would have prevented any incursions
from that quarter. But the nomadic tribes made such inroads on that
district that a series of fortresses had to be built from the Red
Sea to the Nile, to protect the entrance of the Wady Tumilat from
the hordes; and this wall, begun by Amenemhat and continued by his
successors, marked the extreme limit, at that time, of the empire of
the Pharaohs in this direction. Beyond stretched the desert, a world
almost unknown to the Egyptians at that time.
Of the people of Syria and Palestine they had only vague ideas brought
thither by the caravans or brought to the ports in the Mediterranean
by sailors who had been there. Sometimes, however, a party of
emigrants, or even whole tribes, driven from their country by misery or
revolutions, would arrive and settle in Egypt. One of the bas-reliefs
of the tomb of Khnumhotep depicts the arrival of such a party. It
represents thirty-seven men, women, and children, brought before the
governor of the nome of Mah, to whom they present a sort of greenish
paint, called moszmit, and two boxes. They are armed like Egyptians
with bows, javelins, axes, and clubs; one of them plays, as he walks,
on an instrument resembling an old Greek lyre in shape. The cut of
their dress, the brilliancy and good taste of the fringed and patterned
materials, the elegance of most of the things they have with them,
testify to an advanced stage of civilisation, albeit inferior to that
of Egypt. Asia already supplied Egypt with slaves, perfumes, cedar
wood, and cedar essences, enamelled precious stones, lapis-lazuli, and
the embroidered and dyed stuffs of which Chaldea retained the monopoly
until the time of the Romans.[c]
The monuments of this great period provoked wonder among the ancients,
and the old traveller and historian Herodotus thus describes the
marvels of Egypt:[a]
MONUMENTS OF THE TWELFTH DYNASTY: A CLASSICAL VIEW
It was the resolution of all the princes to leave behind them a common
monument of their fame:--With this view, beyond the Lake Mœris, near
the City of Crocodiles, they constructed a labyrinth, which exceeds,
I can truly say, all that has been said of it; whoever will take
the trouble to compare them, will find all the works of Greece much
inferior to this, both in regard to the workmanship and expense. The
temples of Ephesus and Samos may justly claim admiration, and the
Pyramids may individually be compared to many of the magnificent
structures of Greece, but even these are inferior to the Labyrinth. It
is composed of twelve courts, all of which are covered; their entrances
are opposite to each other, six to the north and six to the south; one
wall encloses the whole; the apartments are of two kinds, there are
fifteen hundred above the surface of the ground, and as many beneath,
in all three thousand. Of the former I speak from my own knowledge and
observation; of the latter, from the information I received.
The Egyptians who had the care of the subterraneous apartments would
not suffer me to see them, and the reason they alleged was, that in
these were preserved the sacred crocodiles, and the bodies of the kings
who constructed the labyrinth: of these therefore I presume not to
speak; but the upper apartments I myself examined, and I pronounce them
among the greatest efforts of human industry and art.
The almost infinite number of winding passages through the different
courts, excited my warmest admiration: from spacious halls I passed
through smaller apartments, and from them again to large and
magnificent courts, almost without end. The ceilings and walls are all
of marble, the latter richly adorned with the finest sculpture; around
each court are pillars of the whitest and most polished marble: at the
point where the labyrinth terminates, stands a pyramid one hundred and
sixty cubits high, having large figures of animals engraved on its
outside, and the entrance to it is by a subterraneous path.
Wonderful as this labyrinth is, the Lake Mœris, near which it stands,
is still more extraordinary: the circumference of this is three
thousand six hundred stadia, or sixty schæni, which is the length of
Egypt about the coast. This lake stretches itself from north to south,
and in its deepest parts is two hundred cubits; it is entirely the
produce of human industry, which indeed the work itself testifies, for
in its centre may be seen two pyramids, each of which is two hundred
cubits above and as many beneath the water: upon the summit of each
is a colossal statue of marble, in a sitting attitude. The precise
altitude of these pyramids is consequently four hundred cubits; these
four hundred cubits, or one hundred orgyiæ, are adapted to a stadium of
six hundred feet; an orgyia is six feet, or four cubits, for a foot is
four palms, and a cubit six.
The waters of the lake are not supplied by springs; the ground which it
occupies is of itself remarkably dry, but it communicates by a secret
channel with the Nile; for six months the lake empties itself into the
Nile, and the remaining six the Nile supplies the lake. During the six
months in which the waters of the lake ebb, the fishery which is here
carried on furnishes the royal treasury with a talent of silver every
day; but as soon as the Nile begins to pour its waters into the lake,
it produces no more than twenty minæ.
[The silver which the fishery of this lake produced was, says Larcher,
appropriated to find the queen with clothes and perfume.]
The inhabitants affirm of this lake, that it has a subterraneous
passage inclining inland towards the west, to the mountains above
Memphis, where it discharges itself into the Libyan sands. I was
anxious to know what became of the earth, which must somewhere have
necessarily been heaped up in digging this lake; as my search after it
was fruitless, I made inquiries concerning it of those who lived nearer
the lake. I was the more willing to believe them, when they told me
where it was carried, as I had before heard of a similar expedient used
at Nineveh, an Assyrian city. Some robbers, who were solicitous to get
possession of the immense treasures of Sardanapalus, King of Nineveh,
which were deposited in subterraneous apartments, began from the place
where they lived to dig under ground, in a direction towards them.
Having taken the most accurate measurement, they continued their mine
to the palace of the king; as night approached they regularly emptied
the earth into the Tigris, which flows near Nineveh, and at length
accomplished their purpose. A plan entirely similar was executed in
Egypt, except that the work was here carried on not by night but by
day; the Egyptians threw the earth into the Nile, as they dug it from
the trench; thus it was regularly dispersed, and this, as they told me,
was the process of the lake’s formation.[d]
Thus Herodotus explains what he but faintly understood; his translator
William Beloe has added the following commentary:[a]
Herodotus, Diodorus, and Pomponius Mela differ but little in opinion
concerning its extent. The design of it was probably to hinder the Nile
from overflowing the country too much, which was effected by drawing
off such a quantity of water, when it was apprehended that there might
be an inundation sufficient to hurt the land. [The regulation of the
Nile floods has been accomplished in the latter part of the nineteenth
century, by dams elsewhere described.] The water, Pococke observes, is
of a disagreeable muddy taste, and almost as salt as the sea, which
quality it probably contracts from the nitre that is in the earth, and
the salt which is every year left in the mud. The circumference of the
lake at present is no more than fifty leagues. Larcher says we must
distinguish betwixt the lake itself, and the canal of communication
from the Nile; that the former was the work of nature, the latter of
art. This canal, a most stupendous effort of art, is still entire; it
is called Bahr Yusuf, the canal of Joseph. According to Savary it is
forty leagues in length.
There were two other canals with sluices at their mouths, from the lake
to the river, which were alternately shut and opened when the Nile
increased or decreased. This work united every advantage, and supplied
the deficiencies of a low inundation, by retaining water which would
uselessly have been expended in the sea. It was still more beneficial
when the increase of the Nile was too great, by receiving that
superfluity which would have prevented seed-time. Were the canal of
Joseph cleansed, the ancient mounds repaired, and the sluices restored,
this lake might again serve the same purposes. The pyramids described
by Herodotus no longer exist, neither are they mentioned by Strabo.
When it is considered that this was the work of an individual, and that
its object was the advantage and comfort of a numerous people, it must
be agreed, with M. Savary, that the king who constructed it performed a
far more glorious work than either the Pyramids or the Labyrinth.[e]
The Sphinx itself is hardly more distinctly Egyptian than the ruins
of Karnak, a solemn memorial of Old Thebes. The famed Egyptologist,
Lepsius, visited the region and described the impression the ruins made
on him as follows:[a]
THE RUINS OF KARNAK
The river here divides the broad valley into two unequal parts. On the
west side it approaches close to the precipitous Libyan range, which
there projects; on the eastern side it bounds a wide fruitful plain,
extending as far as Medamut, a spot situated on the border of the
Arabian Desert, several hours distant. On this side stood the actual
town of Thebes, which seems to have been chiefly grouped round the two
great temples of Karnak and Luxor, situated above half an hour apart.
Karnak lies more to the north, and farther removed from the Nile; Luxor
is now actually washed by the waves of the river, and may even formerly
have been the harbour of the city. The west side of the river contained
the necropolis of Thebes, and all the temples which stood here referred
more or less to the worship of the dead; indeed, all the inhabitants of
this part, which was afterwards comprehended by the Greeks under the
name of Memnonia, seem to have been principally occupied with the care
of the dead and their tombs. The former extent of the Memnonia may be
now distinguished by Gurnah and Medinet Habu, places situated at the
northern and southern extremities.
A survey of the Theban monuments naturally begins with the ruins of
Karnak. Here stood the great royal temple of the hundred-gated Thebes,
which was dedicated to Amen-Ra, the King of the Gods, and to the
peculiar local god of the city of Amen, so called after him (No-Amen,
Diospolis). Ap, along with the feminine article Tap, from which the
Greeks made Thebe, was the name of one particular sanctuary of Amen.
It is also often employed in hieroglyphics in the singular, or still
more frequently in plural (Napu), as the name of the town; for which
reason the Greeks naturally, without changing the article along with
it, generally used the plural θῆβαι. The whole history of the Egyptian
monarchy, after the city of Amen was raised to be one of the two royal
residences in the land, is connected with this temple. All dynasties
emulated in the glory of having contributed their share to the
enlargement, embellishment, or restoration of this national sanctuary.
It was founded by their first king, the mighty Usertsen I, under the
Old Theban Royal Dynasty (XIIth of Manetho), between 2400 and 2300
B.C., and even now exhibits some ruins in the centre of the building
from that period bearing the name of this king. During the dynasties
immediately succeeding, which for several centuries groaned under the
yoke of the victorious hereditary enemy, this sanctuary no doubt was
also deserted, and nothing has been preserved which belonged to that
period. But after the first king of the XVIIIth Dynasty, Aahmes, in the
seventeenth century B.C., had succeeded in his first war against the
Hyksos, his two successors, Amenhotep I and Tehutimes I, built round
the remains of the most ancient sanctuary a magnificent temple, with a
great many chambers round the cella, and with a broad court, and pylons
appertaining to it, in front of which Tehutimes I erected two obelisks.
Two other pylons, with contiguous court walls, were built by the same
king, at a right angle with the temple in the direction of Luxor.
Tehutimes III and his sister enlarged this temple to the back by a
hall resting on fifty-six columns, besides many other chambers, which
surrounded it on three sides, and were encircled by one common outer
wall. The succeeding kings partly closed the temple more perfectly in
front, partly built new independent temples near it, and also placed
two more large pylons towards the southwest, in front of those erected
by Tehutimes I, so that now four lofty pylons formed the magnificent
entrance to the principal temple on this side.
But a far more splendid enlargement of the temple was executed in
the fifteenth and fourteenth centuries B.C. by the great Pharaohs
of the XIXth Dynasty; for Seti I, the father of Ramses Meri-Amen,
added in the original axis of the temple the most magnificent hall
of pillars that was ever seen in Egypt or elsewhere. The stone roof,
supported by 134 columns, covers a space of 164 feet in depth, and
320 feet in breadth. Each of the twelve central columns is 36 feet
in circumference, and 66 feet high beneath the architrave; the other
columns, 40 feet high, are 27 feet in circumference.
It is impossible to describe the overwhelming impression which is
experienced upon entering for the first time into this forest of
columns, and wandering from one range into the other, between the lofty
figures of gods and kings on every side represented on them, projecting
sometimes entirely, sometimes only in part. Every surface is covered
with various sculptures, now in relief, now sunk, which were, however,
only completed under the successors of the builder; most of them,
indeed, by his son Ramses Meri-Amen. In front of this hypostyle hall
was placed, at a later period, a great hypæthral court, 270 by 320 feet
in extent, decorated on the sides only with colonnades, and entered by
a magnificent pylon.
The principal part of the temple terminated here, comprising a length
of 1170 feet, not including the row of sphinxes in front of its
external pylon, nor the peculiar sanctuary which was placed by Ramses
Meri-Amen directly beside the wall farthest back in the temple, and
with the same axis, but turned in such a manner that its entrance was
on the opposite side. Including these enlargements, the entire length
must have amounted to nearly 2000 feet, reckoning to the most southern
gate of the external wall, which surrounded the whole space, which
was of nearly equal breadth. The later dynasties, who now found the
principal temples completed on all sides, but who also were desirous
of contributing their share to the embellishment of this centre of
the Theban worship, began partly to erect separate small temples on
the large level space which was surrounded by the above-mentioned
enclosure-wall, partly to extend these temples also externally.[f]
In almost unfailing sequence decline follows glory; and now, having
seen the ruined monuments of the Theban Kingdom, we may turn to
consider the ruin of her power.[a]
THE FALL OF THE THEBAN KINGDOM
[Sidenote: [_ca._ 2250-1635 B.C.]]
The new family (XIIIth Dynasty) which ascended the throne with
Sebekhotep I, seems, from numerous similarities of name, to have been
connected with the previous dynasty; for instance, two of its rulers
took the prename of Amenemhat I, and their surname, generally supposed
to have been derived from the god’s name Sebek, is linked to the name
of the last queen, Sebek-neferu-Ra.
Sebekhotep I appears only once in the monuments, in a measurement
of the height of the Nile at Kummeh in the first year of his reign;
besides him only the sixth of his successors, with the remarkable name
of Amenie-Antef-Amenemhat are on the two altar tablets of the Theban
Amen.
Evidently none of these reigns was of long duration; usurpations and
probably also revolts of the nomarchs shook the kingdom, as at the end
of the VIth dynasty.
The Turin papyrus has an incision at Ranseneb, the eleventh or twelfth
successor of Sebekhotep I. Most of the rulers of the next family (about
fifteen in number) are known to us only by single monuments, and we see
that they still rule the united kingdoms of Usertsen III, from Tanis
to Semneh, albeit in a stormy fashion. Certainly one must not estimate
the accounts of their power and brilliancy too highly, as has been the
case lately. They have left us only short inscriptions and statues,
some of which are masterpieces of work, and albeit the former are of
short reigns and very circumscribed, they are full of significance. The
fact that the sixth king bore the name of Mermesha (_i.e._ General)
shows that he was an usurper. We have two colossal statues of this
ruler, found in Tanis. The tenth king, Neferhotep, was the son of a
private person, brought perhaps by marriage near to the throne, and
we find the name of this ruler here and there on temple buildings at
Karnak and Abydos; and finally the five reigns, of which we know the
duration are only very short; all these are points which cast a clear
light on the condition of Egypt at the time.
The above-named Neferhotep, who reigned eleven years, seems to have
been the most powerful ruler of the period; this great ruler appears
with his family in inscriptions in the district of the First Cataract
(Assuan, Konosso, Sehel) and in the temple of Karnak, also in a
large and very interesting inscription at Abydos, and the museum of
Bologna has a statue of him, as well as of his second son, Sebekhotep
V (Kha-nefer-Ra). The elder, Sehathor, died after a reign of a few
months. There was a colossal granite statue of Sebekhotep V found
at Tanis, another far in the Nubian country on the island of Arqo,
far above the Second Cataract, and the Louvre has two more. There is
frequent mention of him at Karnak. The three last rulers of this house
are of no great importance. Far less is known of the next rulers than
of the above. Their names, probably about a hundred, are divided into
dynasties and fill nearly five divisions of the Turin papyrus. Where
we have dates, there are, on the whole, about twenty-two, more or less
recognisable; they show that the reigns were of short duration, a few
months, one or two years, and, far more rarely, three or four years.
There is only one case of a longer reign, and that was in the case of
the first ruler of the new house, Mer-nefer-Ra Ai, who reigned thirteen
years, eight months, and eighteen days.
It follows that only a very few of these kings are known to us through
the monuments, and the majority only by insignificant memorials. Their
names appear only occasionally in the stone quarries at Hammamat, or
in Karnak and Abydos, or they have statues, which are far inferior to
those of the preceding epoch.
And yet we have from this, as well as from the preceding epoch, a line
of graves and tomb steles in Abydos, as well as numerous rock tombs in
El-Kab (Eleithyia), and probably also the great rock graves of Assiut
(Lycopolis), which attest the position and power of the high priests
of Anubis and the governors of the nome. They are as important for
this period as the graves of Beni-Hasan are for the XIIth Dynasty, but
unfortunately they are in a much worse condition, and much poorer in
historical information.
THE FOREIGN RULE
The facts above mentioned clearly show that the Egypt of this period
was governed under conditions similar to those existing in the Roman
Empire in the third century after Christ.
In fact, as a fuller light is thrown upon Egyptian history, there seems
to have been a whole line of dynasties, evidently local, coexistent
with the chief king at Thebes. If Neferhotep and Sebekhotep V still
reigned over Egypt from Nubia to Tanis, the Delta was lost under their
successors. It is not an improbable theory of Stern’s that Manetho’s
XIVth Dynasty of seventy-six kings from Xoïs (Sakha), in the western
Delta, included Libyan foreign rulers who occupied the Delta.
But the chief invaders of this time were an Asiatic race who made a
violent attack on the power of the Pharaohs at Thebes. They were the
Mentu, or, as they are now called, the Mentu of Satet, that is “the
barbarous Asiatic country.” They were called the Shepherds or Hyksos by
their contemporaries and by Manetho.
Of what race the Hyksos were, is not known. Some points in the account
show that we have here to do with an invasion of Bedouin races, one of
those frequent raids upon cultivated land by nomads of the desert.
Among the latest opinions on the subject is one that ascribes to the
Hyksos a partly Semitic and partly Turanian origin, and accounts for
their settling in Egypt by their being crowded out of western Asia in
the numerous race conflicts of which that part of the world was the
arena. The expelled people could find no resting-place among the wild
hordes of Syria, and moved on to the peaceful and fertile valley of the
Nile.
It is certain that Semitic and Canaanitish, not Arabic, elements
penetrated to Egypt under the Hyksos. The Egyptian language was
subsequently sprinkled with Canaanitish words; the specifically
Canaanitish divinities Baal Astarte (in the feminine form), Anit,
Reshpu, etc., were afterwards extensively worshipped in the eastern
Delta, and in the whole of Egypt. In the next centuries we find
Canaanitish proper names everywhere.
More accurate information on the invasion of the Hyksos is wanting. It
is certain that they settled in Lower Egypt, where they founded a state
which they ruled according to the Egyptian fashion. Their chief seats
were Avaris (Ha-Uar), the border fortress built or enlarged by them,
which is Pelusium, or a place a little to the south; and Tanis, the
powerful capital of the eastern Delta, ornamented by numerous buildings
of the XIIth Dynasty and the real residence of the Hyksos kings.
It seems, moreover, certain that Memphis, and even the Fayum,
remained in their hands; but Upper Egypt was at most conquered only
temporarily. Here ruled, during this epoch, the kings mentioned in the
five divisions of the Turin papyrus, and their successors, perhaps as
tributary vassals, since they occasionally bear the title of Haq, that
is, Prince.
King Meneptah, the son of the great Ramses, speaks of this time as “the
epoch of the kings of Lower Egypt, since this land Qem was in their
(power), and the accursed foe (Aad, the Plague) ruled at the time when
the kings of Upper Egypt (were powerless).”
It is very possible that the Hyksos pillaged Egypt in their conquests,
but Manetho’s assertion that they systematically destroyed the temples
and monuments is contradicted by the following facts. The chief god
they worshipped was Sutekh, or Set with the surname of “the Golden,”
by which the Sun-Baal is understood. They built him a great temple
in Tanis, and his cult was followed in the eastern Delta until later
times. He was also called “Lord of Avaris” at this time.
The Egyptian gods were, however, retained; the kings called themselves
“sons of Ra” and, like the Egyptian rulers, they chiefly begin their
throne names with “Ra.” Egyptian culture was generally adopted by the
foreigners.
The fact that we have a mathematical handbook under the rule of a
Hyksos king, written “according to old copies,” and that we have a
scribe’s palette, presented by the same king to the scribe Atu, shows
that writing was in vogue under their rule. The monuments ascribed to
them, particularly the sphinxes with kings’ heads, found at Tanis, a
group of two men before an altar with fish, the piece of a statue
from Mit-Fares in the Fayum, differ widely from the Egyptian type
in features and apparel, but the work is evidently that of Egyptian
artists, and most carefully executed.
The length of the rule of the Hyksos is as unknown to us as the number
of their kings. Manetho makes two dynasties (Dynasties XV and XVI)
rule, which, according to Josephus, reigned 511 years altogether over
the whole of Egypt, whilst the tables of Africanus give 284 to the XVth
(an evident misquotation of Josephus 260) and 518 to the XVIth. For
the XVIIth Dynasty, according to Africanus, 43 Shepherds and 43 Theban
kings ruled for 151 years; and this is the era of the struggle for
freedom, which ended with the expulsion of the Hyksos. It is impossible
for these figures to be correct, but there is no means of getting at
the historical truth, even approximately. It can be said, however,
that according to the monuments there is no gap of five hundred or
more years between the end of the XIIIth Dynasty and the beginning of
the New Kingdom. The pedigrees of the nomarchs and nobles of El-Kab
(Eileithyia) give names after a few generations, which are undoubtedly
contemporaneous with the XIIIth and XIVth Dynasties.
The monuments of the first rulers of the New Kingdom in Thebes show
the closest connection with the more ancient Theban, and strikingly so
with those of the XIth Dynasty. There is, certainly between the time of
Amenemhat and Sebekhotep and the New Kingdom, no distinctive break in
culture and art similar to that between the Old Kingdom of Memphis and
the XIIth Dynasty.
Manetho’s figures have evidently to be very considerably reduced. Some
of the short-lived rulers of the Egyptian dynasties must be regarded
as contemporaneous with the Hyksos kings and connected directly with
the first rulers of the New Kingdom who undertook the struggle for
emancipation.
If we allow 150 years for the first kings of the XIII Dynasty,--and
dates are inevitable,--about four hundred years would be reckoned from
the end of the XIIth Dynasty to the expulsion of the Hyksos under
Aahmes. Moreover, we also know that a Hyksos king, Nub, reigned four
hundred years before Ramses II.[g]
It will be clear to the reader, from the account just given, that the
period of the XIIIth-XVIIth Dynasties is one of which we have very
little knowledge. Not only is the Turin papyrus here much broken, but
the intrusion of the Hyksos has greatly confused the knowledge we
have indirectly from Manetho through Josephus, Africanus, Eusebius,
and others. Petrie has made a careful study of the subject, and his
conclusions are, in brief, as follows:
1. The Hyksos were not contemporaneous with the 453 years of the
XIIIth Dynasty.
2. There is a period of about 100 years during the XIVth Egyptian
Dynasty during which the Hyksos gradually came into power, and
3. The XVth Dynasty mentioned by Africanus and Eusebius represents
the 260 years of the great Hyksos kings, while Africanus has included
this period again in his XVIth Dynasty of 518 years. On the other hand,
the XVIth Dynasty mentioned by Eusebius is the Egyptian XVIth of 190
years, in which the native rulers persisted, but were ruled and almost
eclipsed by the invaders.
4. The XVIIth Dynasty of both Africanus and Eusebius (it will be
remembered that Josephus dealt only with the Hyksos and neglected the
contemporary Egyptian sovereigns) is a joint dynasty of Hyksos and
Egyptians. The number of its kings is quite unknown, and its period
witnessed the struggle of the two races which culminated in the triumph
of Aahmes I (XVIIIth Dynasty) and the restoration of the old race.
The following table, compiled from Petrie,[h] and keeping his dates,
will show the situation as viewed by this eminent authority:
=========================================================================
Date| | |Date| |
B.C.|Egyptian Dynasty| Years |B.C.| Hyksos Dynasty |Years
----+----------------+---------+----+------------------------------+-----
2565|XIII, (60 kings)| | | |
2112| | 453 |2112|14 years before Hyksos came to|
| | | | power. |
| | |2098| |
| | | | |
|XIV, (76 kings) | 184} | |Unknown period of 100 years} |
| | } | | during which Hyksos } |
| | } | | harried Egyptians. } |
| | } |1998| } |
1928| | }525 | |XV, (6 great Hyksos) 260 } |511
|XVI, (8 kings) | 190} | | years. } |
1738| | } |1738| } |
|XVII, (? kings) | 151} | |XVII, (? kings) 151 years. } |
1587| | } |1587| } |
=========================================================================
THE HYKSOS RULE; THE SEVENTEENTH DYNASTY
[Sidenote: [_ca._ 2000-1635 B.C.]]
It has been most fortunate for our study of antiquity that Josephus’[i]
account of the early history of his people was received by the Greeks
with doubt and denial. In an impassioned answer to his critics the
great Jewish historian has preserved the only account we possess of the
appearance and fortunes of the Hyksos in Egypt, although of course he
is wrong in his theory that these people were Hebrews.
He quotes from Manetho[j]: “There was a king of ours whose name
was Timæus.” (The identity of this king has never been determined
with certainty. It may have been Amenemhat IV (XIIth Dynasty) or Ra
Amenemhat, the third king of the XIIIth.) “Under him it came to pass,
I know not how, that God was averse to us, and there came, after a
surprising manner, men of ignoble birth out of the eastern parts, and
had boldness enough to make an expedition into our country, and with
ease subdued it by force, yet without our hazarding a battle with them.”
It is possible that this campaign of unresisted conquest was
accomplished with the aid of factors hitherto unknown on the African
continent: the war chariot and the horse.[a]
“So when they had gotten those that governed us under their power,
they afterwards burnt down our cities and demolished the temples of
the gods, and used all the inhabitants after a most barbarous manner.
At length they made one of themselves king, whose name was Salatis; he
lived also at Memphis and made both the upper and lower regions pay
tribute, and left garrisons in places that were the most proper for
them. He chiefly aimed to secure the eastern parts, as foreseeing that
the Assyrians, who had then the greatest power, would be desirous of
that kingdom and invade them; and as he found in the Saïte [Sethroite]
nome, a city very proper for his purpose, and which lay upon the
Bubastic channel, called Avaris; this he rebuilt and made very strong
by walls, and by a most numerous garrison of two hundred and forty
thousand armed men to keep it. Thither Salatis came in summer-time,
partly to gather his corn, and pay his soldiers their wages, and
partly to exercise his armed men and thereby to terrify foreigners.
When this man had reigned thirteen years, after him reigned another,
whose name was Beon [or Bnon], for forty-four years, and after him
reigned another, called Apachnas, thirty-six years and seven months;
after him Apophis reigned sixty-one years, and then Ianias fifty years
and one month, after all these reigned Assis forty-nine years and two
months. And these six were the first rulers among them, who were all
along making war with the Egyptians, and were very desirous gradually
to destroy them to the very roots. This whole nation was called
Hyksos, _i.e._ Shepherd kings. These people and their descendants kept
possession of Egypt 511 years.
“And after this the kings of the Thebaïd and of the other parts of
Egypt made an insurrection against the Shepherds, and a terrible and
long war was made between them.
“Under a king whose name was Alisphragmuthosis, the Shepherds were
subdued, and were indeed driven out of other parts of Egypt, but were
shut up in a place that contained ten thousand acres; this place was
named Avaris.
“The Shepherds built a wall around all this place, which was a large
and strong wall, and this in order to keep all their possessions and
their prey within a place of strength, but that Thummosis, the son of
Alisphragmuthosis made an attempt to take them by force and by siege,
with four hundred and eighty thousand men to lie round about them;
but that upon his despair of taking the place by that siege, they
came to an agreement with them, that they should leave Egypt and go
without any harm to be done them, whithersoever they would; and after
this agreement was made, they went away with their whole families and
effects, not fewer in number than two hundred and forty thousand, and
took their journey from Egypt, through the wilderness, for Syria; but
as they were in fear of the Assyrians, who had then the dominion over
Asia, they built a city in that country which is now called Judah, and
that large enough to contain this great number of men, and called it
Hierosolyma (Jerusalem).”[i]
[Illustration: CAPTIVES BEFORE THE PHARAOH]
The modern historian is brought face to face with the fact that for
the period of the XIIIth to the XVIIIth Dynasties there is even less
material and information than for that other “dark age” extending from
the VIIth to the XIth. The main facts of our knowledge concerning the
XIIIth Dynasty have been given in the preceding chapter. The Hyksos
were settled in the land but had not yet come to power. The Pharaohs
were still in full possession of Upper and Lower Egypt.
This cannot have been the case with the XIVth, which Manetho tells
us had its capital at Xoïs (Sakha, a town on the western side of the
central Delta), from which it would seem probable that the invaders
drove the ruling house to the west instead of southward, up the Nile,
perhaps because the broad river and its wide marsh-land were found
to be the best means of defence against a people acquainted hitherto
with only small and insignificant streams. The Turin papyrus gives
eighty-five names for this dynasty; Manetho’s figure is seventy-six,
and of only two of them are there even the slightest remains. For the
184 years this dynasty is said to have ruled, the average length of
reign is therefore only 2½ years. How may we explain this? There seems
to be little doubt that the untrammelled rule of this dynasty lasted
but a few years, perhaps less than twenty. By degrees the Hyksos chiefs
attained influence and power, until, as Professor Petrie says, the
native kings “were merely the puppets of the Hyksos power, the heads
of the native administration which was maintained for taxing purposes;
like the last emperors of Rome, whose reigns also average two years and
a half, or like the Coptic administration of Egypt, maintained during
the supremacy of Islam in Egypt as being the only practical way of
working the country. Later on, when the Hyksos had established a firm
hold on all the land and had a strong rule of their own, these native
viceroys were permitted a longer tenure of power, and formed the XVIth
Dynasty contemporary with the great Hyksos kings.”
[Illustration: COSTUME OF A SOLDIER OF PHARAOH]
The first Hyksos kings seem, from the very beginning, to have
appreciated fully that it was better to exploit the country than to
devastate it, and to this end they retained the temple scribes and
other officials of the native rulers. The influence of the organised
government soon bore effect.
All the pomp and circumstance of Pharaoh’s court were revived; the new
sovereigns had become civilised, and they managed, by adopting the
titles of the Amenemhats and Usertsens, to legitimise themselves as
descendants of Horus and “sons of Ra.” The local religions were not
interfered with, but the chief object of their worship was Baal, “the
lord of all, a cruel and savage warrior,” and from his great similarity
to Set, “the brother and enemy of Osiris,” Baal and Set soon became
identified, and Set was now called Sutekh, “the Great Set.”
The six great Hyksos kings--those mentioned in the Josephus-Manetho
account--may be considered as composing the XVth Dynasty. Their rule
of nearly 260 years marked the zenith of Hyksos power. There was as yet
no sign of rebellion amongst the conquered people.
But when we come to the so-called XVIIth Dynasty the years are no
longer tranquil and authority undisputed. As stated in the preceding
chapter, it is the better plan to regard this dynasty as a joint one
of Shepherds and Egyptians, for its rise is wholly lost to sight under
the Hyksos power. We know that the Hyksos Apophis (Apepa I) ruled the
whole land, for his name is found far in the south; but in the days of
his namesake Apophis (Apepa II), some three hundred years later, Thebes
was practically independent. The compilers of the lists make mention of
unsuccessful attempts at rebellion on the part of the Theban vassals,
for some time before Apepa II, but this ruler had to meet a decisive
revolt under Seqenen-Ra-Taa I, who was _haq_ (prince or regent) over
the South. There is no information as to the cause of the outbreak or
its consequences, but the tale of “Apepa and Seqenen-Ra,” so popular
with readers five hundred years later, asserts that the cause of the
quarrel was a religious one, since Thebes refused to worship no other
gods but Sutekh. Seqenen-Ra would seem to have been the descendant
of a branch of the royal Egyptian line, settled in the far south to
escape the Hyksos oppression, and which, intermarrying with Ethiopian
blood, had become possessed of the characteristics of the dark Berber
race. With the decay of the Hyksos power, these people gradually worked
their way northward from Nubia, and began the re-winning of the land
for the ancient line of Pharaohs. For eighty years after the death of
Assis we have no names of these Berbers, but finally Seqenen-Ra I, in
the days of Apepa II, declared himself “Son of the Sun and King of
the Two Egypts,” and the princes of the Saïd made common cause with
him. Now the native rulers of the XVIIth Dynasty free themselves from
any confusion with the Hyksos, and the strife has become a serious
one. A second Seqenen-Ra, bearing the same family name Taa, followed
the first, and then a third, whose wife Aah-hotep is one of the great
queens of Egyptian history, further celebrated as the mother of the
honoured Nefert-ari. Aah-hotep in all probability was married before,
to an Egyptian and not a Berber husband, and by him was the mother of
an elder Aahmes, who died prematurely, and his three brothers, Kames,
Sekhent-neb-Ra, and a second Aahmes, the Amasis of the Greeks, who
founded the XVIIIth Dynasty.
[Illustration: EGYPTIAN GYMNASTS
(From the monuments)]
Professor Maspero, one of the greatest authorities for this period of
Egyptian history, holds to the belief that Seqenen-Ra-Taa III was the
sole husband of Aah-hotep, and consequently the father of Aahmes, his
brothers, and Nefert-ari. Dr. Petrie, however, one of the most recent
of investigators, says: “Aahmes is always (except once) shown of the
same colour as other Egyptians, while Nefert-ari is almost always
coloured black. And any symbolic reason invented to account for such
colouring applies equally to her brother, who is nevertheless not
black. As Nefert-ari was especially venerated as the ancestress of the
dynasty, we must suppose that she was in the unbroken female line of
descent, in which the royal succession appears to have been reckoned,
and hence her black colour is more likely to have come through her
father. The only conclusion, if these points should be established, is
that the Queen Aah-hotep had two husbands; the one black (the father
of Nefert-ari), the celebrated Seqenen-Ra, who was of Berber type; the
other an Egyptian, the father of Aahmes and his elder brothers.”
There is little known of Aah-hotep’s origin beyond that she was of
pure royal descent, but there are documents which attest to her very
long and eventful life. In the tenth year of Amenhotep I she was still
active and must have been nearly ninety years old; and if a stele found
at Iufi is to be credited, she was alive, and about a hundred, under
her great-grandson Tehutimes I.
Aah-hotep would have had every right to rule as sovereign, but she
willingly gave over the power to her sons. When she died her body was
embalmed with special care, and a beautifully gilded mummy-case was
made for her. Within this coffin was placed the jewelry, presents from
husband and sons, which until recently has been the most famous find
of its kind. Most of the trinkets are for feminine use: bracelets,
solid and hollow gold ankle rings, others of gold beads, lapis lazuli,
cornelian, and green feldspar, a fan with a gold inlaid handle, a
mirror of gilt bronze with handle of ebony, etc.
This wonderful woman in the course of her long life must have witnessed
the whole drama of the restoration. Born when the heel of the Hyksos
was still felt in the land, she closed her eyes, not only with her
country free and her family firmly seated on the throne, but with the
Syrian fatherland of the hated usurpers under heavy tribute, the fruits
of the conquests of her own descendants to the third generation.
Kames and Sekhnet-neb-Ra quickly succeeded Seqenen-Ra III. The struggle
against the Shepherd kings was kept up, and when Aahmes found himself
Pharaoh, nearly the whole of the country was free, and only the
provinces about Ha-Uar (Avaris) remained to the Hyksos; but here they
were prepared to make a desperate stand.[a]