[DYNASTIES XXVI-XXXI: 655-332 B.C.]
And the sword shall come upon Egypt, and great pain shall be in
Ethiopia, when the slain shall fall in Egypt, and they shall take
away her multitude, and her foundations shall be broken down. They
also that uphold Egypt shall fall; and the pride of her power shall
come down: from the tower of Syene shall they fall in it by the
sword, saith the Lord God. And they shall be desolate in the midst
of the countries that are desolate, and her cities shall be in the
midst of the cities that are wasted.--_Ezekiel_ XXX. 4, 6, 7.
A great nation in its time of decline does not sink into utter
insignificance without making spasmodic efforts at recuperation. Such
efforts were made by Egypt in the XXVIth Dynasty, when there sat upon
the throne of Egypt several monarchs who recalled something of the
days of yore. Notable among these were Psamthek I (Psammetichus) and
Aahmes II, under whose beneficent rule Egypt was voluntarily opened
up to commerce with the outside world. These rulers built no lasting
monuments comparable to the Pyramids or the Labyrinth, and attempted
no conquests like those of Tehutimes and Ramses. But their reigns were
marked by a period of national prosperity such as had not been known in
Egypt for several centuries; and they were also notable because at this
time the first recorded observations that have come down to us were
made by foreigners regarding Egyptian history and the Egyptian people.
We shall, therefore, consider some details of this dynasty before
passing on to a brief consideration of the reign of the Persians in
Egypt and an even briefer analysis of the remaining dynasties. In this
sweeping view more than three hundred years are covered. During this
period the centres of world-historic influence are shifted from Assyria
to Babylonia; from Babylonia to Persia; and thence to Greece; but never
again does Egypt occupy her old position. Her reminiscent glory only
serves to make her the more coveted as a conqueror’s prize. But first
there is the bright spot of Psamthek’s reign.[a]
PSAMTHEK
[Sidenote: [655-612 B.C.]]
It was no longer the time of Tehutimes and Ramses. It was the turn of
Egypt to be enslaved, now by the “vile race of the Cushites,” now by
the “vile race of the Kheta.” The Egyptian monuments, which register
only victories, would not have sufficed to make known to us the history
of this troubled epoch; it is only since the Assyrian inscriptions have
been deciphered that we have been able to learn of the double conquest
of Egypt by Kings Esarhaddon and Asshurbanapal.
The princes of the Delta received investiture from these Asiatic
conquerors, for whom they had perhaps less aversion than for the
Ethiopian kings. Twice, however, was Egypt reconquered by Tirhaqa and
by his successor, Tanut-Amen. But all these successive invasions had
broken the bond which attached the nomes to the national unity; all
that remained was an Egypt parcelled out like feudal Europe after the
invasion of the Northmen.
The princes of the South continued to recognise the authority of the
Ethiopian Dynasty; those of the Delta, to the number of twelve, formed
a sort of federation which the Greek authors call the Dodecarchy. But
at the end of fifteen years, the prince of Saïs, Psamthek, became an
object of suspicion to his colleagues. Herodotus tells us the occasion.
“At the very commencement of their reign, an oracle had foretold to
them that he amongst them who should make libations in the temple
of Hephaistos (Ptah) with a brazen cup, would have the empire of
all Egypt. Some time later, as they were on the point of making
libations, after having offered sacrifices in the temple, the high
priest presented them with cups of gold; but he made a mistake in the
number, and instead of twelve cups, he only brought eleven for the
twelve kings. Then Psammetichus [Psamthek], who happened to be in the
first rank, took his helmet, which was of bronze, and used it for the
libations. The other kings, reflecting on his action and on the oracle,
and recognising that he had not acted from premeditated design, thought
that it would be unjust to put him to death; but they despoiled him
of the greater part of his power, and relegated him to the marshes,
forbidding him to leave them or to keep up any correspondence with the
rest of Egypt.
“Smarting under this outrage, and resolved to avenge himself on the
authors of his exile, he sent to Buto to consult the oracle of Leto,
the most veracious of the Egyptian oracles. Answer was returned that
he would be avenged by men of bronze, coming from the sea. At first
he could not persuade himself that men of bronze could come to his
aid; but a short time after, some Ionian and Carian pirates, being
obliged to put into Egypt, came on shore clothed in bronze armour. An
Egyptian ran to carry the news to Psammetichus, and as this Egyptian
had never seen men armed in such a manner, he told them that men of
bronze, coming from the sea, were pillaging the countryside. The king,
perceiving that the oracle was accomplished, made alliance with the
Ionians and Carians, and engaged them by large promises to take his
part. With these auxiliary troops and the Egyptians who had remained
faithful to him, he dethroned the eleven kings.”
Upper Egypt submitted without resistance, and the names of the
Ethiopian kings were struck off the Theban monuments. They seem,
however, to have retained some partisans, for Psamthek espoused a wife
of their race, the means employed by each dynasty to legitimatise its
usurpation. He recompensed his auxiliaries by giving them territories
near the Pelusiac mouth of the Nile, and made them his guard of honour.
This was not an innovation; for a long time the kings of Egypt had been
wont to take foreigners into their pay, and there is no doubt that
there were in the native army many soldiers of Libyan or Ethiopian
race; but they were annoyed at the favour shown the newcomers, and
emigrated into Ethiopia to the number of two hundred thousand men.
Psamthek tried to detain them by appealing to their patriotism, but
they struck their lances on their shields and answered that so long as
they had arms they would find their own country wherever they chose to
establish themselves.
This wholesale desertion was a benefit to Egypt, which it thus relieved
from military rule. Conquests lead to inevitable reprisals. Armies,
like all privileged classes, end by becoming corrupted, and then,
useless in the face of the enemy, they become a heavy burden and
an instrument of civil war. Psamthek had no reason to regret these
soldiers, who had been unable to repel foreign invasion.
The labours of peace repaired the recent disasters; the temples were
rebuilt; the arts shone with a new brilliancy; the whole activity
of the nation was turned towards commerce and industry. Psamthek
inaugurated a new policy by opening the country to foreigners.
“He received those who visited Egypt with hospitality,” says Diodorus;
“he was the first of the Egyptian kings to open markets to other
nations, and to give great security to navigators.”
The Greeks, who had helped to conquer the throne, were particularly
favoured. Encouraged by the example of the Ionian and Carian
adventurers whose services he had paid so well, some Milesian colonists
anchored thirty ships at the entrance of the Bolbitinic mouth of
the Nile, and there founded a fortified trading establishment. To
facilitate commercial relations for the future, Psamthek confided
some Egyptian children to the Greeks established in Egypt, that they
might learn Greek, and thus arose those interpreters who formed a
distinct class in the towns of the Delta. It even appears, according
to Diodorus, that Psamthek had his own children taught Greek. The
intercourse of the Greeks with the Egyptians became from that time so
constant that from the reign of Psammetichus, says Herodotus, we know
with certainty all that passed in that country.
The accession of Psamthek and the XXVIth Dynasty is fixed at the year
655 before the Christian era, and it is only from this period that we
have certain dates for the history of Egypt. The complete chronology
of the XXVIth Dynasty has been recovered in the monuments of the tomb
of Apis, discovered by Mariette Bey, in the excavation of the Serapeum
of Memphis, and now in the Louvre. This chronology differs somewhat
sensibly from that which it had been possible to draw up from Manetho’s
lists, so that we are, says De Rougé, obliged to distrust figures
preserved in those lists, which a few years ago were regarded as an
infallible criterion. An attempt has been made to restore to them the
credit they had lost as an instrument of chronology, by attaching to
them an undisputed synchronism. According to the calculation of M.
Biot, a rising of the star Sothis (Sirius), indicated at Thebes under
Ramses III, towards the commencement of the XXth Dynasty, would fall at
the beginning of the thirteenth century B.C.
Psamthek had his reign dated from the death of Tirhaqa (664), without
taking the Dodecarchy into account, and this is doubtless the reason
why Herodotus gives him fifty-four years’ reign, although in reality
he reigned only forty-four. He had built the southern pylon of the
temple of Ptah at Memphis, and a peristyle court where the Apis bull
was fed. The walls were covered with bas-reliefs, and colossi, twelve
ells high, took the place of columns; these were probably caryatides
like those which are seen at Thebes and Abu Simbel. These structures
have disappeared, like all the other buildings of Memphis. The only
monuments of the reign of Psamthek which still exist are the twelve
columns, twenty-one metres (about sixty-nine feet) high, whose ruins
are seen in the first court of the temple of Karnak, where they formed
a double rank. One only of these columns is still upright. It is not
known whether they were raised to form the centre avenue of a hypostyle
hall like that of Seti, or whether they were intended to bear symbolic
images which served the Egyptians as military ensigns, such as the ram,
the ibis, the sparrow-hawk, the jackal, etc.
Psamthek and his successors, though not residing at Thebes, restored
its monuments and repaired the disasters of the Assyrian invasion. In
the Louvre and the British Museum there are numerous sculptures of the
Saïtic epoch, which is one of the grand epochs of Egyptian art.
In the reign of Psamthek, the Scythians, driving the Cimmerians before
them, had invaded Asia and were threatening Egypt. Psamthek preferred
to buy their retreat by a money payment, rather than expose the country
to the danger of invasion, and the barbarians retraced their steps
northward. But in order to protect Egypt on the northeast, it was
necessary to have a foothold in Palestine, and Psamthek therefore laid
siege to the town of Ashdod.
[Illustration: EGYPTIAN BIRDS
(From the monuments)]
[Sidenote: [612-594 B.C.]]
This siege, says Herodotus, lasted twenty-nine years, but perhaps,
as M. Maspero thinks, Herodotus’ interpreters meant to say that the
taking of Ashdod took place in the twenty-ninth year of Psamthek’s
reign. His son, Neku II, who succeeded him in 612, desiring to profit
by the changes which had supervened in Asia, and to re-establish the
dominion of Egypt, gave battle to the Jews and Syrians near Megiddo.
Josiah, king of Judah, was killed, his son Jehoahaz, whom the Jews had
proclaimed king, was dethroned by Neku, who put in his place Eliakim,
another son of Josiah, and remained master of all Syria. But he soon
found a redoubtable adversary in front of him, for the kingdom of
Babylon had succeeded to that of Nineveh. Beaten by Nebuchadrezzar at
Carchemish on the banks of the Euphrates, Neku lost all his conquests
and returned precipitately to Egypt.
His name remains connected with an enterprise more important than his
military expeditions. Two kings of the XIXth Dynasty, Seti I and Ramses
II, had had a canal of communication dug between the eastern branch of
the Nile and the Red Sea. But whether it was that this canal had not
been finished, or that it was blocked up by the sands, Neku desired
to restore it. The canal began a little above Bubastis. According to
Herodotus, a hundred and twenty thousand workmen perished in digging
it, and Neku had it discontinued in consequence of an oracle, which
warned him that he was labouring for the barbarians; an oracle which
was accomplished, for the canal was finished by the Persians. In our
own day, when it was desired to open direct communication between the
Red Sea and the Mediterranean, the operations were begun with the
restoration of Neku’s canal, to supply fresh water for the workmen who
were digging the maritime canal.
After abandoning his project, Neku conceived another which might have
had still more important consequences. He sent some Phœnician sailors
to make a voyage of circumnavigation round Africa.[b]
“The Phœnicians,” says Herodotus,[e] “having embarked on the Erythræan
Sea, sailed into the Southern Sea. As the autumn was come they landed
on that part of Libya at which they found themselves, and sowed corn.
They then awaited the time of the harvest, and having gathered it again
took to the sea. Having voyaged thus for two years, in the third year
they doubled the pillars of Heracles and, returning to Egypt, related
what I do not believe, but which others may perhaps credit; that whilst
sailing round Libya they had the sun on their right.”
Psamthek was well known to classic writers under the name Psammetichus.
The old historian Diodorus picturesquely tells of his accession. We
prefer to quote the old translation of Booth, 1700.
THE GOOD KING SABACH [SHABAK] AND PSAMMETICHUS
[Sidenote: [728-612 B.C.]]
“After a long time, one Sabach an Ethiopian came to the Throne, going
beyond all his Predecessors in his Worship of the Gods, and kindness
to his Subjects. Any Man may judge and have a clear Evidence of his
gentle Disposition in this, that when the Laws pronounced the severest
Judgment (I mean Sentence of Death) he chang’d the Punishment, and
made an Edict that the Condemn’d Persons should be kept to work in
the Towns in Chains, by whose Labour he rais’d many Mounts, and made
many Commodious Canals; conceiving by this means he should not only
moderate the severity of the Punishment, but instead of that which was
unprofitable, advance the publick Good, by the Service and Labours of
the Condemn’d.
“A Man may likewise judge of his extraordinary Piety from his Dream,
and his Abdication of the Government; for the Tutelar God of Thebes,
seem’d to speak to him in his Sleep, and told him that he could not
long reign happily and prosperously in Egypt, except he cut all the
Priests in Pieces, when he pass’d through the midst of them with his
Guards and Servants; which Advice being often repeated, he at length
sent for the Priests from all parts, and told them that if he staid in
Egypt any longer, he found that he should displease God, who never at
any time before by Dreams or Visions commanded any such thing. And that
he would rather be gone and lose his Life, being pure and innocent,
than displease God, or enjoy the Crown of Egypt, by staining his Life
with the horrid Murder of the Innocent.
“And so at length giving up the Kingdom into the Hands of the People,
he return’d into Ethiopia. Upon this there was an Anarchy for the space
of Two Years; but the People falling into Tumults and intestine Broyls
and Slaughters one of another, Twelve of the chief Nobility of the
Kingdom joyn’d in a Solemn Oath, and then calling a Senate at Memphis,
and making some Laws for the better directing and cementing of them
in mutual peace and fidelity, they took upon them the Regal Power and
Authority.
“After they had govern’d the Kingdom very amicably for the space of
Fifteen Years, (according to the Agreement which they had mutually
sworn to observe) they apply’d themselves to the building of a
Sepulcher, where they might all lye together; that as in their
Life-time they had been equal in their Power and Authority, and had
always carried it with love and respect one towards another; so after
Death (being all bury’d together in one Place) they might continue the
Glory of their Names in one and the same Monument.
“To this end they made it their business to excel all their
Predecessors in the greatness of their Works: For near the Lake of
Myris in Lybia, they built a Four-square Monument of Polish’d Marble,
every square a Furlong in length, for curious Carvings and other pieces
of Art, not to be equall’d by any that should come after them. When
you are enter’d within the Wall, there’s presented a stately Fabrick,
supported round with Pillars, Forty on every side: The Roof was of
one intire Stone, whereon was curiously carv’d Racks and Mangers for
Horses, and other excellent pieces of Workmanship, and painted and
adorn’d with divers sorts of Pictures and Images; where likewise
were portray’d the Resemblances of the Kings, the Temples, and the
Sacrifices in most beautiful Colours. And such was the Cost and
Stateliness of this Sepulcher, begun by these Kings, that (if they had
not been dethron’d before it was perfected) none ever after could have
exceeded them in the state and magnificence of their Works. But after
they had reign’d over Egypt Fifteen Years, all of them but one lost
their Sovereignty in the manner following.
[Sidenote: [655-612 B.C.]]
“Psammeticus Saïtes [Psamthek I], one of the Kings, whose Province
was upon the Sea Coasts, traffickt with all sorts of Merchants, and
especially with the Phenicians and Grecians; by this means inriching
his Province, by vending his own Commodities, and the importation of
those that came from Greece, he not only grew very wealthy, but gain’d
an interest in the Nations and Princes abroad; upon which account he
was envy’d by the rest of the Kings, who for that reason made War upon
him. Some antient Historians tell a Story, That these Princes were
told by the Oracle, That which of them should first pour Wine out of a
brazen Viol to the God ador’d at Memphis, should be sole Lord of all
Egypt. Whereupon Psammeticus when the Priest brought out of the Temple
Twelve Golden Viols, pluckt off his Helmet, and pour’d out a Wine
Offering from thence; which when his Collegues took notice of, they
forbore putting him to death, but depos’d him, and banish’d him into
the Fenns, bordering upon the Sea-Coasts.[10]
“Whether therefore it were this, or Envy as is said before, that gave
Birth to this Dissention and Difference amongst them, it’s certain
Psammeticus hir’d Souldiers out of Arabia, Caria and Ionia, and in a
Field-Fight near the City Moniemphis, he got the day. Some of the Kings
of the other side were slain, and the rest fled into Africa, and were
not able further to contend for the Kingdom.
“Psammeticus having now gain’d possession of the whole, built a Portico
to the East Gate of the Temple at Memphis, in honour of that God, and
incompass’d the Temple with a Wall, supporting it with Colosses of
Twelve Cubits high in the room of Pillars. He bestow’d likewise upon
his Mercenary Souldiers many large Rewards over and above their Pay
promis’d them.”[c]
To return to later and less credulous historians, it will be well to
note a more authoritative account of this period.
THE RESTORATION IN EGYPT
[Sidenote: [655-612 B.C.]]
When Asshurbanapal again subjected the petty princes of Egypt, he had
favoured none so much as Neku I of Saïs. The latter had fallen in
battle against Tanut-Amen; his son Psamthek had sought refuge with
the Assyrians and had been brought back to his dominions by them. As
soon as circumstances allowed, he threw off the Assyrian yoke, as his
father had done before him. At the same time he took up the task begun
by Tefnekht, his predecessor and courageous ancestor, of suppressing
the petty princes and uniting Egypt. King Gyges of Lydia sent him
auxiliaries; they were the Carian and Ionian troops, which, according
to Herodotus, landed in Egypt one day and were employed by Psamthek
against his rivals. Soon the first mercenaries were followed by others;
they formed the backbone of the king’s army.
[Illustration: EGYPTIAN MUMMY-CASE]
What took place in the individual fights is not known; that is, we have
no knowledge of the battles with the Assyrians. But about the year 655
the object was obtained, Egypt freed and united. So as to establish his
rule safely, the king married Shepenapet, daughter of Queen Ameniritis.
The chief opponents of the new ruler were doubtless the mercenaries
organised as a warrior caste, the Ma, who had shared the land under
the Ethiopian and Assyrian supremacy. Herodotus relates that 240,000
warriors “who stood to the left of the king” had wandered to Ethiopia,
under Psamthek, since for three years they were not relieved in the
garrisons; the king, who hastened after them, could not persuade them
to return. Although the recital is legendary with regard to the immense
number, the fact fits in clearly with the history of the times that a
considerable number of the warrior caste, who would not submit to the
new circumstances, should have left the land, been taken up by the king
of Napata and colonised the valley of the Upper Nile.
It has already been mentioned that Psamthek, so as to protect himself
against the renewed invasion of the Assyrians, also turned to Asia.
As Aahmes I, after the expulsion of the Hyksos, invested Sherohan in
Palestine, so for twenty-nine years Psamthek took the field against
Ashdod, until he conquered the town. His power does not seem to have
extended farther south than the First Cataract. His grandson, Psamthek
II, first took the field against Ethiopia. To his time probably belong
the inscriptions which Greek, Carian, and Phœnician soldiers have
inscribed on the colossi of the temples of Abu Simbel in their mother
tongues. Southern Nubia did not remain long conquered. The three strong
border fortresses of Elephantine in the south, Daphne in the east, and
Marea in the west, essentially determine the limits of Egyptian power.
The new state, in which, after some two hundred years of anarchy,
the kingdom of the Pharaohs was again established, was only partly
national. The dynasty was, as the name teaches, not of Egyptian
origin, but in all probability Libyan. The troops which the princes
of Saïs could raise were doubtless for the greater part Libyans, and
the particular characteristic was due to the mercenaries who had
come across the sea. In future days the Ionians and Carians who were
colonised in the “camps” between Bubastis and Pelusium, on that most
dangerous east border of the land, were the chief support of the
throne; under Uah-ab-Ra [Apries] their number increased to thirty
thousand men.
[Sidenote: [612-596 B.C.]]
Thus from the beginning the kings of the restoration, like the
Ptolemies, held a much freer position, which raised them far above
their predecessors. They, manifestly with intention, held Saïs as
residence, although Memphis was honoured as the oldest capital, and
structures were built on the ruins of ancient Thebes. With full
knowledge they carried on a considerable commerce. Psamthek’s son, Neku
II (612-596), began to build a canal from the Nile to the Red Sea; he
sent out a Phœnician fleet to circumnavigate Africa, which returned to
the Mediterranean three years after its departure from Suez. A fleet
was maintained on the Arabian as well as in the Mediterranean Sea.
With the Greeks, who in earlier times came to Egypt only as pirates
or were driven there by storm, but now sought to draw all the coasts
of the Mediterranean into their commerce, active negotiations were
taken up. From trading with them arose the numerous caste of the
interpreters. Neku II sends oblations to Brandichæ; to his son,
Psamthek II, there came an embassy from Elis; the Egyptian divinities
begin to become known to the Greeks: whilst amongst Asiatics closely
related to the culture and customs of the Egyptians there reigned
active negotiation and a reciprocal influence, the Hellenes, of quite
other disposition and more active in commerce, remained strangers
to the Egyptians. They were met with suspicion, and restrictions
were laid upon them. Aahmes was the first to assign them a place in
Naucratis, south of Saïs, where they gained influence and property and
could organise themselves as an independent community, but the Greek
merchants were forbidden to navigate in any other branch of the Nile.
Internally the XXVIth Dynasty in every sense bears the stamp of
restoration. The end of a formidable crisis had come, and the endeavour
was made to re-establish conditions as they were conceived to have been
of old--that is to say--to introduce the abstract ideal.
Therefore the Egyptians held themselves more aloof from the strangers,
most carefully observing all laws as to cleanliness; the god of the
strangers and hostile powers, the till-now-honoured Set, was cast
out of the Pantheon, his name and image effaced everywhere: also the
divinities taken up from the Syrian neighbours, such as Astarte and
Anata, completely disappeared. In religion they turned back to the
oldest laws; the dead formulas of the tombs of the Pyramids were
revived, the worship of the early kings of Memphis, Sneferu, Khufu,
Sahu-Ra, was again taken up.
The art of this period is throughout archaic, constituting a period of
efflorescence distinguished by excellence and neatness of the forms,
but wanting in all originality. In writing, the endeavour is made as
far as possible to imitate the old models. Naturally in this manner the
relative simplicity and naturalness of the olden times was not reached;
the heritage of a thousand years’ development, the endless magic
and formal ritual with its wearying system and its dead phrases, is
carefully preserved and ever increased. If, according to Greek reports,
the Egyptians believed in the transmigration of souls after death into
the body of another being, and that, after having gone through all the
animals of land and sea and air, they returned to human form after
three thousand years, this doctrine, which is nowhere to be found in
manuscripts left to us, may have arisen at this time from their view
of conditions after death and the consubstantiality of all life. That
Egypt which the Greeks learnt to know was a well-preserved mummy of
primitive times and served to impress them by its uniqueness and its
age, and individually to stimulate, but was no more in a position to
awaken a new life.
In the social domain, if we can believe the reports of the Greeks,
the separation of classes was brought about. The priesthood was an
exclusive caste, and their dignity was hereditary; next to them come
the completely exclusive warrior class, consisting of the successors of
the Ma, divided into the Calasirians and Hermotybians. Priests as well
as warriors are exempt from taxes and in possession of a great part of
the agricultural land, which they hire out to peasants for large sums
of money. The remaining part of the soil is royal dominion. Far below
the privileged classes stands the mass of the people, the labourers,
manufacturers, merchants, finally the shepherds of the Delta, of
Semitic descent, and the inhabitants of the Delta living on fisheries
of the swamps, both of which are considered unclean in Egypt. In theory
the principle may also be set down here that every class forms a
decided caste; that this was not practically carried through is taught
us by the report of Herodotus, II, 147, that the Shepherd race, being
unclean, could marry only within itself. From which we may infer that
other castes were permitted to intermarry.[d]
THE PERSIAN CONQUEST AND THE END OF EGYPTIAN AUTONOMY
[Sidenote: [596-572 B.C.]]
With the XXVIth Dynasty the curtain was practically drawn for all time
on Egyptian autonomy. The recurrent struggle between Asia and Africa
was renewed with disastrous consequences to the people of the Nile. We
have here to do with the Persian conquest, and in particular with the
deeds of Cambyses.
Neku reigned six years according to Manetho, sixteen according to
Herodotus, and this latter figure is confirmed by two steles at
Florence and Leyden. His son, Psamthek II, whom Herodotus calls Psammis
(596), reigned six years and died on his return from an expedition into
Ethiopia. It was probably during this expedition that some Greek and
Phœnician soldiers carved their names on the leg of one of the colossi
of Abu-Simbel.
In the reign of Uah-ab-Ra, the Apries of the Greeks (591), Syria and
Palestine were the theatre of important events. The petty people of
these countries, threatened by the Chaldean power, tried to save their
independence by the help of Egypt.
Nebuchadrezzar, king of Babylon, first turned his forces against
the kingdom of Judah, which succumbed in spite of Egypt’s tardy and
inefficient intervention. Jerusalem was taken, and the people led
away to captivity. The Jewish prophets, in their anger against Egypt,
announced for it the fate of Judah, and, if we are to believe Josephus,
these predictions were accomplished; for Nebuchadrezzar is said to have
defeated and killed Uah-ab-Ra and subdued Egypt. But Herodotus and
Diodorus say nothing of this defeat, and speak, on the contrary, of a
naval victory of Apries over the Phœnicians and Cypriotes. M. Renan’s
explorations have brought to light the ruins of a temple raised by the
Egyptians at Gebel, a fact which seems to indicate that they remained
masters of the country.
Uah-ab-Ra undertook to subdue the Greek colony of Cyrene, and, as it
would not have been prudent to oppose his Greek auxiliaries to a people
of the same race, he employed only native troops on this expedition,
which was an unfortunate one. The Egyptian soldiers, believing he had
undertaken it solely in order to get rid of them, revolted. To appease
them, Uah-ab-Ra sent an officer named Aahmes, whose good nature pleased
the soldiers. As he was speaking to them, one of them put a helmet on
his head, and there was a cry that they ought to make him their king.
He did not wait to be persuaded, and immediately put himself at the
head of the rebels.
Uah-ab-Ra, learning this, gave orders to one of those who remained
faithful to him to bring Aahmes to him, dead or alive. The envoy
received only a very coarse answer, and when he returned, the king had
his nose and ears cut off. The indignant Egyptians instantly went over
to Aahmes. Uah-ab-Ra at the head of his Carian and Ionian mercenaries,
to the number of thirty thousand, marched against the rebels, who
were far more numerous. He was beaten and led back, a prisoner, into
the palace which had been his. Aahmes at first treated him with
consideration, but the Egyptians insisted that he should be delivered
up to them, and strangled. He had reigned twenty years. Aahmes had
him buried in the tomb of his ancestors, and espoused a daughter of
Psamthek II in order to graft himself on the Saïtic Dynasty.
[Sidenote: [572-525 B.C.]]
Aahmes II, though he had become king by a reaction of the national
party against the foreigner, nevertheless showed himself still more
favourable to the Greeks than his predecessors had been. He permitted
them to establish themselves at Naucratis, on the Canopic branch of
the Nile, and to raise temples to their gods. One of these temples,
the Hellenion, was built at the public expense by the principal Greek
towns in Asia. Particular temples were consecrated to Apollo by the
Milesians, to Hera by the Samians, and to Zeus by the Æginians.
Aahmes sent his statue to several towns in Greece, and when the
temple of Delphi was destroyed by fire, he desired to contribute to
the subscription opened for its reconstruction, and offered a talent
of alum from Egypt. He entered into an alliance with the Cyrenæans,
and married one of the daughters of the country; he also allied
himself with Polycrates, tyrant of Samos, and with Crœsus, king of
the Lydians. He made no war except against the Cypriotes, whom he
subjected to a tribute. He chiefly occupied himself, as Psamthek had
done, in developing the trade of Egypt. Like him he erected monuments
at Saïs and Memphis, which are no longer in existence, but of which
Herodotus speaks with admiration. There is at the Louvre a monolithic
chapel in pink granite, which dates from the reign of Aahmes, and the
British Museum possesses the sarcophagus of one of his wives, Queen
Ankhnes, who long resided at Thebes. It is believed that the hypogees
of Assassif, near Gurnah, belong to the Saïtic epoch. There is one of
them which, in extent and richness, yields to none of the tombs of
Biban-el-Moluk. This is the tomb of a high priest who was at the same
time a royal functionary.
Aahmes was nothing more than a soldier of fortune, and it appears that
the ceremonious etiquette of the ancient kings of Egypt wearied him.
When he had employed his morning in administering justice, he passed
the rest of the time at table with his friends. Certain courtiers
represented to him that he was compromising his dignity. He answered
that a bow-string could not always be stretched. At the beginning of
his reign the obscurity of his birth made him despised. Perceiving
this, he had melted a gold basin, in which he used to wash his feet,
made from it the golden statue of a god and offered it to the public
veneration.
“Thus it was with me,” he said; “I was a plebeian, now I am your
king; render me, then, the honour and respect which are due me.” The
people understood the allegory, and ended by becoming attached to this
sensible man, who took his trade of king seriously. It was from him,
according to Herodotus, that the Athenians borrowed their famous law
against idleness.
“He ordered each Egyptian to declare to the nomarch, every year, what
were his means of subsistence. He who did not comply with the law, or
could not prove that he lived by honest means, was punished with death.
Solon, the Athenian, borrowed this law from Egypt, and established it
in Athens, where it is still in force, because it is a wise one and no
fault can be found with it.”
Herodotus says that Egypt was never happier or more flourishing than in
the reign of Aahmes, and that there were then in that country twenty
thousand well-peopled towns or villages.
All this prosperity was to disappear in one day, for Egypt was about
to founder like Nineveh and Jerusalem and Sardis and Babylon, without
previous decay, in one of those sudden and overwhelming storms which
sweep monarchies away.
A new empire had just arisen in Asia. Persia had absorbed Media and
subdued Chaldea and Asia Minor. Lydia had succumbed so quickly that
Aahmes had not been able to succour his ally, Crœsus. Cyrus, the
founder of the Persian Empire, left Egypt in peace, and she took good
care not to stir; but his son Cambyses felt the need of aggrandising
his states, and as in default of reasons wars never lack pretexts, here
is the one he gave, or which was perhaps invented as an afterthought.
It was said that Cyrus had asked Aahmes to send him the best physician
for diseases of the eye, to be found in his dominion. This physician
wished to avenge himself on the king of Egypt, who had torn him from
the arms of his wife and children to send him into Persia. He persuaded
Cambyses to demand the daughter of Aahmes, counting on a refusal,
which would not fail to be considered as an insult. Aahmes knew well
that Cambyses would not make his daughter a queen, but a slave of
the harem; he sent a daughter of Uah-ab-Ra. The latter disclosed the
ruse to the king of Persia, and demanded of him to avenge her father,
whose murderer Aahmes had been. Cambyses flew into a violent rage and
resolved to carry war into Egypt.
A desert that an army could not cross in less than three days’ march
protected Egypt on the side of Asia. Following the advice of Phanes,
a Greek officer and deserter from the Egyptian army, Cambyses secured
for himself the alliance of the Arab king, who stationed camels laden
with skins full of water, all along the route the Persians were to
follow. The town of Pelusium, which was the key of Egypt, was besieged
by Cambyses. Polyænus relates that he caused dogs, cats, and ibises to
be collected, and placed them in front of his army; the Egyptians dared
not fly their arrows for fear of hitting the sacred animals, and the
town was taken without resistance. Aahmes had just died, after a reign
of forty-four years (528). His son, Psamthek III, the Psammenitus of
Herodotus, came to meet the enemy. The Greek and Carian mercenaries in
the pay of the king of Egypt, learning the treason of Phanes, their
former chief, revenged themselves on his children.
“They led them into the camp,” says Herodotus, “and, having placed a
mixing bowl between the two armies, they cut their throats under the
eyes of their father, mingled their blood with wine and water in the
bowl, and, when all the auxiliaries had drunk, rushed into battle.”
It was fierce and bloody; many perished on either side; but at last the
Egyptians had the worst of it and fled in disorder to Memphis. Cambyses
summoned the town to surrender; the crowd destroyed the Mytilenean
vessel which carried the ambassadors, massacred those who manned it,
and dragged their limbs through the citadel. The town was taken, and
Psamthek brought before the conqueror. He had reigned only six months.
THE ATROCITIES OF CAMBYSES
[Sidenote: [525 B.C.]]
Cambyses treated him with the utmost severity, and had him led before
the town, together with some other Egyptians.
“The king’s daughter,” says Herodotus, “was clad as a slave and sent,
pitcher in hand, in search of water, with several other young girls
of rank. They passed, weeping, in front of their captive fathers, who
groaned at their humiliation. Psammenitus [Psamthek III] saw them and
lowered his eyes towards the earth. Then Cambyses caused his son and
two thousand young men of the same age to pass before him, with cords
round their necks and bridles in their mouths. They were being led to
death to avenge the Mytileneans slain at Memphis, for the royal judges
had ordained that, for every man killed on that occasion, ten Egyptians
of the first families should be put to death. Psammenitus saw them
pass and recognised his son; but while the other Egyptians round him
wept and lamented themselves, he preserved the same countenance as at
the sight of his daughter. When the young men had passed, he perceived
an old man who generally ate at his table. This man, despoiled of his
goods, and reduced to live on charity, was imploring pity from the
soldiers and even from Psammenitus and the Egyptian captives brought
into the outskirts of the town. Psammenitus could not restrain his
tears; he beat himself on the head and called to his friend. Three
guards, deputed to watch him, made this known to Cambyses. He was
astonished and sent a messenger to Psammenitus, who questioned him thus:
“‘Cambyses, thy master, demands wherefore, having neither wept or
groaned when thou sawest thy daughter treated as a slave and thy son
marching to execution, thou shouldst interest thyself in the lot of
this beggar who, from what we learn, is neither thy relative nor ally.’
“He answered, ‘Son of Cyrus, the misfortunes of my house are too great
to be wept; but the fate of a friend, once happy, and reduced to
begging in his old age, has seemed to me to deserve tears.’
“This answer was reported, and appeared a just one. The Egyptians say
that Crœsus, who had come into Egypt in the train of Cambyses, wept,
and the Persians who were present wept also. Even Cambyses felt some
pity. He ordered Psammenitus brought before him and his son to be
withdrawn from the number of those about to die.
“Those sent to seek the child did not find him alive; he had been
the first struck. They made Psammenitus rise and conducted him into
the presence of Cambyses. He remained in the retinue and suffered no
violence. The government of Egypt would even have been restored to him
if he had not been suspected of exciting disturbances; for the Persians
are wont to honour the children of kings and to replace them on the
thrones lost by their fathers. But Psammenitus, having conspired,
received his reward. Convicted by Cambyses of having urged the
Egyptians to revolt, he drank bull’s blood and died of it on the spot.
“From Memphis, Cambyses went on to Saïs, and as soon as he had reached
the tomb of Amasis [Aahmes] he ordered the corpse to be exhumed, to be
beaten with rods, to have the hair and beard torn out, to be pricked
with goads--in short, to be subjected to all sorts of outrages. The
executioners soon grew tired of maltreating a lifeless body, from which
they could break off nothing, as it was embalmed. Then Cambyses had it
burnt without any respect of holy things. Indeed the Persians believe
that fire is a god, and it is not permitted, either by their law or by
that of the Egyptians, to burn the dead. Thus Cambyses performed on
this occasion an act equally condemned by the laws of both peoples.”
In violating the tomb of the man who had usurped the throne of Egypt,
Cambyses perhaps counted on rallying the legitimists, for he thus
presented himself as the avenger and heir of Uah-ab-Ra. From the
inscriptions on a statuette in the Vatican, it appears that, in the
early days of his conquest, he avoided giving offence to the religion
of the vanquished. He caused the great temple of Nit, where some
Persian troops had installed themselves, to be evacuated, and had it
repaired at his own expense. He even carried his zeal so far as to be
initiated into the mysteries of Osiris. But this apparent and wholly
political deference could not last long.
[Illustration: DEATH OF PSAMMENITUS [PSAMTHEK III]]
The religious symbols of the Egyptians, the external forms of their
worship, inspired profound aversion in the Persians, whose religion
greatly resembled the strict monotheism of the Semitic peoples.
This antipathy, which was only awaiting an opportunity to manifest
itself, blazed out after an unfortunate expedition of Cambyses against
Ethiopia. Instead of ascending the Nile as far as Napata, he had taken
the shorter route of the desert.
The provisions gave out, and his soldiers were reduced to devouring
each other. He returned, having lost many men, and then learnt the
complete destruction of another army which he had sent against the
Ammonians and which had been entombed under whirlwinds of sand. He
was exasperated at this disaster, and, as the Egyptians naturally
attributed it to the vengeance of the gods, his fury turned against the
Egyptian religion.
“From Assuan to Thebes and from Thebes to Memphis,” says Mariette, “he
marked his route by ruin: the temples were devastated, the tombs of the
kings were opened and pillaged.” The mummy of Queen Ankhnes, wife of
Aahmes, was torn from its sarcophagus in the depths of a funeral vault
behind the Ramesseum, and burned as that of Aahmes himself had been.
When this sarcophagus, which is now in London, was discovered by a
French officer, remains of charred bones were found in it, according to
Champollion Figéac, some of them preserving traces of gilding.
“Cambyses having returned to Memphis,” says Herodotus, “the god Apis,
whom the Greeks call Epaphos, manifested himself to the Egyptians. As
soon as he had shown himself, they donned their richest clothing and
made great rejoicings. Cambyses, believing that they were rejoicing
at the ill-success of his arms, called the magistrates of Memphis
before him, and asked them why, having exhibited no joy the first time
that they saw him in their town, they were exhibiting so much of it
since his return and after he had lost part of his army. They told him
that their god, who was generally very long in appearing, had just
manifested himself, and that the Egyptians were accustomed to celebrate
this epiphany by public festivities. Cambyses, hearing this, said that
they lied, and punished them with death for liars. When they had been
killed he sent for the priests to come into his presence, and, having
received the same answer from them, he told them that if any god showed
himself familiarly to the Egyptians, he would not hide himself from
him, and he ordered them to bring Apis to him. The priests immediately
went in search of him.
“This Apis, who is the same as Epaphos, is born of a cow which can bear
no further offspring. The Egyptians say that this cow conceives Apis
by lightning, which descends from heaven. These are the distinguishing
signs of the calf they call Apis: it is black, and bears a white square
on its forehead; it has the figure of an eagle on its back, on its
tongue that of a beetle, and the hairs of its tail are double.
“As soon as the priest had brought Apis, Cambyses, like a maniac,
drew his sword to pierce its belly, but only struck its thigh. Then,
beginning to laugh, he said to the priests:
“‘O blockheads, are there such gods, made of flesh and blood and
susceptible to the stroke of steel? This god is well worthy of the
Egyptians, but you shall have no cause to rejoice for having attempted
to laugh at our expense.’
“Thereupon he had them whipped by those deputed for that purpose, and
ordered such Egyptians as were found celebrating a festival to be
slain. Thus the festivities ceased and the priests were punished. Apis,
wounded in the thigh, languished, lying in the temple, and when he
was dead the priests buried him, unknown to Cambyses. As to him, who
was already wanting in good sense, he was from that time smitten with
madness, the Egyptians say, in punishment of his crime.”
Among the funeral steles of the Apis, found by Mariette in the
excavations of the Serapeum at Memphis, and which are now in the
Egyptian Museum at the Louvre, are two connected with the facts
recounted by Herodotus: one, whose inscription is almost illegible,
contained the epitaph of the Apis who died in the reign of Cambyses,
and was born, as it seems, in the twenty-fifth year of Aahmes. We
possess, the catalogue says, his sarcophagus, sculptured by order of
Cambyses. The other is the epitaph of the bull who died in the fourth
year of Darius.
“We think,” says M. de Rougé, “that this is the same Apis whom
Cambyses, in his fury, wounded when, on his return from the unfortunate
Ethiopian expedition, he found the Egyptians abandoning themselves to
the rejoicings which accompanied the festivities of the theophany of a
new Apis (in 518 B.C.).” If this be so, this Apis must have survived
his wound nearly five years.
[Sidenote: [522-332 B.C.]]
Darius wished to repair the mistakes of his predecessor, and tried to
conciliate the Egyptians. He put to death the satrap Aryandes, whose
tyranny was already provoking revolts, and, learning that the Apis had
just died, he joined in the public mourning and promised one hundred
talents of gold to whoever should find a new Apis. He visited the
great temple of Ptah and would have placed his statue there beside
that of Sesostris [Ramses II]. The priests told him that he had not
yet equalled the exploits of Sesostris, since he had not subdued the
Scythians. Darius was not offended at this exhibition of national
pride; he answered simply that if he lived as long as Sesostris he
would endeavour to equal him. He had a great temple of Amen, whose
ruins still exist, built in the oasis of Thebes. Finally, he finished
the canal of communication which Seti I and Neku II had wished to
establish between the Nile and the Red Sea. According to Diodorus, his
memory was venerated by the Egyptians, who placed him in the number of
their great legislators.
The kings of Persia who form the XXVIIth Dynasty did not, however,
succeed in making themselves accepted by Egypt. They had not, like
the Shepherd kings, adopted her religion, her language, her writing,
and her manners, and therefore they were always foreigners to her.
Their dominion was rarely oppressive, and yet it was interrupted by
insurrections which always found a support in the Greek republics.
After one hundred and twenty years, Egypt recovered her independence
under three native dynasties, the XXVIIIth, the XXIXth, and the XXXth.
But she lost it sixty-four years after, through the cowardice of her
king, who fled into Ethiopia without fighting, as Meneptah had fled
before the Unclean. Egypt was a second time conquered by the Persians,
and Ochus renewed the follies and pillaging of Cambyses (340 B.C.).[b]
The XXVIIIth Dynasty is regarded as consisting of one king only, since
at his death the rule passed to the princes of Mendes. This king was
Amen-rut (Amyrtæus), 405-399 B.C., son of Pausiris and grandson of that
Amyrtæus who was the ally of Inarus of Libya. Amen-rut revolted against
Persia, and became independent on the death of Darius II.
Nia-faa-rut I, prince of Mendes (399-393), succeeded Amen-rut. He and
his successors--Haker (393-380), Psamut (380), and Nia-faa-rut II
(379)--form the XXIXth Dynasty, and continued, by the alliances with
Persia’s enemies, to maintain the native rule of Egypt.
This state of affairs continued under the XXXth Dynasty, which ruled
at Sebennytus. Under the first king, Nekht-Hor-heb (Nectanebo I),
the Persians, two hundred thousand strong, made a desperate attempt,
with the help of the Greek general Iphicrates and twenty thousand of
his countrymen, to invade the Delta, but Nectanebo defeated them near
Mendes. This victory secured peace and independence to Egypt for a term
of years, during which art and commerce revived.
Tachus’ reign was short (364-361), and he had internal as well as
external troubles to deal with. He died an exile at the court of
Artaxerxes. Nekht-neb-ef (Nectanebo II), 361-340, brought his dynasty
and the empire of the Pharoahs, after a duration of over four thousand
years, to an end by succumbing to the Persians under Ochus (Artaxerxes
III).[a]
[Sidenote: [_ca._ 322 B.C.]]
It is not surprising that, after the eight years during which this
second Persian dynasty lasted, Alexander should have been received as
a liberator and proclaimed son of Amen, that is to say, legitimate
successor of the ancient kings of Egypt. The most able of his generals,
Ptolemy, son of Lagus, founded a dynasty which may, in spite of its
foreign origin, be considered as national as that of the Ramessides
or of the Saïtic kings. Greek influence did not make itself felt
outside Alexandria. The Lagides respected the religions and customs of
Egypt, which became the most important of the Greek kingdoms, while
still preserving her original civilisation. She even preserved it
under the Roman dominion; and if we did not read the inscriptions, we
could never guess that the temples of Esneh, of Edfu, of Denderah,
and of Philæ belong to the time of the Lagides, the Cæsars, and the
Antonines. Enfolded in the great Roman unity, Egypt did not regret her
independence. Alexandria was the second town of the world, the capital
of the East. The philosophic movement of which it was the seat entered
as an important factor into the elaboration of Christian dogma. But
the establishment of the new religion was the death-blow of old Egypt,
for a people is dead when it has denied its gods. The edicts of the
Christian emperors, ordering the destruction of the temples, dealt the
last blow to Egyptian art. Those monuments which were not entirely
destroyed were distorted to meet the needs of the new worship.
Then came the Mussulman conquest, which waged further war against the
ruins. Finally, in our days, the introduction of Western civilisation
into Egypt has done the monuments more harm than all the rest. When the
viceroy wishes to build a barrack or a sugar factory, he takes stones
from the temples; it saves expense.
Thus is accomplished the sad prediction of the Egyptian philosopher
whose works bear the name of Hermes Trismegistus:
“O Egypt, Egypt, there shall remain of thy religion but vague stories
which posterity will refuse to believe, and words graven in stone
recounting thy piety. The Scythian, the Indian, or some other barbarous
neighbour shall dwell in Egypt. The Divinity shall reascend into the
heaven. And Egypt shall be a desert, widowed of men and gods.”[b]
FOOTNOTES
[10] [Herodotus tells the story somewhat differently.]