[XIXTH-XXVTH DYNASTIES: _ca._ 1285-655 B.C.]
And the Lord shall smite Egypt; he shall smite and heal it: and
they shall return even to the Lord, and he shall be intreated of
them, and shall heal them.
In that day shall there be a highway out of Egypt to Assyria, and
the Assyrian shall come into Egypt and the Egyptian into Assyria,
and the Egyptians shall serve with the Assyrians.--_Isaiah_ xix.
22, 23.
* * * * *
So shall the king of Assyria lead away the Egyptians prisoners, and
the Ethiopians captives, young and old, naked and barefoot, even
with their buttocks uncovered, to the shame of Egypt.--_Isaiah_ xx.
4.
After the summit, the inevitable decline. The first of world powers
under the Ramessides, Egypt again becomes degenerate, and, after
some five hundred years of reanimation, passes into the power of the
priests, who in turn are supplanted by invading hosts, this time
from Ethiopia. Then the Assyrian conquerors, taking their turn at
world-domination, invade Egypt along the route which Tehutimes and
Ramses had followed of old in invading Assyria. Dismembered Egypt
falls an easy prey to Esarhaddon. It revolts under Asshurbanapal again
and again, and is as often reconquered. But a mixed population of
Ethiopians and Assyrians again gives a certain measure of new vitality
to the old body, and, the destruction of the Assyrian empire having rid
the Egyptians of one of their enemies, they were presently able, under
Psamthek I (Psammetichus), to overthrow the Ethiopian “usurpers,” and
establish once more a “native” dynasty.
For about three-quarters of a century Egypt retained autonomy, and
even struggled back to a shadow of its old-time power, illustrating
once again the vitality that resides in an old stock. Then the final
_coup_ was given by Cambyses the Persian; and the last contest was
over. Taken by themselves, these long-drawn-out struggles of a dying
nation--extending over half a thousand years--are full of interest; but
in the comparative scale they are unimportant. We have seen the great
nation at its flood-tide of power, and we need not dwell at very great
length upon the time of its ebbing fortunes; for other nations, off to
the east, have now taken the place of Egypt as the world-centres, and
are beckoning attention.[a]
MENEPTAH
[Sidenote: [_ca._ 1285-1250 B.C.]]
The disappearance of the old hero, Ramses II, did not produce many
changes in the condition of affairs in Egypt. Meneptah from this
time forth possessed as Pharaoh the power which he had previously
wielded as regent. He was now no longer young. Born somewhere about
the beginning of the reign of Ramses II, he was now sixty, possibly
seventy, years old; thus an old man succeeded another old man at
a moment when Egypt must have needed more than ever an active and
vigorous ruler. The danger to the country did not on this occasion rise
from the side of Asia, for the relations of the Pharaoh with his Kharu
[Phœnician] subjects continued friendly, and, during a famine which
desolated Syria, he sent wheat to his Hittite allies.
The nations, however, to the north and east, in Libya and in the
Mediterranean islands, had for some time past been in a restless
condition, which boded little good to the empires of the Old World. The
Tamahu, some of them tributaries from the XIIth, and others from the
first years of the XVIIIth Dynasty, had always been troublesome, but
never really dangerous neighbours. From time to time it was necessary
to send light troops against them, who, sailing along the coast or
following the caravan routes, would enter their territory, force them
from their retreats, destroy their palm groves, carry off their cattle,
and place garrisons in the principal oases--even in Siwa itself. For
more than a century, however, it would seem that more active and
numerically stronger populations had entered upon the stage. A current
of invasion, having its origin in the region of the Atlas, or possibly
even in Europe, was setting toward the Nile, forcing before it the
scattered tribes of the Sudan.
[Illustration: TEMPLE ON THE ISLAND OF PHILÆ]
Who were these invaders? Were they connected with the race which had
planted its dolmens over the plains of the Maghreb? Whatever the answer
to this question may be, we know that a certain number of Berber
tribes--the Libu and Mashauasha--who had occupied a middle position
between Egypt and the people behind them, and who had only irregular
communications with the Nile Valley, were now pushed to the front and
forced to descend upon it.
The Libu might very well have gained the mastery over the other
inhabitants of the desert at this period, who had become enfeebled
by the frequent defeats which they had sustained at the hands of the
Egyptians. At the moment when Meneptah ascended the throne, their king,
Marajui, son of Did, ruled over immense territory.
A great kingdom had risen capable of disturbing Egyptian control. The
danger was serious. The Hittites, separated from the Nile by the broad
breadth of Phœnicia, could not directly threaten any of the Egyptian
cities: but the Libyans, lords of the desert, were in contact with
the Delta, and could in a few days fall upon any point in the valley
they chose. Meneptah, therefore, hastened to resist the assault of the
Westerners, as his father had formerly done that of the Easterners;
and, strange as it may seem, he found among the troops of his new
enemies some of the adversaries with whom the Egyptians had fought
under the walls of Kadesh sixty years before. The Shardana, Lycians,
and others, having left the coasts of the Delta and the Phœnician
seaports, owing to the vigilant watch kept by the Egyptians over their
waters, had betaken themselves to the Libyan littoral, where they
met with a favourable reception. Whether they had settled in some
places, and formed there those colonies of which a Greek tradition of
a more recent age speaks, we cannot say. They certainly followed the
occupation of mercenary soldiers, and many of them hired out their
services to the native princes, while others were enrolled among the
troops of the king of Kheta or of the Pharaoh himself. Marajui brought
with him Achæans, [Aqauasha], Shardana, Turisha, Shakalisha, and
Lycians in considerable numbers when he resolved to begin the strife.
This was not one of those conventional little wars which aimed at
nothing further than the imposition of the payment of a tribute upon
the conquered, or the conquest of one of their provinces. Marajui
had nothing less in view than the transport of his whole people into
the Nile Valley, to settle permanently there as the Hyksos had done
before him. He set out on his march toward the end of the fourth year
of the Pharaoh’s reign, or the beginning of his fifth, surrounded by
the élite of his troops, “the first choice from among all the soldiers
and all the heroes in each land.” The announcement of their approach
spread terror among the Egyptians. The peace which they enjoyed for
fifty years had cooled their warlike ardour, and the machinery of their
military organisation had become somewhat rusty. The standing army had
almost melted away; the regiments of archers and charioteers were no
longer effective, and the neglected fortresses were not strong enough
to protect the frontier.
As a consequence, the oases of Farafrah and of the Natron lakes fell
into the hands of the enemy at the first attack, and the western
provinces of the Delta became the possession of the invader before any
steps could be taken for their defence. Memphis, which realised the
imminent danger, broke out into open murmurs against the negligent
rulers who had given no heed to the country’s ramparts, and had
allowed the garrisons of its fortresses to dwindle away. Fortunately
Syria remained quiet. The Kheta, in return for the aid afforded them
by Meneptah during the famine, observed a friendly attitude, and the
Pharaoh was thus enabled to withdraw the troops from his Asiatic
provinces. He could with perfect security take the necessary measures
for insuring “Heliopolis, the city of Tmu,” against surprise, “for
arming Memphis, the citadel of Ptah-Tanen, and for restoring all things
which were in disorder; he fortified Pa-Bailos (Bilbeis), in the
neighbourhood of the Shakana canal, on a branch of that of Heliopolis;”
and he rapidly concentrated his forces behind these quickly organised
lines. Marajui, however, continued to advance; in the early months of
the summer he had crossed the Canopic branch of the Nile, and was now
about to encamp not far from the town of Pa-Arshop (Proposis).
The Pharaoh did not stir from his position. Marajui had, in the
meantime, arranged his attack for the 1st of Epiphi, at the rising of
the sun: it did not take place however until the 3rd. “The archers of
his Majesty made havoc of the barbarians for six hours; they were cut
off by the edge of the sword.”
When Marajui saw the carnage, “his heart failed him; he betook
himself to flight as fast as his feet could bear him to save his
life, so successfully that his bow and arrows remained behind him in
his precipitation, as well as everything else he had upon him.” His
treasure, his arms, his wife, together with the cattle which he had
brought with him for his use, became the prey of the conqueror; “he
tore out the feathers from his head-dress, and took flight with such of
those wretched Libyans as escaped the massacre, but the officers who
had the care of his Majesty’s team of horses followed in their steps”
and put most of them to the sword. Marajui succeeded, however, in
escaping in the darkness, and regained his own country without water or
provisions, and almost without escort. The conquering troops returned
to the camp laden with booty, and driving before them asses carrying,
as bloody tokens of victory, quantities of hands and phalli cut from
the dead bodies of the slain. The bodies of six generals and of 6359
Libyan soldiers were found upon the field of battle, together with 222
Shakalisha, 724 Turisha, and some hundreds of Shardana and Aqauasha
[Achæans]; several thousands of prisoners passed in procession before
the Pharaoh, and were distributed among such of his soldiers as had
distinguished themselves.
[Illustration: EGYPTIAN SOLDIER WITH CAPTURED HAND]
Meneptah lived for some time after this memorable year V, and the
number of monuments which belong to this period shows that he reigned
in peace. We can see that he carried out works in the same places as
his father before him--at Tanis as well as Thebes, in Nubia as well
as in the Delta. He worked the sandstone quarries for his building
materials, and continued the custom of celebrating the feasts of the
Inundation, at Silsilis. One at least of the steles which he set up on
the occasion of these feasts is really a chapel, with its architraves
and columns, and still excites the admiration of the traveller on
account both of its form and of its picturesque appearance. The last
years of his life were troubled by the intrigues of princes who aspired
to the throne, and by the ambition of the ministers to whom he was
obliged to delegate his authority. One of the latter, a man of Semite
origin, named Ben-Azana, of Zor-bisana, who had assumed the appellation
of his first patron Ramses-uparna-Ra, appears to have acted for him as
regent. [Chronological reasons demand that we place the Exodus of the
Hebrews from Egypt in the reign of this Pharaoh.]
[Sidenote: [_ca._ 1250-1235 B.C.]]
Meneptah was succeeded, apparently, by one of his sons, called Seti,
after his great-grandfather. Seti II had doubtless reached middle
age at the time of his accession, but his portraits represent him,
nevertheless, with the face and figure of a young man. The expression
in these is gentle, refined, haughty, and somewhat melancholy. It
is the type of Seti I and Ramses II, but enfeebled and, as it were,
saddened. An inscription of his second year attributes to him victories
in Asia, but others of the same period indicate the existence of
disturbances similar to those which had troubled the last years of his
father. Seti died, it would seem, without having time to finish his
tomb. We do not know whether he left any legitimate children, but two
sovereigns succeeded him who were not directly connected with him, but
were probably the grandsons of the Amenmes and the Siptah, whom we meet
with among the children of Ramses.
The first of these was also called Amenmes, and he held sway
for several years over the whole of Egypt, and over its foreign
possessions. The second, who was named Siptah-Meneptah, ascended “the
throne of his father,” thanks to the devotion of his minister, Bi, but
in a greater degree to his marriage with a certain princess called
Ta-user. He maintained himself in this position for at least six years,
during which he made an expedition into Ethiopia, and received in
audience at Thebes messengers from all foreign nations. He kept up so
zealously the appearance of universal dominion that to judge from his
inscriptions he must have been the equal of the most powerful of his
predecessors at Thebes. Egypt, nevertheless, was proceeding at a quick
pace toward its downfall. No sooner had this monarch disappeared than
it began to break up.
As in the case of the Egyptians of the Greek period, we can see only
through a fog what took place after the deaths of Meneptah and Seti II.
We know only for certain that the chiefs of the nomes were in perpetual
strife with each other, and that a foreign power was dominant in the
country as in the time of Apophis. The days of the kingdom would have
been numbered if a deliverer had not promptly made his appearance.
The direct line of Ramses II was extinct, but his innumerable sons by
innumerable concubines had left a posterity out of which some at least
might have the requisite ability and zeal, if not to save the empire,
at least to lengthen its duration, and once more give to Thebes days of
glorious prosperity.
Egypt had set out some five centuries before this for the conquest
of the world, and fortune had at first smiled upon her enterprise.
Tehutimes I, Tehutimes III, and the several Pharaohs bearing the name
of Amenhotep, had marched with their armies from the upper waters of
the Nile to the banks of the Euphrates, and no power had been able to
withstand them. New nations, however, soon rose up to oppose her, and
the Hittites in Asia and the Libyans of the Sudan together curbed her
ambition. Neither the triumphs of Ramses II nor the victory of Meneptah
had been able to restore her prestige, or the lands of which her rivals
had robbed her beyond her ancient frontier. Now her own territory
itself was threatened, and her own well-being was in question; she was
compelled to consider, not how to rule other tribes, great or small,
but how to keep her own possessions intact and independent; in short,
her very existence was at stake.[b]
FROM SETNEKHT TO RAMSES VIII AND MERI-AMEN MERI-TMU
[Sidenote: [_ca._ 1230-1220 B.C.]]
In the midst of the unsettled state of affairs a new dynasty arose
under the leadership of Setnekht, a descendant of Ramses II and
governor of Thebes, who with some difficulty succeeded in quelling
the rebels and subjugating the Syrian Arisu. “He was like the gods
Kheper and Sutekh in his energy, repairing the state of disorder of
the whole country, killing the barbarians who were in the Delta, and
purifying the great realm of Egypt. He was regent of the two countries
on the throne of Tmu (the chief god of Heliopolis) devoting himself
so well to the reorganisation of what had been upset, that each one
found a brother in every one of those from whom they had been so long
separated; and re-establishing the temples and sacrifices so well that
the traditional homage was rendered to the divine cycles.”
His son, Ramses III, who had been his co-regent, was the last of the
great sovereigns of Egypt. His ambition during the thirty-two years
of his reign was to follow in the steps of his namesake, Ramses the
Great, in re-establishing the integrity of the empire abroad, and
the prosperity of the country at home. But in spite of his father’s
successful warfare, the Syrian provinces were lost, and the frontiers
encroached upon. On the east, the Bedouins attacked the fortified
ports of the Delta, and the mining colonies of Sinai; on the west,
the nations of Libya had invaded the Nile. Led by their chiefs Did
(probably the son of Marajui, the contemporary of Meneptah), Mashaknu,
Zamar, and Zautmar, the Tuhennu, the Tamahu, the Kahaka, and their
neighbours, left the sandy plains of the desert and conquered the
Mareotic nome or district of the Saïd, at the mouth of the Nile, as far
as the great arm of the river, in short all the western part of the
Delta from the town of Karbria on the west to the outskirts of Memphis
on the south.
[Sidenote: [_ca._ 1220-1195 B.C.]]
After repulsing the Bedouins, Ramses III turned his arms against
the Libyans in the year V and completely conquered them. “They were
as terrified as goats attacked by a bull, that tramples with his
foot, strikes with his horns, and makes the mountains tremble in his
rush upon those that approach him.” The raids of the barbarians had
exasperated the Egyptians, they gave no quarter; the Libyans fled in
disorder, and some of their tribes, lingering in the Delta, were taken
off and incorporated in the auxiliary army.
[Illustration: MUMMY OF RAMSES III]
Scarcely was this trouble over when Ramses attacked Syria. Whilst Egypt
was being ruined with civil wars, her old enemy, the Kheta, made her
lose the rest of her empire. The nations of Asia Minor, continually
pushed forward by the arrival of new races, had left their homes and
penetrated into the distant regions of Syria and Egypt, attracted by
reports of the riches of those countries; the Danau, the Tyrians,
the Shakalisha, the Teucrians, who had succeeded the Dardani in the
hegemony of the Trojan nations, and the Lycians and the Philistines
joined the confederation. Those on the ships attacked the coasts,
and the others crossed Syria and laid siege to the fortresses of the
isthmus. With forces increased by the people they subjugated on the
way, they penetrated Cilicia, forced the Kati and Kheta [Hittites]
to follow them, picked up the contingent of Carchemish, Arathu, and
Kadesh, and after staying some time in the environs of this town in the
country of the Amorites, pushed straight on to Egypt.
But prompt as this action had been, Ramses was quite prepared to meet
it. After having armed the mouth of the Nile and the places of the
Delta, he started to oppose the enemy. The encounter of the two armies
and the two fleets took place in the year VIII between Raphia and
Pelusium under the walls of the castle, called the Tower of Ramses III.
“The mouth of the river was like a mighty wall of ships and vessels of
every kind, filled from prow to poop with brave armed men. The infantry
soldiers, the picked men of the army of Egypt, were there like roaring
lions on the mountains; the charioteers, chosen from the swiftest of
heroes, were led by every kind of experienced officers; the horses
trembled in every limb and longed to trample nations under foot.
“As for me,” says Ramses, “I was like Mentu, the warlike. I rose
before them and they saw the work of my hands. I, the King Ramses, I
have acted like a hero, who knows his valour and who stretches his arm
over his people in the day of the struggle. Those who have violated
frontiers will no longer cultivate the land, the time for their souls
to pass into eternity is fixed. Those who were upon the shore were
prostrated on the banks of the water, massacred as in a charnel house.
I destroyed their vessels, and their goods were swallowed up by the
waters.”
Prompt as this victory was, it did not conclude the wars of Ramses III.
The Libyans, the old allies of the maritime races, would gladly have
joined against Egypt in the year VIII; and if they did not do so, it
was doubtless because they had not had time to repair their losses.
As soon as they were ready, they reappeared upon the scene, and in
the year XI the chief Kapur and his son Mashashal led the Mashauasha
[Maxyes], the Sabita, the Kaikasha and other less important tribes,
aided by the people of Tyre and Lycia, to the invasion of the Delta.
“For the second time their hearts told them that they would pass their
lives in the nomes of Egypt, and that they would till the valleys and
plains like their own land.”
But the attempt did not meet with success. “Death came upon them in
Egypt for they had run with their own feet to the furnace, which
consumes corruption, to the fire of the bravery of the king which
descends like Baal from the heights of the skies! All his members
are imbued with victorious strength. With his right hand he seizes
multitudes; his left extends like arrows over those before him to
destroy them; his sword-blade is as sharp as that of his father, Mentu.
Kapur, who had come to demand homage, blinded by fear, cast his arms
from him and his troops did likewise: he raised a supplicating cry to
Heaven and his son supported his arms. But lo, there stood by him the
god, who knew his most secret thoughts.
“His Majesty fell upon their heads like a mountain of granite, he
crushed them and watered the earth with their blood, their army and
their soldiers were massacred … they were taken, they were struck,
their arms were tied, and like birds, imprisoned in the hold of a ship,
they were in the power of his Majesty. The king was like Mentu, his
victorious feet trampled on the heads of the enemy; the chiefs who
opposed him were struck and held by the wrists.”
So the Libyans were careful henceforth not to disturb the peace of
Egypt.
The victories of these twelve years healed the wounds of the preceding
period. A voyage of the fleet along the coasts made the ancient Syrian
provinces return to their allegiance and the allied nations of the
Kheta [Hittites], of Carchemish and of the Kati, seeing the subjugation
of the maritime people, soon followed suit. A second maritime
expedition was directed against Arabia.
“I equipped vessels and galleys, armed with numerous sailors and
workmen. The captains of the maritime auxiliary forces were there
with overseers and managers to provision the ships with the countless
products of Egypt. There were tens of thousands of every kind passing
through the great sea of Kati. They arrived at the country of the Punt
without any misadventure, and prepared to load the galleys and vessels
with the products of Tonutir, with all the mysterious wonders of the
country, and with considerable quantities of the perfumes of Punt.
Their sons, the chiefs of the Tonutir came themselves to Egypt bringing
tribute; they came safe and sound to the country of Coptos and landed
in the country with their riches. They brought them in caravans of
asses and men, and embarked them on the river at the port of Coptos.”
Other expeditions to the peninsula of Sinai restored the mining
districts to the possession of Pharaoh. So the Egyptian empire was
reconstituted as it was in the preceding century in the time of Ramses
II. The Shardana, Tyrians, Lycians, and Trojans no longer landed _en
masse_ on the coasts of Africa.
The tide of Asiatic emigration now turned from the valley of the
Nile, which had been its direction for the last one hundred and fifty
years, towards the west, and inundated Italy, at the same time that
the Phœnician colonists arrived there. The Tyrians took the land at
the north of the mouth of the Tiber, the Shardana occupied the large
island, which later was called Sardinia, and soon nothing remained of
them in Egypt but the recollection of their raids and the legendary
recital of their migrations from the shores of the Archipelago to the
coasts of the western Mediterranean.
The Philistines were the only people of the confederation allowed to
settle in Syria, and they took root along the southern coast between
Joppa and the river of Egypt, in the districts hitherto peopled by the
Canaanites, and there they primarily lived under the yoke of Pharaoh.
On the other frontier of the Delta, a Libyan tribe, called Mashauasha,
likewise obtained a concession of territory, and the Mashauasha
soldiers raised in Libya, from that portion of the tribe encamped on
the bank of the Nile, formed a picked corps, the Ma, the leaders of
which played a great part in the internal history of Egypt.
Herodotus relates that on the return of Sesostris (the name given by
that historian to Ramses II) he was nearly killed by treachery. His
brother, to whom he had intrusted the government during his absence,
invited him and his children to a great feast; then he surrounded the
house with wood and gave orders for it to be set alight. The king,
learning this, immediately consulted with his wife, who was with him,
and she advised him to take two of their six children and lay them on
the burning wood, so that they could use their bodies as a bridge by
which to pass over. Sesostris did this, and thus burned two of his
children, and the others were saved with the parents.
The monuments have proved that the Sesostris of this legend of
Herodotus is not Ramses II but his namesake, Ramses III. One of
the brothers of the king mentioned in official documents under the
pseudonym of Pen-ta-ur conspired against him with a large number of
courtiers and ladies of the harem, with the object of killing Pharaoh
and putting his brother in his place. The plot was discovered, the
conspirators cited before the tribunals and condemned, some to death
and others to perpetual imprisonment.
The last years of the reign of Ramses III were passed in peace. He
built at Thebes, in memory of his wars, the great palace of Medinet
Habu; he enlarged Karnak and restored Luxor. The details of these pious
works in the Delta have been preserved in a manuscript at the library
of Heliopolis, the great Harris papyrus.
One sees by this document that Egypt not only regained her foreign
empire, but her commercial and industrial activity. The prosperous days
of Tehutimes III and Ramses II seemed to have returned.
Nevertheless, the decadence was at hand. Egypt, exhausted by four
centuries of perpetual warfare, became more and more incapable of
serious effort. The population decimated by recruiting, inefficiently
replaced by the incessant introduction of foreign elements, had
lost the patience and enthusiasm of early times. The upper classes,
accustomed to comfort and riches, now only cared for the civil
professions, and thought lightly of what was military.
THE SORROWS OF A SOLDIER
“Why do you say that an infantry officer is happier than a scribe?”
asked a scribe of his pupil. “Let me describe to you the lot of an
infantry officer, and the extent of his miseries. He is taken when
quite a child and shut up in a barrack; a cutting sore forms on his
stomach; a wearing pain is in his eye; an open wound is on his two
eyebrows; his head is split and covered with matter. In short, he is
beaten like a roll of papyrus, he is bruised by the pressure of arms.
Come and let me tell you of his marches towards Syria and his campaigns
in distant countries. His bread and his water are on his shoulder like
an ass’s burden, and make the nape of his neck like that of an ass. The
joints of his spine are broken; he drinks putrid water, then returns
to his watch. If he reaches the enemy, he trembles like a goose, for
he has no valour. If he end by returning to Egypt, he is like a tick
consumed by the worm. If he be ill, what alleviation does he have? He
is taken away on an ass; his clothes are carried off by robbers; his
domestics flee from him. That is the foot-soldier, and the cavalry one
is not much better treated. The scribe Amenonopit says to the scribe
Penbisit: ‘When this written communication reaches thee, apply yourself
to becoming a scribe, and you will rise in the world. Come, let me tell
you of the fatiguing duties of a chariot officer:
“‘When he is placed at school by his father and mother, he has to give
away two of his slaves. After he dons his uniform, he goes to choose
his horses in the stable. In the presence of his Majesty, he takes the
good steeds and with shouts of joy wishes to bring them to the town at
a gallop. But the horses will not go without a stick. Then, as he does
not know what fate awaits him, he bequeaths all his goods to his father
and mother. He goes off then with a chariot, but its pole weighs more
than twice the weight of the chariot. So when he wishes to gallop with
this chariot, he is forced to get down and pull it. He does so, falls
on to a reptile, slips into the brushwood, his legs are bitten by the
reptile, his heel is pierced by the bite, his misery is extreme. He
lies on the ground and receives a hundred blows.’”
And these lines were written in the reign of Ramses II to the sound
of songs of triumph, when the populace were full of enthusiasm
for victory, and followed the triumphal chariot of Pharaoh with
acclamations of delight. The first intoxication over, the lower
classes, exhausted by centuries of incessant warfare, crushed under
the weight of tributes and taxes, lapsed into their normal depression,
the literature turned the sufferings of the soldiers into ridicule.
This weariness of success, this disgust for the bloody, dearly bought
victories, explains some obscure points in the history of Egypt, and
casts great light on the rapid fall of the edifice so laboriously
raised by the princes of the XVIIIth and XIXth Dynasties. The Egypt of
Tehutimes III wished for war; the Egypt of Ramses III wished for peace
at any price.
[Sidenote: [_ca._ 1195-945 B.C.]]
This was especially seen to be the case in the course of the XXth
Dynasty. In the year XXXII, Ramses, tired of government, called his
son Ramses IV to share it. He died two years later, and Ramses IV,
after a reign of not more than three or four years, was followed by a
distant relation who was Ramses V. Then came the four sons of Ramses
III: Ramses VI, Ramses VII, Ramses VIII, and Meri-Amen Meri-Tmu, who
succeeded each other rapidly on the throne. These Ramses made some
expeditions here and there, but never great wars. They passed their
days in peace abroad, and peace at home, and if it be true that people
are happy who have no history, Egypt was very happy under their rule.
No more constant struggles, no more distant marches to the mountains
of Cilicia and to the plains of the Upper Nile. Syria continued to pay
tribute for some time; for if Egypt, exhausted by victory, had scarcely
the strength to enforce obedience, Syria was exhausted with defeat, and
had no more strength to revolt. But there was this difference between
the two countries, the one bordered on old age and never revived, while
the other soon rallied from its reverses. The kingdom of Egypt died of
exhaustion in full prosperity.[c]
EGYPT UNDER THE DOMINION OF MERCENARIES
The first sign of weakness in an empire seems to be scented. Egypt,
decaying within, attracted speedy attention from the ambitious, who
turned greedy eyes towards her hoarded wealth.
After the death of Ramses III, Egypt had ceased to exercise any
influence upon Syria. A time of increasing inaction and stagnation
had set in for Egypt, which at last led to Her-Hor, the Theban high
priest, being placed upon the throne. How long Her-Hor ruled over
Egypt, we know not, but we see that his son Piankhi and his grandson
Painet´em I did not have royal power but only succeeded their father as
high priests, and, as such, had uncontrolled power in Thebes and its
environs.
[Sidenote: [_ca._ 1000 B.C.]]
Another ruling house of foreign (Libyan) origin arose at this time in
Tanis. King Se-Amen (according to Manetho, Smendes) was its chief. His
name is seen on the walls of a temple at Tanis, and upon an obelisk of
Heliopolis. He also reigned over Thebes. In the sixteenth year of his
reign he had the mummies of Ramses I, Seti I, and Ramses II examined
and put in another tomb. He evidently overthrew the dominion of the
Theban high priests and forced them to recognise his power.
Thereupon Painet´em I added the title of provost (of Thebes) and
commander-in-chief of the South and North, to his dignity of high
priest, evidently taking, with the Tanitic kings, a position similar
to that of Her-Hor with Ramses XII. Se-Amen’s son, Pasebkhanu (Greek,
Psousennes), seems to have gone a step farther; he overcame the party
of the Theban priests, and gave the office of chief priest to one of
his sons, who, like the grandson of Her-Hor, had, or took, the name
of Painet´em II. A few short reigns, among which were those of the
Amenemapt, also recognised in Thebes, seem to have followed that of
Pasebkhanu I; and then Painet´em ascended the throne.
As “high priest of Amen” at Thebes, and commander-in-chief, he invested
his sons Masaherta and Men-kheper-Ra and then Painet´em (III), the
son of the latter, with power; and Hor-Pasebkhanu II seems to have
succeeded him in Tanis. The rule of the Tanites seems to have lasted
about 120 years (from about 1060 to 943 B.C.).
The kingdom, or at all events the part of the country governed by the
priests of Amen, was certainly not well organised, for we have several
accounts of embezzlements of the properties of the temple of Amen by
the stewards and scribes, of the robbing of graves, etc. The constant
necessity of removing the mummies of the early kings in the west part
of Thebes from their magnificent tombs into secret caves, shows the
weakness of the government.
Moreover, the great state trials were conducted on a very simple
system. The question Guilty or Not Guilty was put to the statue of
Amen, which gave its verdict by the mouth of an oracle.
One sees how perfectly realised is the idea of God’s rule in practice.
Doubtless the theory was at this time evolved in Thebes, later in
Ethiopia, that the king was not only obliged to consult the oracle in
all his acts, but also that he was appointed and could be deposed by
the oracle.
[Illustration: AN EGYPTIAN PRIEST
(From a statue in the Louvre)]
The title of commander-in-chief borne by the Theban priests, seems to
distinguish them as commanders of the soldiers taken from the Egyptian
peasants in contradistinction to the mercenaries which, since Seti I,
composed the chief part of the army. This force was partially furnished
by those domiciled in the country, and partially by fresh supplies from
Libya.
There was thus formed in the country an exclusive set similar to the
Mamelukes, which held the fate of the country in its hand, and which
bequeathed the martial profession from father to son.
These mercenaries were classed together under the name of Ma, derived
from the contraction of the Libyan name Mashauasha. We soon see from
the surnames of the warriors that the Libyans attained ascendance over
them; and although the repeated attacks of the Libyans on Egypt were
successfully repulsed, they were now in fact rulers of the country.
It is noteworthy that the corps of the Shardana, so often mentioned in
more ancient times, is no more spoken of; it must have been absorbed
in the mass of the other soldiers. But the name of Mashau has been
retained, and in Coptic _matoei_ is still a common name for soldier.
One can easily understand that they had frequent opportunities of
gaining wealth and land; and the kings granted them exemption from the
land tax. At their head stood the “dukes of the Ma,” the grand-duke
of the Ma having the chief command. But many of such generalissimi may
have had equal rank.
[Sidenote: [_ca._ 945-800 B.C.]]
Buiu-uaua, a Libyan, came to Egypt about Her-Hor’s time. His family
attained great importance; his fifth descendant, Naromath [Nimrod]
was made “grand-duke of the Ma and Generalissimo” sometime under King
Painet´em. After his death his son Shashanq succeeded him as commander
of the army. An inscription at Abydos shows in what honour he was held,
how the king looked after his father’s grave, questioned the oracle at
Thebes on his behalf, and prayed God for the victory of the general.
It is conceivable that Shashanq ended by trying to gain the crown for
himself, 943 (?) B.C.
By peaceable or violent means he was the successor of Hor-Pasebkhanu
II, the last Tanite, whose daughter Ka-Ra-maat he married to his son
Uasarken, to give support to his dynasty. According to the ruling
custom of the Tanites he made Auputh, another of his sons, high priest
of Amen and commander-in-chief of all the military forces. By the
inscriptions he seems to have been co-regent with his father.
Under the subsequent rulers it remained a custom for one of the king’s
sons to be endowed with the highest priestly power in Thebes, and also
the priesthood of Ptah at Memphis was given to a branch of the royal
family, and the other princes were priests as well as generals.
Moreover, Shashanq seems to have brought forward the descendants of
the Ramses, for we find a Ramses prince occupying a high military post
under him.
The history of the Hebrews shows that the Pharaohs of the XXIst Dynasty
were not in a condition to take part in Asiatic affairs. It was early
in Solomon’s reign that the king of the period, probably Pasebkhanu
II, entered into relations with the Israelitish state, took Gaza for
Solomon and gave it to his daughter as a dowry, and also gave refuge to
political fugitives like Jeroboam and Hadad of Edom to leave a loophole
for intervention.
The separation of Judah from Israel and the subsequent long civil war
offered an opportunity to renew the expeditions into Syria. So Shashanq
repaired to Syria in the fifth year of the reign of Rehoboam. The
scanty remains of the annals of the Hebrew kings only report that he
carried off the treasures of the temple and palace at Jerusalem; that
is, the golden shields which Solomon had hung up there. The long list
of the conquered places upon a wall of the temple of Karnak shows that
Israelitish strongholds were likewise conquered and plundered.
The Pharaoh hardly met with any great resistance anywhere. The
inscription of his victory contains, according to the fashion of the
time, only religious phrases instead of an account of the war. The
expedition was nothing more than a predatory raid for booty; it had
no political consequences, and it is quite a mistake to think it was
undertaken in the interest of Jeroboam against the king of Judah.
The increase of the Egyptian power, consequent on the accession to the
throne of the new dynasty, was of short duration. The successors of
Shashanq I--Uasarken I, Takeleth I, Uasarken II, Shashanq II, Takeleth
II--are only mentioned by name on the monuments. In Thebes they
enlarged the entrance hall of the temple of Amen, begun by Shashanq I.
We find further traces of them at Bubastis, the cradle of the dynasty,
at Memphis, and elsewhere.
[Sidenote: [_ca._ 800-735 B.C.]]
The state gradually fell into complete decay under them. The chief
generals of the Ma, perhaps partially belonging to the branch lines of
the house, founded their own princedoms and shook off the Bubastites.
Shashanq III, the successor of Takeleth II, is the last whose name we
find in Thebes, where a long and very mutilated inscription of the
twenty-ninth year of his reign speaks of gifts which he brought to
Amen. Then it seems as if the southern portion of the country was taken
by the Ethiopians.
Shashanq III reigned fifty-two years altogether. Then came his son
Pamai, who reigned at least two years, and his grandson Shashanq IV,
who reigned at least thirty-seven years, until about 735 B.C. We
only know of these kings by their being mentioned on several of the
monuments to the honour of the Apis bulls which died in their reigns.
So their supremacy must at least have been recognised for a time in
Memphis. But their dominion must have been limited to the province of
Busiris. King Piankhi of Ethiopia mentions in his great inscription a
grand-duke of the Ma, Shashanq of Busiris, and his successor Pamai,
who, presumably, were identical with Shashanq III and Pamai. At the
time of this conqueror, about 775 B.C., we find near them a king
Nimrod of Hermopolis, a ruler Peftotbast of Heracleopolis Magna, who
bore the king’s ring, a king Auputh of the Delta cities Tentremu and
Ta-an, and a king Uasarken (III) of Bubastis. The latter probably
belongs to the Manethan XXIIIrd Dynasty which came from Tanis, and,
according to Africanus, ascended the throne about 823 B.C. Manetho
mentions Petasebast as its founder, and he was succeeded by Uasarken,
who is presumably the aforementioned Uasarken III. Manetho evidently
did not regard the last rulers of the XXIInd Dynasty as legitimate, so,
although they are mentioned, they are not included in the chronology.
By the side of these “kings” there are, moreover, numerous princes
(_Ur_) of the Ma, designated in other cases as lords (_rpa_) or
nomarchs (_ha_). Independent rulers in the few provinces of the Delta,
in Athribis, Mendes, Sebennytus, Saïs, etc., and the provost of
Letopolis bore the title of high priest.
These leading men came mostly from the leaders of the mercenaries, and
their possessions and power constantly tottered. It is very possible
that the single states formed a slack political confederation, and
it is probable that the descendants of the old ruling house were
recognised as the chief feudal lords, while those rulers who usurped
the title of king laid claim to complete independence.
THE ETHIOPIAN CONQUEST
[Sidenote: [_ca._ 1000-775 B.C.]]
At the time when a great conquering kingdom was forming itself on the
upper Tigris and began to lay hold on all sides around it, the power of
the Pharaohs in the Nile Valley completely went down. The kingdom of
Tehutimes III had been divided into a succession of small independent
principalities and was ruled by dynasties which had arisen from the
leaders of the mercenaries. On the other hand, in the upper valley of
the Nile, in the lands first joined to Egypt in the time of Usertsen
III and afterwards for five centuries by Tehutimes I, there arose the
powerful kingdom of Cush (Greek Æthiopia, now Nubia). Its capital
was Napata in the Gebel Barhal, “the sacred mountain,” at the foot
of which Amenhotep III had already founded a great sanctuary to the
Theban Amen. By its long connection with Egypt, Egyptian culture was
completely naturalised in Ethiopia. Egyptian was the official language,
the writing was in hieroglyphics, the styling of the kings was after
that of the Pharaohs. Above all, the Egyptian, and especially the
Theban, religion of Amen gained complete dominion in Cush. In the name
of Amen the kings went to battle; they were fully dependent on his
instructions and oracles; they carefully observed the laws on outer
cleanliness and on the food forbidden by religion. What had remained
theory in Egypt, became practice in Ethiopia; a long inscription
describes to us how the god himself immediately elects the king through
his oracle, and strikingly confirms the accounts of the Greeks. Whence
it followed that the priests could command the king in the name of the
god to put an end to his life, a prerogative which Ergamenes abolished
in the third century B.C. By these circumstances it can be seen why the
Egyptian priests described Ethiopia to the Greeks as the Promised Land.
From these circumstances it can also be supposed that the rise of the
kingdom of Napata was connected with the usurpation of the priests of
the Theban Amen at the time of the XXIst Dynasty, an assumption which
is confirmed by many of the kings having borne the name of Piankhi,
prominent in the family of Her-Hor. After that time there was no
question of the rule of the Pharaohs over Cush; so perhaps relatives of
the priests of Amen may have founded the Ethiopian town _circa_ 1000
B.C.
[Illustration: HEAD OF UASARKEN III
(Now in the British Museum)]
When the power of the XXIInd Dynasty became lamed, the kings of Napata
could extend their dominion to Upper Egypt. Probably about the end
of the reign of Shashanq III, 800 B.C., Thebes may have fallen into
their hands; in the first half of the eighth century the valley of the
Nile to the vicinity of Hermopolis was under the rule of the Ethiopian
king Piankhi. In his time the Prince Tefnekht of Saïs succeeded in
subjecting the west part of the Delta in Lower Egypt, in winning
Memphis, and in making all the numerous princes, kings, and small lords
of the middle and east Delta, “all princes of Lower Egypt who wear
the feather” (the sign of the warrior casts of the Ma), acknowledge
his supremacy. He did not adopt the title of king, probably because
he wished to violate as little as possible the relations of rank
which existed amongst the mercenary princes. From Memphis he went
south, subjected Crocodilopolis, Oxyrhynchus and others, besieged
Heracleopolis, the royal residence of Peftotbast, and compelled King
Nimrod of Hermopolis to submit. Then Piankhi stepped forward, called to
help by the adversaries of Tefnekht. His army conquered a hostile fleet
on the Nile, drove Tefnekht back at Heracleopolis, besieged Nimrod in
Hermopolis, and seized a number of small places. Then the king himself
appeared at the seat of war; he compelled Nimrod to capitulate, and
received rich presents from him. After the fall of Hermopolis, all
the small places subjected themselves, only Memphis had to be taken
by storm, after a plan of Tefnekht to relieve it had failed. Then
Piankhi advanced to the Delta; small princes hastened together before
him to swear allegiance and bring him rich gifts. Thus Tefnekht was no
longer strong enough to assert his position; Piankhi may also have had
misgivings as to waging a dangerous war in the west Delta. He contented
himself with Tefnekht’s taking the oath of allegiance in the presence
of the ambassador of the Ethiopian king and sending him presents after
being promised safety.
[Sidenote: [_ca._ 775-704 B.C.]]
The campaigns of Piankhi, which fell in the year XXI of his reign
(_circa_ 775 B.C.), do not seem to have resulted in a lasting
subjection of Egypt. If the vassal king Uasarken (III) of Bubastis
was the second ruler of the XXIIIrd Dynasty, the Ethiopians must by
that time have been expelled from Upper Egypt; for we meet with the
third ruler of this house, Psamus, in two small inscriptions in the
temple of Karnak. In the monuments Manetho lets him be succeeded by
an unauthenticated king, Zet. Then follows the XXIVth Dynasty, which,
according to him, only consists of the Saïte Bakenranf (probably
733-729 B.C.), who, according to the reliable Greek reports, was a son
of Tnephachthus, that is to say, of Tefnekht, Piankhi’s adversary. In
tradition he is praised as a wise prince and great legislator; from
the monuments we only know that in his sixth year, an Apis was placed
in the same sepulchral chamber with one that died under Shashanq IV;
according to this he probably succeeded the last title-bearing king
of the XXIInd Dynasty, but must already have reigned for some time
previously in Saïs.
In Ethiopia, Piankhi (it is not known whether after one or more
interregnums) was followed by Kashta, who was married to Shepenapet,
a daughter of King Uasarken, probably Uasarken III of Bubastis.
His son Shabak repeated the expedition to Egypt, conquered
Bakenranf,--according to Manetho he burnt him alive,--and compelled the
local dynasties to acknowledge his supremacy (728 B.C.). He took the
title of a king of Egypt, but as real rulers of the land he established
his sister Ameniritis and her husband, Piankhi (II?). We often meet
with Shabak and his sister in the temples of Thebes, likewise in
Hammamat and elsewhere; an exquisite alabaster statue of the queen has
been found in Karnak. Greek tradition asserts that the Ethiopian king
reigned very mildly over Egypt, executions never took place, criminals
were made to build canals and dams. But a fixed and uniform dominion
was never practised by the Ethiopians over Egypt. As in the time of
Piankhi, the local dynasties remained in possession of their dominions,
and amongst them in all probability also the successors of Tefnekht and
Bakenranf in Saïs, the ancestors of the XXVIth Dynasty.
Although in the year 725 (II Kings xvii. 4) and in 720 (Annals of
Sargon), Shabak is called “King of Egypt,” yet in 715 Sargon speaks of
the tribute of “Pharaoh, King of Egypt”; in 711 he mentions the same
together with the King of Melukhkha (i.e. Cush), and in Sennacherib’s
time the “Kings of Egypt” appear together with “the troops of the King
of Melukhkha.”
Numerous battles for the possession of the Lower Nile occupied the
reigns of Shabak and his successors; it made it impossible for them to
take part in the affairs of Asia, no matter how much they desired done.
[Sidenote: [_ca._ 704-672 B.C.]]
Shabak of Cush and Egypt was succeeded in the year 716 (?) by Shabatakh
who, according to Manetho, was his son, and of whom only scattered
monuments have been preserved in Karnak and Memphis. But in the year
704 he was succeeded by a younger, more vigorous prince, Tirhaqa. The
latter appears not to have belonged to the royal family, but to have
acquired the throne by marriage with the wife of Shabak and to have
seized the government in the name of the latter’s son, Tanut-Amen; in
Karnak the two conjointly raised a temple to Osiris Ptah, and are here
both called kings in exactly the same terms. Tirhaqa was twenty years
old when he obtained the double crown. The numerous princes of the
Egyptian cities acknowledged his supremacy, and he was able to turn
his attention to renewing Shabak’s interference in Syria. A number
of Syrian princes were ready to join the liberator from the Assyrian
yoke, especially Elulæus of Tyre, Hezekiah of Judah, who, in the year
714, had succeeded Ahaz, and Zidqa of Askalon. King Padi of Ekron
remained faithful to the Assyrians, but his magnates revolted against
him and delivered him up to Hezekiah. It might have been hoped that
Sennacherib would be detained for a long time in Babylonia. We learn
that Merodach-baladan had opened negotiations with Hezekiah, so that a
great coalition against Assyria seems to have been planned.
Yet this time also the Assyrians were able to forestall their
adversaries. Before their preparations were completed, in the beginning
of 701, Sennacherib appeared in Syria and turned first against Elulæus.
Sidon, Sarepta, Akko, and the other towns subject to him submitted,
and he himself fled to Cyprus. From Phœnicia, Sennacherib marched to
Philistia, having received in every way the homage of those vassals who
had remained loyal. Zidqa of Askalon was captured, his towns reduced,
and a new king set up. Then, the Great King further informs us, he
marched against Ekron, when the army of the King of Cush (Assyrian,
Melukhkha) and the princes of Egypt came to its assistance. At Altaku
he defeated this force, took that city and Timnath, reduced Ekron where
he punished the instigator of the rebellion, and restored King Padi,
who had been taken as a prisoner to Jerusalem.
Trusting in Pharaoh and in Jehovah, Hezekiah persisted in resisting.
Meantime the army of Tirhaqa, King of Cush, marched up. Sennacherib
advanced against him and again demanded the surrender of Jerusalem. But
Hezekiah, trusting in Jehovah’s word as announced to him by the prophet
Isaiah, once more refused. In the night the Mal’ak-Yahveh (the angel
of the Lord) smites the Assyrian army, so that 185,000 men die, and
Sennacherib had to return to Nineveh.
[Sidenote: [_ca._ 672-663 B.C.]]
The Egyptians gave Herodotus a similar account: after the Ethiopian
Sabaco [Shabak], a former priest of Ptah, Sethos, who had been at
enmity with the warrior caste, ruled over Egypt. Now when Sennacherib,
“King of the Arabians and Assyrians,” made an expedition against Egypt,
the warriors refused to fight, and Sethos was in great distress. But
the gods sent field-mice against the hostile army which was encamped at
Pelusium, and the mice gnawed the bows and all the leather trappings of
the enemy, so that on the following day they could easily be defeated
by the Egyptian artisans and merchants that had been impressed into
service.
We can never be completely clear as to what did happen, especially
so long as the position of the places mentioned is not positively
ascertained. This much is established, that although Sennacherib may
have exaggerated the importance of the victory at Altaku, he did not
suffer defeat at the hands of the Egyptians. For in that case Tirhaqa
would have followed up his victory--while, as a matter of fact, he
did not again interfere in Syria for the space of thirty years--and
the Egyptians would have spoken of a victory and not of a miracle. It
is much more likely that it was some natural visitation, presumably
a pestilence, which compelled Sennacherib to give up the invasion
of Egypt and raise the siege of Jerusalem. There was, however, no
further hope of aid from Egypt, so Hezekiah made his peace with the
Great King and sent to his capital the heavy contribution which could,
only with great difficulty, be raised by the little city. In spite of
the half compulsory retreat, the supremacy over Syria was secured;
during the next decades none of the petty states ventured to dream of
a revolt from the Assyrian. It was not till towards the end of his
reign, after 672 B.C., that Esarhaddon undertook a great campaign.
Again had rebellion broken out in Syria in reliance on Ethiopian
support: King Baal of Tyre had renounced his allegiance. Esarhaddon
determined to find some means of putting an end to the ever-recurring
danger. Tyre was blockaded anew, but the main army marched straight
on Egypt. The prince of the desert Arabs furnished camels, and the
toilsome march from Raphia to Pelusium was successfully accomplished.
We do not know whether Tirhaqa was in a position to offer resistance;
at all events Memphis was taken, and the Assyrian army penetrated as
far as Thebes. Tirhaqa had to retreat to Ethiopia, and the numerous
provincial princes of Egypt submitted, and were confirmed in possession
as tributary vassals. No less than twenty of them are mentioned as
being summoned to Thebes from the Delta and the towns of Upper Egypt.
The most powerful amongst them was Neku, the lord of Saïs and Memphis
(according to Manetho 671-664 B.C.), whose forefathers, Stephinates
and Nechepsos, had already risen in power in Saïs, and were probably
the direct successors of Tefnekht and Bocchoris (Bakenranf). At the
bidding of the Assyrian king, Neku had to change the name of Saïs into
Karbilmatati, “garden of the lord of the countries”; in the same way
his son Psamthek received the Assyrian name of Nabu-shezib-anni. From
this time Esarhaddon styles himself “King of the Kings of Misir (Lower
Egypt), Patoris (Upper Egypt), and Cush.” On the 12th of Airu (April),
668 B.C., Esarhaddon laid down the government. He set his illegitimate
son Shamash-shum-ukin over the Babylonian provinces as vice-king, while
Asshurbanapal inherited the crown of the Assyrian empire. The change of
rulers encouraged Tirhaqa to attempt to win back Egypt. Mentu-em-ha,
the governor of Thebes, hailed him as a deliverer. Memphis was also
won, and in Thebes restoration works were even taken in hand. But the
success was not a lasting one; an army despatched by Asshurbanapal beat
the Ethiopian troops, and Tirhaqa had to fly to Thebes but did not
manage to hold it (about 667 B.C.). It is true that several Egyptian
princes, Neku, Pakruru of Pisept, and Sharludari of Tanis (Pelusium),
now attempted to overthrow the rule of the foreigner and bring
back Tirhaqa: but the Assyrian generals anticipated them; Neku and
Sharludari were taken and the rebel towns severely punished. In Neku,
Asshurbanapal hoped to be able to win a firm support for his rule,
and presumably on information of warlike preparations in Ethiopia, he
released him from his captivity with rich presents and reinstated him
in his principality.
[Sidenote: [663-655 B.C.]]
In the year 664-663 Tirhaqa died; he was succeeded by his stepson
Tanut-Amen, who was already advanced in years. A dream which promised
him the double crown, induced him, so he states in an inscription,
to lead his army from Napata against Egypt in the very beginning of
his reign. At Thebes he encountered no resistance; before Memphis
the enemy’s troops were beaten and the town taken. In one of these
engagements Neku, the most powerful of the Assyrian vassals, probably
met his death: Herodotus relates that he was slain by the Ethiopian
king, and according to Manetho he died 663 B.C. On the other hand, the
attempt to conquer the towns of the Delta was unsuccessful: but some
of the vassals, including Pakruru of Pisept, presented themselves at
the court at Memphis. Tanut-Amen’s inscription tells only of the long
theological discourses which the king held before them, and how, after
having been well entertained, each returned to his own town. Silence
is preserved as to the sequel; from Asshurbanapal’s annals we learn
that the feeble prince, who was completely under the dominion of
theological fancies, evacuated the country before the Assyrian army,
without striking a blow, and returned to his own land. This terminated
the Ethiopian rule for all time (about 662 B.C.): Thebes fell again
into the hands of the Assyrians and rich booty was carried to Nineveh.
The memory of the retreat of the Ethiopians was preserved down to a
late period; the priests told Herodotus that Shabak, the representative
of the Ethiopian rule, had voluntarily evacuated Egypt after a reign of
fifty years, in consequence of a dream. It is true that they omitted to
mention that as a result of this the country fell into the hands of the
Assyrians.
The following table will assist the reader in straightening out the
dynasties of this much confused period.
TABLE OF CONTEMPORANEOUS DYNASTIES
-----+------------------+-----------------+---------------+-------------
Dates| XXIInd Dynasty | XXIIIrd Dynasty |XXIVth Dynasty |XXVth Dynasty
-----+------------------+-----------------+---------------+-------------
B.C. |Bubastites |Tanites |Saïtes |Ethiopians
|(From monuments |(From Manetho) | |
|at Memphis) | | |
| | | |
800 |1. Shashanq III | | |
|(52 years) | | |
|(Perhaps S-- of | | |
|Busiris, of | | |
|Piankhi Stele) |Petasebast | |
| | | |
775 |2. Pamai (at least|Uasarken III |Tefnekht |Piankhi I
|2 years) |(King of Bubastis|(Prince of Saïs|
|(Perhaps P-- of |according to |according to |
|Busiris, of |Piankhi Stele) |Piankhi Stele) |
|Piankhi Stele) | | |
| | | |
|3. Shashanq IV (at|Psamus | |
|least 37 years) |(According to | |Kashta
|(About 771-735). |Theban monuments)| |(Husband of
| | |4. Bocchoris |Shepenapet,
750 |Predecessor of |Zet |(of Manetho, or|daughter of
|Bocchoris |(Total duration |Bakenranf, from|King Uasarken
|(Bakenranf) |of this dynasty |the Memphis |[III?])
| |according to |monuments) |
| |Africanus, |ruled, |5. Shabak
| |89 years. |according |(728-717
| |823-735 B.C.) |to Africanus, 6|[Manetho];
725 | | |years, 734-726;|brother of
| | |according |Ameniritis,
| | |to Eusebius, |wife of
| | |44 years, |Piankhi II)
| | |772-729 [?]) |
| | | |6. Shabatakh
700 |XXVIth Dynasty. | | |(716-705
| | | |[Manetho])
|Saïtes | | |
|(Figures according| | |7. Tirhaqa
|to Manetho) | | |(704-664;
| | | |only to 685
| | | |[Manetho])
| | | |
675 |Stephinates, | | |Tanut-Amen
|684-687 | | |(664-663;
|Nechepsos, 677-672| | |reigned
|Neku I, 671-664 | | |12 years
| | | |[Manetho])
|8. Psamthek I, | | |
|663-610 (Psamthek | | |
|I became king | | |
|of all Egypt | | |
|about 655) | | |
-----+------------------+-----------------+---------------+-------------
The numbers 1, 2, etc., show the direct succession of the recognised
legitimate Pharaohs.[d]