CHAPTER XI.

THE MARCH TO MEROE.

More than two centuries before Cambyses set foot upon its soil, Egypt

had experienced the rule of the stranger. The reign of the Ethiopic

monarchs of Napata over Egypt (730-672 B.C.) was followed by the more

severe dominion of the Assyrians. But Psammetichus had been able to

restore the kingdom, and the sovereignty of his house; the reign of

Amasis had called into existence a beautiful after-bloom of Egyptian

art, had given a lively impulse to trade, and increased the welfare of

the land. Now the day of Pelusium and the fall of Memphis had decided

the fate of Egypt irrevocably and for all time. The kingdom had been

founded from Memphis three thousand years previously, and at Memphis it

was now overthrown. Egypt, in spite of repeated and stubborn attempts,

was never able to recover from the dominion of the Persians, and even

the fall of the Persian empire did not permit the rise of the Egypt of

the Egyptians.

The speedy and great success which Cambyses achieved had effects beyond

the borders of Egypt. Herodotus narrates that the Libyans in their

anxiety about the fortune of Egypt submitted to Cambyses without a

battle, promised to pay tribute, and sent presents. The Cyrenaeans also

and Barcaeans from similar apprehensions had done the same. The

presents of the Libyans were graciously accepted by Cambyses, but the

500 minae which the Cyrenaeans sent, he threw with his own hand among

the people because "it was too little."[155] Diodorus explains the

anxiety of the Libyans and Cyrenaeans, "after Cambyses had become lord

of the whole of Egypt" and the voluntary submission which was the

consequence of it, by the fact that the Libyans and Cyrenaeans had

fought against Cambyses with the Egyptians. We know from other sources

that the princes of Cyrene were in close and friendly connection with

Amasis.[156] The subjugation of the Libyans cannot have extended farther

than to the tribes adjacent to the Delta, and reaching towards the west

perhaps as far as Cyrene. At that time Archelaus III. was the king of

Cyrene. More than a century before, Greeks from the island of Thera had

founded the city on the well-watered and grassy slopes which run from

the table-land of Barca to the sea. Ever since that time the family of

Battus and Archelaus had reigned over this settlement, which, owing to

its favoured position and lively trade, rose quickly to power and

wealth. The attack which Pharaoh-Hophra made upon it in the year 571

B.C. had been successfully repulsed by the Cyrenaeans (III. 405).

Subsequently, about the year 545 B.C., Battus III. had been compelled to

submit to a constitutional form of government which restricted the

monarchy to a hereditary presidentship. Discontented with this position,

Archelaus III. attempted to recover the old powers. The attempt failed,

Archelaus fled, and found shelter with Polycrates, the tyrant of Samos.

When he had collected there an army of adventurers he returned at their

head, subverted the constitution, and set on foot a cruel persecution

against all who had adhered to it. He may have felt the ground insecure

under his feet in the city; the fall of Egypt deprived him of the

support which he had had in that country, and if he had really sent a

contingent to aid Psammenitus he had to fear the vengeance of Cambyses.

These were reasons enough for seeking the protection of the Persian

king. He recognised the sovereignty of Cambyses, and sent that sum of

money as the first proof of his submission.

"Cambyses now proposed to himself a threefold expedition," so Herodotus

relates; "one against the Carthaginians, a second against the Ammonians,

and a third against the long-lived Ethiopians, who inhabit Libya on the

southern sea. It seemed best to send the fleet against the

Carthaginians, and a part of the land army against the Ammonians, but to

the Ethiopians envoys were first sent. When he had given this command he

ordered fish-eaters to be brought from Elephantine (the island on the

Nile on the border of Egypt) who were acquainted with the language of

the Ethiopians. While these were being brought he ordered the fleet to

set out against Carthage. But the Phenicians refused; they were bound by

great oaths, and they would be guilty of a crime if they went against

their own children. As the Phenicians refused, the rest (_i.e._ the

Greeks) were not strong enough, and so the Carthaginians escaped slavery

under the Persians. For Cambyses could not do violence to the

Phenicians, because they had voluntarily submitted to the Persians (p.

90), and the whole naval power rested on the Phenicians. When the

fish-eaters had come, they were told what they had to say to the

Ethiopians, and received the presents which they had to take--a purple

robe, a golden necklace and bracelets, a box of alabaster filled with

ointment, and a jar of palm-wine. The Ethiopians to whom they were sent

were said to be the tallest and most beautiful of men, and as they live

under laws which are different from those of other men, they were said

to regard the man who is the tallest and strongest among them as the

most worthy of the throne."

"When the fish-eaters reached the Ethiopians and gave over their

presents to the king, they said: 'Cambyses, the king of the Persians,

wishes to be your friend and sends you as presents these things in which

he takes most delight himself.' The Ethiopians answered: 'The Persian

king has not sent you with these presents because he wishes to be my

friend, and ye are not speaking the truth. You have been sent to spy out

my kingdom, and he is not a righteous man. If he were righteous he would

not have desired another land than his own, nor would he have reduced

men to slavery from whom he had suffered no wrong. Give him this bow

(the bows of the Ethiopians were of palm-wood and more than four cubits

in length),[157] and say to the king of the Persians, that when his

people can string a bow of that size he may march against the long-lived

Ethiopians with an overwhelming army; till then, he may thank the gods

that it has not occurred to the sons of the Ethiopians to conquer

another land in addition to their own.' Then he gave them the bow, and

he took the purple robe, and asked what it was and how it was made. And

when the fish-eaters gave him a true account of the purple and the

dyeing, he said that the men were deceivers and their garments

deceptive. When he saw the necklace and bracelets, the king laughed,

for he imagined that they were fetters; their fetters, he said, were

stronger. Then he inquired about the ointment, and when the preparation

and use of this were explained, he said the same as about the robes. The

wine he drank and it pleased him greatly, and he asked what the king of

Persia ate, and what was the greatest age to which the Persians lived.

They replied that he ate bread, and explained the nature of wheat; they

also put the greatest age to which the Persians lived at eighty years.

The king replied that he did not wonder that their years were few,

inasmuch as they ate dirt, and they would not live so long as they did,

if the drink did not strengthen them--in that matter the Persians had

the advantage. Of the Ethiopians most lived to 120 years, and some even

longer; their food was cooked flesh, and their drink milk. When the

envoys returned and Cambyses received their account, he fell into a

passion, and marched against the Ethiopians without taking measures for

the supply of provisions or considering that he was about to march to

the end of the world, but like one distraught and out of his mind, he

set forth on his expedition as soon as he heard the account of the

fish-eaters. No Persian was able to draw the bow of the Ethiopians;

Smerdis alone, the brother of Cambyses, was able to draw it two

finger-breadths.[158] Cambyses bade the Greeks who were with him (_i.e._

the crews of the Greek ships) to remain in Egypt; but the whole of the

rest of the army he took with him. When he came to Thebes, he sent

50,000 men away with orders to enslave the Ammonians and burn the oracle

of Zeus; with the rest he marched against the Ethiopians. But before the

army had traversed a fifth part of the way all their provisions were

consumed, and not long after even the beasts of burden were eaten. If

Cambyses when he saw this had given up his intention, and led the army

back, he would have shown himself a wise man after his first mistake,

but he went recklessly onward. So long as the soldiers found anything

growing on the ground, they ate herbs and grass; but when they came to

the sand, some of them did a horrid deed; they drew lots for the tenth

man and ate him. When Cambyses heard of this, he was distressed that the

soldiers should eat each other, abandoned the war against the

Ethiopians, marched back, and reached Thebes after losing many men. This

was the end of the expedition against the Ethiopians. But with regard to

those who were sent against the Ammonians it is only known that they

reached the city of Oasis where the Samians dwell, seven days' march

distant from Thebes through the desert; in the Greek language this place

is called the island of the blessed. To this place the army came; but

beyond this no man knows anything except what the Ammonians say. They

relate that when they marched from the oasis through the sand and were

about midway between the oasis and the Ammonians, and were eating

breakfast, a great wind from the south blew up a mass of sand and

overwhelmed them, and in this way they perished." Diodorus represents

Cambyses as making the attempt to subjugate the Ethiopians with a great

host, in which he lost the whole of his army and was in the greatest

danger.[159]

If the legend of the Greeks of the fortunes of Psammenitus after his

defeat exhibits analogous traits to the legend, also Greek, of the fate

of Croesus after his capture, the account given by Herodotus of the

march of Cambyses against the long-lived Ethiopians reminds us of his

account of the march of Cyrus against the Massagetae. In both cases the

aim is directed against unknown foreign nations, against whom there is

no reason to make war; in both cases good sense, moderation, wisdom, and

love of peace are found in the chief of the barbarians; in both envoys

are sent under false pretences; in both the conversation on either side

is accurately known. In the first case it is a foolish resolution which

brings ruin; in the second it is the vexation of Cambyses at the answer

of the Ethiopians, and the inability to draw the bow, which causes him

to lead his army without any hesitation into destruction. Along with

other indications, the test of the bow here, like the bottle in the

other legend, points to a poetical source.

We have seen that the ancient Pharaohs, the Sesurtesen and Amenemha,

Tuthmosis and Amenophis, and after them Sethos and Ramses II., had

extended the dominion of Egypt up the Nile to Semne and Cumne, and

subsequently to Mount Barkal. The Egyptian language, worship, and art

spread in this direction, and with the decline of the Egyptian power

after the time of the Ramessids (from the year 1100 B.C.), an

independent state grew up, the metropolis of which was Napata, near the

modern Meravi, on Mount Barkal. The princes of this state in their turn,

from king Pianchi onwards, had forced their way down the Nile.[160]

Sabakon, Sebichos, and Tirhaka had governed Napata and Egypt. After

Sabakon had come into conflict with the Assyrians at Raphia in Syria

(720 B.C.), and Tirhaka at Altaku (701 B.C.), Tirhaka succumbed in the

year 672 B.C. to the arms of Esarhaddon. Repeated attempts of Tirhaka

and his son Urdamane upon Egypt were wrecked; Esarhaddon calls himself

king of Miluhhi and Cush. Assurbanipal boasts that he pursued Urdamane

as far as the land of Cush. But the kingdom of Napata, which the

inscriptions of Sargon, Sennacherib, Esarhaddon and Assurbanipal call

Miluhhi (Meroe[161])--in the inscriptions on Mount Barkal we find the

names Meru and Merua--continued to exist, and maintained itself against

the restoration of Egyptian power under Psammetichus and his successors.

We cannot doubt that Cambyses wished to penetrate up the Nile at least

as far as the army of the Assyrians, that he felt it necessary to secure

his dominion in Egypt against attacks from Napata, and to extend his

dominion as far up the Nile as the army of the old Pharaohs had reached.

That the prince, who, as we saw, made the most careful preparations for

the campaign against Egypt, should have thrown himself foolishly and

recklessly into this undertaking, as Herodotus represents, is

incredible, and the statement must be attributed to special tendencies

in the sources used by the historian. So far as Meroe, Herodotus tells

us from information collected at Elephantine on the southern border of

Egypt, the way lay up and on the Nile. First there were four days'

journey from Elephantine (against the stream), then forty days' march

along the river, since the rocks made navigation impossible, and then

after twelve days' voyage the great city of Meroe was reached, the

metropolis of the rest of the Ethiopians. The distance to the place

where the Egyptians lived who had emigrated under Psammetichus (III.

307) was not less than the distance from Elephantine to Meroe, and it

was a long journey for them to the long-lived Ethiopians. The total of

56 days' journey from the way from Elephantine to Meroe upon or along

the Nile points to a place much higher up the river than Napata. The new

Meroe is meant, which the princes of Napata, receding before the

Persians, had founded before the time of Herodotus.[162] Herodotus'

statements that the Ethiopians worshipped Zeus and Dionysus alone among

the gods, and worshipped them very zealously, that there was an oracle

of Zeus in their country, and that it was only by its command that they

went to war, are completely established by the monuments of Napata. They

show that the worship of Ammon, the god of Thebes and upper Egypt, and

that of Osiris whom the Greeks, as we know, compared with their

Dionysus, were zealously prosecuted. From inscriptions and intelligence

of other kinds we have also ample information of the influence of the

priests, and the importance of the oracle in the kingdom of Napata. The

fame of the priesthood at Napata may be the basis of the "pious

Ethiopians" of Homer; the same piety, though further removed, is shown

in Herodotus' narrative of the long-lived Ethiopians.

When Cambyses, so Strabo tells us, had made himself master of Egypt, he

advanced to Meroe (Napata), and it is said that he gave the name to the

city in honour of his wife, or his sister, as others say, who was buried

there. Diodorus indeed tells us that Cambyses founded the famous city of

Meroe, and gave it the name of Meroe after his mother.[163] Josephus

also observes that Cambyses changed the name of the royal city of the

Ethiopians and called it Meroe.[164] However unfounded may be the

assertion that the name of Meroe proceeded from Cambyses--for we find it

used two centuries previously by the Assyrians--it is quite clear from

these statements that Cambyses did advance as far as the old metropolis

of the Ethiopians and brought it into his power; that he conquered and

maintained the kingdom of Napata. Indeed Herodotus tells us elsewhere

himself that he advanced far beyond Napata to the south. "In his

campaign against the long-lived Ethiopians," we are told in this

passage, "Cambyses subjugated the Ethiopians who dwell around the sacred

Nysa, and hold festivals in honour of Dionysus." The position of the

mythical Nysa, we cannot, it is true, define more precisely than that a

Homeric hymn puts it above the fountains of the Nile,[165] and Herodotus

himself places it above Egypt in Ethiopia;[166] but inasmuch as these

Ethiopians of Nysa wore leopard and lion skins, according to Herodotus,

and were armed with clubs; as their arrow-heads were made of sharp

stones, and their lances of the horns of antelopes; as they painted

themselves half red and half white in battle;[167] as they had to pay

to the Persians every third year two hundred logs of ebony, twenty large

tusks of elephants, five boys, and two choenixes of unrefined gold,[168]

Cambyses must have penetrated into the land of the negroes, the zone of

ebony and the elephant. On the middle course of the Nile in Nubia, and

above Napata, there were tribes akin to the Egyptians; the land of the

negroes began about the union of the White and Blue Nile. The monuments

of Egypt comprise both populations under the name Cush, the name of the

land of the south, and they exhibit these southern nations as partly red

and partly black. The Greeks call the red and black inhabitants of the

land of the south, Ethiopians. According to the statements of

Artemidorus of Ephesus and of Agatharchides, which have been preserved

by Strabo and Diodorus, the land of the elephant-hunters and

ostrich-eaters, who fought with the Ethiopians, men armed with the horns

of the antelope, began south of the confluence of the Atbara and

Bahr-el-Azrek or Blue River, and the Nile.[169] At the present time the

region of the ebony-woods and elephants begins in the marsh at the foot

of the Abyssinian Alps; elephants are not found elsewhere except in some

more northern regions on the Red Sea; and that the Ethiopians did not

acquire the elephants' tusks in the way of trade is proved by the small

amount of gold which they had to pay as tribute. As we find in the

reliefs of Persepolis and Naksh-i-Rustem, among the nations of the

Persian kingdom, certain figures which are marked out as negroes by

their short, curly hair, their snub nose, their bare breast and the

animal's skin on the shoulders; as the Ethiopians of Nysa and their

neighbours served, according to Herodotus, in the army of Xerxes, and

paid the tribute mentioned, as Herodotus expressly tells us, even in his

day, the march of Cambyses must have penetrated beyond the mouth of the

Atbara, and Napata must have been permanently maintained, otherwise such

distant tribes would not have furnished contingents in war fifty years

later, and their tribute would have come to an end long before

Herodotus.

Hence Cambyses did not, as the account of Herodotus represents, return

to Egypt from the upper Nile without success. On the contrary, he

penetrated much further than the Assyrians, and his campaign had more

lasting results than the conquests of Tuthmosis III. and Ramses II. on

the upper Nile. The account given by Herodotus of the distress into

which the army fell, the statement that the soldiers ate each other

(which is also told of the expedition of Cyrus to the Indus), and that

the retreat to Egypt was thus brought about, is hardly compatible with

such results and so firmly-established a supremacy. Yet we may suppose

that Cambyses wished to penetrate even further than the junction of the

White and Blue Nile, and there fell into difficulties. But it is

probable that quite another incident lies at the base of the legend of

the distress of Cambyses "in the sand." At Premnis on the Nile, Pliny

mentions "the market of Cambyses;" in Ptolemy the same place is called

"the Magazine of Cambyses." Strabo, when narrating the campaign which

Petronius took in the year 24 B.C. against Napata, tells us, that after

Petronius had taken Pselchis (140 miles above Elephantine) he came to

Premnis (150 miles further up the Nile, below Abu Simbel and the falls

of Wadi Halfa), "after he had marched through the sand-heaps in which

the army of Cambyses was buried by a sudden wind." Thus, five hundred

years after the campaign of Cambyses, the tradition was in existence,

that his army had been buried there. Hence when Napata had been

conquered, and the negro stems subjugated, when Mount Barkal and the

falls of Wadi Halfa were already behind the army on the return journey,

it was overtaken by a sand-storm in the neighbourhood of Egypt, and a

part of the army, though not the whole, was buried.[170]

Herodotus told us above that Cambyses in his march against the

Ethiopians sent a section of his army against the Ammonians, to reduce

them to slavery, and burn the oracle of Ammon there. Diodorus repeats

the statement of Herodotus almost in the same words. Justin observes,

that Cambyses had sent an army for the conquest of the famous temple of

Ammon, but it was overwhelmed by a storm and masses of sand. Herodotus'

narrative of this campaign cannot have arisen from the source from which

he took the striking traits of his account of the march against the

long-lived Ethiopians. Had this treated of the march against the

Ammonians it would have given some account of the issue of it; but

Herodotus expressly tells us that only the Ammonians could give an

account of this. His authority therefore was a Greek-Egyptian tradition.

The Ammonians inhabited the oasis of Sivah, which lies in the desert to

the west of Egypt: the worship of Ammon was carried there by Egyptian

settlers and Egyptian influence.[171] We cannot doubt that Cambyses,

after Cyrene and the tribes of the Libyans between Egypt and Cyrene had

submitted, sent a part of his army to obtain possession of this oasis.

The oasis of Ammon was well adapted to keep the Libyans of the coast as

well as the Cyrenaeans in subjection; and was at the same time an

important station for trade, and a desirable point of support for

further undertakings in the West. The command to enslave the inhabitants

of the oasis and burn the temple, is part of the conception which

represents Cambyses as setting out against the Ethiopians in a moment of

reckless passion. According to Herodotus, the expedition to Sivah came

in seven days after leaving Thebes to "the Island of the Blest," _i.e._

to the oasis El Charigeh, which as a fact is seven good days' march from

Thebes in the desert.[172] From this point the army had to proceed about

500 miles; at present the caravans go northward from El Charigeh, then

to the west from the oasis of Kasr, to Sivah. What happened to the army

on one of these routes, no one, Herodotus says, can tell; the Ammonians

declared that it was buried half way between El Charigeh and Sivah.

It would be rash to connect the heaps of bones which a traveller in our

times saw in the neighbourhood of the oasis of Kasr with the destruction

of the army of Cambyses,[173] and it is surprising that the Persians

took the longer route from Thebes, when the shorter route which led from

Memphis to Sivah was already frequented. Alexander of Macedon, in order

to reach the Ammonians, marched from the Mareotic Lake along the coast

westward to Paraetonium, then he turned directly to the south, and in

eight marches reached the oasis. A modern traveller reached it in

fifteen days from Fayum, in 1809, and the troops of Mahomet Ali who

subjugated Sivah in 1820 to Egypt (2000 men and 500 camels with water)

reached it in fourteen days. Most remarkable of all is the fact, that

both campaigns of Cambyses were overtaken by the same disaster. The

direction taken by each does not allow us to connect the two; the route

to Sivah could not be past Pselchis and Premnis. Yet neither one nor the

other disaster is in itself incredible, though 50,000 men cannot have

perished. Some 70 years ago a caravan of about 2000 souls was buried in

a sand-storm on the road from Darfur to Egypt.[174] But even if the

division which was despatched against the oasis of Ammon succumbed to

the storms of the desert, Cambyses maintained the oasis El Charigeh,

which Herodotus calls the city Oasis and the Island of the Blessed. The

magnificent remains of a temple which Darius the son of Hystaspes caused

to be erected there to the god of the oasis, the ram-headed Ammon, prove

that the oasis was conquered and held by Cambyses.[175]

Like the undertaking against the Ammonians, the intention of Cambyses to

send the fleet against Carthage was evidence of his plan of extending

his power to the west, and achieving in Africa what his father had done

in Asia. Herodotus gives the account of the order commanding the fleet

to sail, of the refusal of the Phenicians, and the abandonment of the

project by Cambyses, according to the tradition of the Greeks, who

together with the Phenicians made up the fleet of Cambyses and the

Greeks in Egypt. There is no reason to doubt the statement. By the

submission of the Cyrenaeans and Barcaeans Cambyses became the neighbour

of Carthage, which had lately united the Phenician colonies of West

Africa under her leadership and was eager to oppose the advance of the

Greeks in the west of the Mediterranean, the settlement of their

colonies to the west of the great Syrtis, and their progress in

Sardinia, Corsica, and Sicily. If the attempt to advance to the desert

to the west of El Charigeh were already wrecked, if Cambyses had already

returned from Napata when he commanded the fleet to sail against

Carthage, new successes covered that disaster as well as the calamity of

Premnis, and the gain of Carthage was of more importance than that of

the oasis of Sivah. The old Phenicians of the East, in union with the

navy of the Anatolian cities, was to conquer the new Phoenicia of the

West. The Greeks no doubt were ready, but the Phenicians refused. By

injuring their colonies in the West they would have rendered the

greatest service to the rival naval power and trade of the Greeks; in

Anatolia and on the coasts of Sicily they would probably have given a

fatal blow to their own power by sea. Whether Cambyses saw this

connection of affairs, and felt that the subjection of Carthage would

liberate the independent Greeks from a dangerous neighbour, and the

dependent Greeks from a rival in trade, or whether he simply gave way to

the refusal of the Phenicians, we cannot decide: we only know that "as

the fleet of the Phenicians refused,"--and it formed the preponderating

part of the naval force,--it was impossible to compel it to go.

FOOTNOTES:

[155] Herod. 3, 13.

[156] Diod. "Exc. de legat." p. 619 = 10, 14.

[157] Herod. 7, 69. Cf. Strabo, p. 802.

[158] Herod. 3, 30.

[159] Herod. 3, 17-26; Diod. 3, 1.

[160] Vol. III. 63 ff. 159.

[161] The name Miluhhi is nevertheless used so often in the inscription

of the kings, and in such close connection with Egypt, that the kingdom

of Napata may merely be meant. Assurbanipal tells us that his brother

seduced into rebellion "the princes of Miluhhi whom he subjugated." Vol.

III. 170.

[162] Herod. 2, 29; Strabo, p. 786. Herodotus' statements, like those of

the later authorities from Eratosthenes to Strabo and Pliny, have the

second, more southern, Meroe in view, the ruins of which were found at

Begerauieh, above the mouth of the Atbara, some 150 miles as the crow

flies to the south of Napata. They describe this Meroe as situated on an

island, because the Atbara was regarded as an arm of the Nile. The ruins

at Begerauieh are less important and artistic than those of Napata, the

hieroglyphics are of another kind. As the Persians maintained their hold

on Napata, a new metropolis of the Ethiopian kingdom obviously grew up

at this place after the times of Cambyses and Darius, which adopted the

name and civilization of the old.

[163] Strabo, p. 790; Diod. 1, 33.

[164] "Antiq." 2, 10.

[165] "Hymn." 26, 9.

[166] "Hymn." 2, 146.

[167] "Hymn." 7, 69.

[168] "Hymn." 3, 97.

[169] Diod. 3, 26, 33; Strabo, p. 772.

[170] Plin. "H. N." 6, 35; Strabo, p. 822.

[171] Herod. 2, 42.

[172] Parthey, "Die Oase des Jupiter Ammon, Abh. Berl. Akad." 1862, s.

159 ff.

[173] Belzoni, "Narrative," p. 398.

[174] Ritter, "Erdkunde," 2, 1, 397.

[175] Lepsius, "Trinuthis, Z. Aegypt. Sprache," 1874, s. 76 ff.

The History of Antiquity, Vol. 6 (of 6) · 第 6 / 15 章