SECTION I.

PHYSICAL GEOGRAPHY, PRODUCTIONS, AND INHABITANTS.

Egypt. Egypt, a country situated at the north-eastern extremity of Africa, between N. Lat. 31° 37' and 24° 1', and E. Long. 27° 13' and 34° 12', bounded on the N. by the Mediterranean Sea, on the S. by Nubia, on the E. by Palestine, Arabia, and the Red Sea, and on the W. by the Great Desert.

In the hieroglyphic inscriptions the proper name of Egypt is Kem, and it was therefore thus called by its ancient inhabitants. The pronunciation of this name cannot be regarded as perfectly certain, since the first consonant may perhaps be "ch," and the vowel is not expressed. The Coptic form is χημ or χημι in the Memphite dialect, and χημι or χημιν in the Theban. The name signifies, both in Egyptian and in Coptic, "black," and is said to have been given to the country by reason of the blackness of its cultivable soil. The other names of Egypt in its ancient language appear to be appellations of a poetical character.

Egypt is usually called in the Hebrew Scriptures מִצְרַיִם (Mizraim). In the enumeration of the descendants of Noah, we find Mizraim among the sons of Ham; and it has been hence concluded this is the name of an individual as well as of Egypt. In the Old Testament, however, men are called the fathers of tribes and of cities; and the name Mizraim, although used as a singular, being dual in form, is manifestly applicable to a country naturally divided into two regions, and so divided by its ancient inhabitants. This name in the singular form מִצְרָיִם, Mazor, is sometimes given to Egypt in the Bible. The latter is the same as the Arabic name مصر Misr, pronounced in the vulgar dialect مَصْر Masr, and signifying "red mud." By red (أحمر ahmar), the Arabs mean both red and reddish brown; and the Egyptian Kem signifies either a dark colour generally, or particularly (and this is more probable) that of the tail of the crocodile, the first hieroglyphic of the group (which is read Kem), which varies, in different individuals, from a slaty to a reddish brown. The ordinary Hebrew and Arabic name of Egypt is therefore of the same significance as the hieroglyphic one. We also find Egypt called in the Old Testament "the land of Ham," בֶּן הָאָדָם, and mention is made therein of "the tabernacles of Ham."

This may refer to the patriarch or to the Egyptian name; and as the patriarch's name signifies in Hebrew "hot" or "warm," and we find in Arabic, a sister language, a cognate word حمامة, fetid black mud, the two may be regarded as identical with each other and with Mazor. Since the name of the patriarch is so appropriate to Egypt, it is most reasonable to suppose that it was given him prophetically as the progenitor of the sun-burnt inhabitants of this and neighbouring lands; and it must be borne in mind, that both Noah and Japhet, and probably Shem also, were so named. Besides the biblical names of Egypt above mentioned, there is also בֶּן רָחוֹב Rahab, signifying "the Proud."

The Arabic name of Egypt, Misr, is given to that country by its modern inhabitants. It first occurs, as far as is known, in the Kur-an, as in the following passage, "And Pharaoh proclaimed among his people, saying, O my people, doth not the government of Misr belong to me?" where Misr signifies Egypt.

The name of Egypt, written Misr, is stated by Colonel Rawlinson to be found in the cuneiform inscriptions of Assyria. The etymology of the common Greek name of Egypt, Ἀἰγύπτος, whence ours is derived, has occasioned much discussion. The most probable derivation is αἴα "land," and πέρως a proper name. This "Guptos" seems equivalent to Coptos, the Coptic κοπτός, κερτός, κερτός, κερτός, and Arabic كرت كرت, a town in Upper Egypt, radically the same as the name of the Egyptian Christians, Copts. In hieroglyphics Coptos is called Kebt-hor, which is clearly the same as the biblical Caphtor; and since Kebt-hor is identical with Coptos, Caphtor may be with "Guptos." In the enumeration of the sons of Mizraim we find the Caphtorim, and elsewhere the country called Caphtor is mentioned. In the book of Jeremiah, יִנְחֵם יִנְחֵם כָּפְתֹר (Iy-Caphtor) that is, "the island" or "coast" (whether bordering on a sea or river) "of Caphtor" is spoken of; and this expression seems to be the very origin of Ἀἰγύπτος. A historical inquiry, for which there is not space in the present article, lends additional weight to the probability of this etymology.

By the Greeks and their contemporaries Egypt was generally held to be a country of Asia, though some assigned it cal post to Libya, that is, Africa. The reason of this difference lies in... seems to have been twofold, partly because Egypt was socially Asiatic but by position African, and partly because the Nile, which intersects the country, was fixed upon as the boundary of Asia and Libya, so that half Egypt, or at least some part of it, would have been assigned to each of these continents. From this cause arose the opinion of the Ionians, which Herodotus mentions; that what others have called Egypt, except the Delta, was half an Arabian country and half a Libyan; so that the Delta, their Egypt, should have been, as the historian remarks, reckoned a fourth division of the world by the Ionians, since they assigned it to neither Asia nor Libya.

In ancient times Egypt was held to be the country overflowed by the Nile north of the First Cataract, and the Arabian and Libyan deserts and mountains which border that tract on the east and west were not considered part of it. Thus Herodotus relates that "they of the city of Mareca and of Apis, who inhabit the parts of Egypt bordering on Libya, thinking themselves to be Libyans and not Egyptians, and being discontented at the usage concerning victims, desiring not to abstain from [eating the flesh of] cows, sent to [the oracle of] Ammon, saying that nothing was common to them and to the Egyptians, for they dwelt without the Delta, and did not speak the same language with them, and that they wished it might be allowed to them to eat all things; but the god did not permit them to do thus, saying, that Egypt was that [tract] which the Nile passing over waters, and the Egyptians those who, dwelling below the city Elephantine, drink of this river. Thus these things were replied by the oracle to them. Now the Nile reaches, when it swells, not alone the Delta, but also some part of the tract which is said to be Libyan, and of that which [is said to be] Arabian, even for a two days' journey on both sides, and [sometimes] yet more than this or less." No more accurate description could be given of the Egypt of the ancients than this reply of the oracle of Jupiter Ammon. By the modern inhabitants, and by the Arabs, Egypt Proper is the same tract, but they differ from the ancients in calling the deserts those of Egypt, instead of assigning them to the adjoining countries. Modern European geographers, however (the Turks excepted), understand Egypt to comprehend the Eastern Desert to the Red Sea, and the Western as far as a little beyond the neighbouring oases, excepting that of Seewah, anciently that of Jupiter Ammon. The country watered by the Nile north of the First Cataract, and the deserts which bound it, have been always distinct naturally and politically, inhabited by two or more different races, a settled people, and a nomad, often at war with one another; and it has been easier to distinguish these tracts than to determine how much of either desert should be assigned to the inundated tract as part of Egypt, so that the ancient definition of that country seems by far the more reasonable of the two. That of the modern geographers is, however, now so generally received, that it is unadvisable to attempt to disturb it.

The political advantages of the situation of Egypt, and of its natural strength, as well as resources, can scarcely be overestimated. It lies in the very route of the trade between the East and the West. Not only has the commerce of Arabia and India in almost all ages passed through it, but its great river and caravans of camels have brought from Central Africa ivory and gold and negroes, since the patriarchal times. It has natural harbours on the coast of the Red Sea and that of the Mediterranean, the selection and improvement of the most important of which has been regarded as the wisest act of Alexander the Great, and certainly was that by which he most benefited posterity, if indeed he did so directly by any other." The plain of Lower Egypt is hard to approach by land, and by reason of its intersection by the branches of the Nile and by canals, as well as the possibility of sometimes laying great portions of it under water, difficult to subdue, while the narrow valley of the Sa'eed, or Upper Egypt (otherwise called Middle and Upper) is made almost impregnable by the mountains and deserts which closely hem it in. The whole country is rendered independent of neighbouring lands by its extreme fertility, which makes its defence the easier. The ancient wealth and power of Egypt need therefore occasion us no wonder, and while we trace the causes of their decay, these natural advantages of position raise a hope for the future.

In the great French work on Egypt, there is an excellent memoir on the superficies of that country by Col. Jacotin, which is both fuller and from a higher authority than anything else on the same subject; from this memoir the following remarks are taken.—M. Jacotin observes that Egypt, according to the maps of the best geographers, particularly of D'Anville, is situate between the meridians 26°, 30°, and 32° 20'. E. Long. (that is from the meridian of London, or rather Greenwich, 28°, 50°, and 34°, 40°. E. Long.), and the parallels 24°, 1°, 25°, and 31°, 37°, 0°. N. Lat. The surface contained within these limits may be computed to be 20,000 square leagues, or 115,200 square geographical miles. This must be considered as a very approximate calculation, since the limits of Egypt, when the deserts are included, are necessarily extremely vague. The space which the Nile does or can water and fertilize, including its bed, north of the First Cataract, is only 9582-8396 square miles, or about a twelfth of the whole superficies, and of this but 5626-5984 square miles, inclusive of the islands of the river, are either in a state of cultivation, or fit for cultivation. The space actually under cultivation was found by M. Estève, according to M. Jacotin, to be 5469-8688 square miles; but the latter gentleman calculates that anciently 2735-5078 square miles more may have been cultivable, whereof much might still be reclaimed. His most important results are contained in the following table, which he gives in various measures of space, of which the square leagues of 25 to the degree of latitude are only here retained, while a column is added with the same sums in square geographical miles.

| Nature of the Surface | Square Leagues | Square Geographical Miles | |-----------------------|---------------|--------------------------| | 1. Towns, villages, &c. | 21-93 | 129-3108 | | 2. Cultivated land, and land fit for cultivation | 965-85 | 5563-2900 | | 3. Uncultivated land which might be cultivated | 224-67 | 1295-2512 | | 4. Islands in the river | 10-99 | 63-3021 | | 5. Canals, dykes, banks, dikes, roads, &c. | 39-19 | 208-454 | | 6. Ruins and rubbish, of ancient towns and monuments | 4-69 | 28-1664 | | 7. The river when at its height | 47-71 | 274-6096 | | 8. The lakes, ponds, and marshes, during the inundation | 283-00 | 1630-0600 | | 9. Sandy tracts, sandhills, and hills within the part of Egypt which can be inundated by the river, and distinct from the deserts | 69-18 | 392-7168 | | Total | 1603-61 | 9682-2006 |

In addition to these various kinds of surface, M. Jacotin estimates the desert tract between the limits of the fertile

---

1. Herod., ii., 15, 16. 2. The Emperor Napoleon I., who was not the man to underrate military glory, held this opinion: "Alexandre," a dit Napoléon, s'est plus illustré en fondant Alexandrie et en y substituant le siège de son empire, que par ses plus éclatantes victoires. Cette ville devait être la capitale du monde. Elle est située entre l'Asie et l'Afrique, à portée des Indes et de l'Europe. Son port est le seul mouillage de cinq cents lieues de côtes qui s'étendent depuis Tunis, ou l'ancienne Carthage, jusqu'à Alexandrette; il est à l'une des anciennes embouchures du Nil. Toutes les escadres de l'univers pourraient y mouiller, et, dans le vieux port, elles sont à l'abri des vents et de toute attaque."—Clot-Bey, Agence Général, tom. i., p. 150. 3. Description de l'Egypte, 2de edit. tom. 18, ii., p. 101, et seqq. 4. The square miles mentioned in these remarks are always geographical, whether this is specified or not. soil and the foot of the mountains on either side of the Nile as equal to about 52 square leagues, or 293/52 square miles.

Mr Lane calculated the extent of the cultivated land in Egypt to be equal to 5,500 square geographical miles, or rather more than one square degree and a half. "He made this calculation," says Mrs Poole, "from a list of all the towns and villages in Egypt, and the extent of cultivated land belonging to each. This list is appended to De Sacy's 'Abd Allah." It was made in the year of the Flight 777 (A.D. 1875-6); and may be rather underrated than the reverse. The estimate of M. Mengin shows that in 1821 the extent of the cultivated land was much less; but since that period, considerable tracts of waste land have been rendered fertile. Near agreement of Mr Lane's calculation with those of M. Estève and Col. Jacotin, affords satisfactory evidence of the accuracy of the writer last mentioned. Mrs Poole's work was published in 1844, since which time the extent of the cultivable land can have varied but little.

In the hieroglyphic inscriptions mention is made of "the two regions" of Egypt, and the kings of the whole land wear the crowns of Upper and Lower Egypt, although the country had been divided into more than two monarchies; all which shows that among its ancient inhabitants, in the earliest times, the natural division obtained. The upper country, or Upper Egypt, commenced above Memphis, comprising the narrow valley as far as the First Cataract; while the lower country, or Lower Egypt, was the plain containing the Delta, the cultivable land on each side thereof, and the few miles of territory which intervened between the point of the Delta and the southern part of Memphis. Near Memphis the mountains begin to recede, and the valley to open into the plain; and the commencement of the Delta was not anciently so far north of that city as it is at present north of its site. For the lesser divisions of Egypt under the Pharaohs, we must depend upon the statements of ancient writers, since satisfactory evidence has not been adduced on this matter from the hieroglyphic inscriptions. The first step, however, has recently been taken by Mr A. C. Harris of Alexandria, who has collected and published the hieroglyphical standards representing districts (whether nomes or toparchies), and ascertained that these standards have a geographical import.

Diodorus Siculus relates that a king Sesōstris, whom he calls Sesostris, first divided Egypt into nomes, 36 in number; and Strabo says that such was the ancient number of these provinces. It will be seen, however, that the name Sesōstris was applied by the Greeks to more than one king, without any distinction; so that, if we admit that Diodorus is accurate, we cannot determine to which of the Pharaohs this relates; nor, since certain of these kings who were thus confounded reigned at distant periods, can we ascertain approximately the time when nomes were instituted. It is not therefore possible to come to any certain conclusion as to the period before that of the Greek geographers. The following is a list of the more important nomes from Ptolemy, Pliny, Strabo, and the coins. In consequence of the changes that were occasioned by the increase in their number, and the confusion that is caused by different names having been applied to the same nome, no complete list could be given without large comments as to the disputed points. In the Delta and the rest of Lower Egypt, were the Mareotic nome, the Alexandrian, the Metellic, the Cabassite, the Saïte, the Prosopite, the Sebennyte (which was separated latterly into two nomes), the Xoïte, the Athribite, the Mendesian, the Busirite, the Leontopolite, the Tanite, the Sethroïte, the Arabian, the Bubastite, and the Heliopolite. The nomes of the Heptanomis were the Memphite, the Heracleopolite, the Arsinoïte, or Crocodilopolite, the Aphroditopolite, the Oxyrhynchite, the Cynopolite, the Hermopolite, and the Antinoïte. Of the Thebais the chief nomes were the Lycopolite, the Hypselite, the Aphroditopolite, the Antarcopolite, the Panopolite, the Thinite, the Diospolite, the Tentyrite, the Copite, the Theban, the Hermouthite, the Apollinopolite, and the Ombite. The Oasis of Jupiter Ammon forms a separate nome in Pliny's list, and the other two oases, the "Great" and "Little," were included in the Antinoïte nome, according to Ptolemy. Strabo assigns ten nomes to the Delta, the same number to the Thebais, and sixteen to the intermediate space; but it is not clear that he refers to his own times, and the text seems inaccurate, and the number sixteen should rather be assigned to the nomes of the Delta. Ptolemy enumerates 44 nomes, and Pliny 46. Subsequently, however, they increased to about 58 or 56, 35 or 33 in Lower Egypt, 8 in the Heptanomis, and 15 in the Thebais.

The whole country in the time of the earlier Caesars was divided into the Delta, Heptanomis, and Thebais. The first of these comprehended nothing beyond its natural limits, excepting certain portions of land to the east and west; the second, called Heptanomis, because it originally comprised seven nomes, commenced at the point of the Delta and extended southwards to the Thebaïca Phylaxe; and the third, the Thebais, reached thence to the First Cataract. About the close of the fourth century Lower Egypt was further divided into four provinces, Augustannica Prima and Secunda, and Ægyptus Prima and Secunda, and the Heptanomis was called Arcadia from the Emperor Arcadius, while Upper Egypt was divided into Upper and Lower Thebais.

The following is a list of the modern divisions and provinces:

- El-Akáleem El-Bahréeyeh, or the northern province, comprehending the Gharbeeyeh, the province of Er-Rasheed, and Rosetta, the Boheyreh, the province of El-Mansooréh, the Manooceyeh, the province of Ed-Dimyát, or Damietta, the Sharkeeyeh, the Kalyoobeeyeh, and the province of El-Geczeh. - El-Akáleem El-Wustáneeyeh, or the middle provinces, containing the province of Atfeeh, the Feiyoom, the province of Benée-Suweyf, and that of El-Minyeh. - El-Akáleem El-Kibleyeh, or the southern provinces, having three divisions, the province of Asyoot, that of Girgeh, and that of Kinsé. This is the manner in which the country was officially divided at the time of the French invasion, and the same division popularly obtains at the present day. Under the Memlook Sultans of the Bahree Dynasty, we find Egypt divided into somewhat smaller provinces, whereof the less important were afterwards merged in those adjoining them, and the later system was thus formed. By Mohammad 'Alee Pasha a new division was organized into muhafazahs, or districts governed by a muhafiz, of which Lower Egypt, including a small portion of Middle Egypt, contained four, and Middle and Upper Egypt three. In consequence of these circumstances it will be easily understood that much confusion prevails respecting the modern divisions of the country.

The general appearance of Egypt is remarkably uniform. General The Delta is a level plain richly cultivated, and varied alone appear by the lofty dark-brown mounds of ancient cities, and the once,

---

1. *Englishwoman in Egypt*, vol. I., p. 85. M. Jomard in the *Description de l'Egypte* (ix., p. 110), calculates the land mentioned in the list given by De Sacy, to be 952/1 square leagues, or 5592/96 square miles. Mr Lane has preferred giving a round sum, for the reason doubtless that accuracy is not to be expected in a list of the kind.

2. *List of the nomes of Egypt* representing places in Egypt supposed to be its Nomos and Toparchies, collected by A. C. Harris of Alexandria, M.R.S.L., London.

3. Wilkinson's *Modern Egypt and Thebes*, vol. I., p. 420-1; and ii. 3, 4, 5. Becker's *Handbuch der Römischen Alterthümer*, continued by Marquardt, vol. iii. pt. 1, p. 213. See also Eckhel's *Doctrina Numerorum Veterum*, vol. iv., p. 99, et seqq.

4. Lib. i., 54.

5. Lib. xvii., 5.

6. See Mengin, *Histoire Sommaire*, 237, et seqq. villages in groves of palm-trees, standing on mounds often if not always ancient. We sometimes see groves of palm-trees besides those around the villages, but other trees are, except in some parts, rare. In Upper Egypt the valley is in as rich a state of cultivation, but very narrow and bounded by mountains of no great height, which hem it into a confined space. The mountains seem like cliffs from the river, but are rarely very steep. They constitute the edge of the desert on either side of the valley, which appears as though it had been cut through a rocky table-land, for they rarely take the form of peaks. Sometimes they approach the river in bold promontories, and at others are divided by a valley with the bed of a torrent that flows only at very distant intervals. The features of the country therefore vary very little, nor is there great difference in the colour. The bright green of the fields, however, the reddish-brown or dull green colour of the great river, the tints of the bare yellow rocks, and the deep blue of the sky, always form a pleasant view, and often one of great beauty.

The climate of Egypt, being remarkably equable, is healthy to those who can bear great heat, and who avoid the unwholesome tracts of the country. Europeans, exclusive of the Turks, generally hold a contrary opinion to this; but it should be remembered that Alexandria, where most of them reside, is situate on a salt marsh, and that those born in cold climates are generally found to be unfit to support great heat, more especially if they persist in a mode of life which, though not prejudicial in a cold climate, is the surest means of destroying the constitution in a hot one. The English physician at Cairo, Dr Abbott, who has resided in Egypt several years, but is also acquainted with many other countries, considers that the climate is the finest in the world; and he does not stand alone in thinking thus.

The atmosphere is remarkably dry and clear, except on the sea-coast; and even the humidity, which is the inevitable consequence of the spreading of the inundation, is scarcely felt except in its usually rendering the heat more oppressive. Sometimes a white fog very dense and cold rises from the river in the morning, but it is of rare occurrence and short duration. The heat is extreme during a great part of the year, but it is chiefly felt when accompanied by the hot winds of spring, and the sultry calm of autumn, after the Nile has overspread the lands. The winter is often comparatively severe in its cold, especially as the domestic architecture is calculated to protect rather from heat than cold. "The general height of the thermometer in the depth of winter in Lower Egypt, in the afternoon and in the shade, is from 50° to 60°; in the hottest season it is from 90° to 100°; and about ten degrees higher in the southern parts of Upper Egypt."

On the coast of the Mediterranean rain is frequent, but in other parts of Egypt very unusual. At Cairo there is generally one heavy storm in the winter, and a shower or two besides, while at Thebes a storm occurs but once in about four years, and light rain almost as rarely.

The wind most frequently blows from the north-west, north, or north-east, but particularly from the first direction. The proportionate prevalence of these winds to those from all the other quarters, in the year, is about 8 to 3; but to those from the south, south-east, and south-west, about 6 to 1.

The northerly winds are the famous Etesian winds of the ancients, which enable boats constantly to ascend the Nile against its strong and rapid current. They also cool the temperature during the summer months. The southerly winds are often very violent, and in the spring and summer, especially in April and May, hot sand-winds sometimes blow from the south, greatly raising the temperature, and causing especial suffering to Europeans. The famous Simeon, properly called Samoom, is a much more violent hot sand-wind, which is more usual in the desert than in the cultivated tracts, but in either occurring only at long intervals. It is a kind of hurricane most painful to experience, and injurious in its effects. The Zohalah is a common but remarkable phenomenon. It is a very lofty whirlwind of sand resembling a pillar, which moves with great velocity, and when crossing the Nile frequently capsizes any boat which may be in its way, and of which the main sheet is tied, through the carelessness of the boatmen, instead of being held. Mr Lane measured some with a sextant and found them to be between five and seven hundred feet in height, and one to have an altitude of seven hundred and fifty feet.

One of the most interesting phenomena of Egypt is the mirage, which is frequently witnessed both in the desert and in the waste tracts of uncultivated soil near the Mediterranean; and it is often so truthful in its appearance that one finds it difficult to recognise the illusion.

Notwithstanding the fineness of the climate, the stranger who visits Egypt is struck by the signs which he sees everywhere of the prevalence of many serious diseases, while he may be a witness of calamitous visits of the plague or the cholera. Yet he should remember the poverty of the great mass of the inhabitants, and their insufficient food, the ignorance of the native medical practitioners, the false system of many of the foreigners established in the country, and the reluctance of the natives to take medical advice. Ophthalmia is frequently followed by blindness if not treated, and dysentery, without the aid of physic, still oftener terminates fatally; so that there is no reason to wonder at one's frequently meeting blind persons, and hearing of deaths from dysentery.

The plague may be regarded as the most remarkable disease of Egypt. Plagues are recorded by Manetho to have occurred in the reigns of two of the most ancient kings, and this malady is evidently alluded to in the Bible as peculiarly Egyptian. It has not, however, broken out since the year 1843, when there was a plague of a comparatively insignificant character so far as the mortality was concerned. In 1835 there was a plague of extreme severity, by which there died of the inhabitants of Cairo a number equal to the whole adult male population. There having been no outbreak since 1843, whereas ordinarily there would have been several before the present year (1855), has been attributed to the sanitary measures of the Egyptian government. That government doubtless deserves great credit for its exertions in this matter; but all such efforts would have as yet produced but little result were it not for the constant extreme dryness of the climate, and the powerful heat of the sun during a great part of the year.

The plague is not confined to Egypt, but appears on the east and south coasts of the Mediterranean, and part of the north coast, and sometimes pursues a similar course to the cholera in advancing steadily from place to place. In Egypt it usually first appears at Alexandria in the winter or spring, and if the earliest cases occur towards the close of the year, one may be sure of a plague of great severity and long continuance. At first the cases are generally few, but they gradually increase, and in the hottest weather attain their maximum. The disease is not long in travelling from Alexandria to Cairo, but it rarely ascends much higher.

---

1 Lane's Modern Egyptians, Introduction. 2 Id., ibid. 3 Clot-Bey's Aperçu Général sur l'Egypte, tom. I., p. 29. 4 In Stephens's Incidents of Travel in Egypt, &c., chap. iv., there is an excellent description of the effects of a gale from the south. Any one who has witnessed the scene which that author describes on the Nile, will be struck by the truthfulness of the picture which he draws. 5 Id., loc. cit. Modern Egyptians, chap. x. 6 Cory's Ancient Fragments, 2d edit., p. 90. 7 Modern Egyptians, Introduction. up the river, and has seldom been known at Thebes in modern times. Many medical writers have denied the contagious character of the plague; in particular, Clot-Bey, a French physician, who was long chief medical officer of the Egyptian government, and who published a treatise on this disease; yet it is impossible to deny the positive evidence of the senses, showing not only that the plague is contagious, but that it is so in the highest degree. The efficacy of quarantine is alone a strong argument in favour of those who believe in its contagious character; but the distinct fact, for example, of persons having taken the disease after wearing the clothes of those who had died of it, in circumstances the most conclusive, can hardly be rejected.

Dysentery is an extremely common malady, and causes very considerable mortality. It may usually be traced to a careless course of diet, and especially to the eating of crude vegetables, and urine or unwholesome food, and the drinking brackish water. Mr Lane (in the Modern Egyptians) has made public a mode of treatment which has been attended with extraordinary success.

Asiatic cholera has visited Egypt in its westward course on the occasions in which it has appeared in Europe, excepting the last visitation; and it is remarkable that after each of the two former occasions, the epidemic appeared a second time, but with far less destructive results. At each of these times the mortality was considerable, nearly 200,000 having perished in all Egypt, according to the government reports, which were probably below the truth, in 1848.

Among the diseases most dreaded by the European residents, or, to use the expression of the natives, the Franks, is the liver-complaint. Those, however, who are moderate in the use of intoxicating drinks, or who abstain from them altogether, either escape this disease, or suffer from it in a comparatively mild form. Hemorrhoids and hernia are among the most ordinary maladies.

Cutaneous disorders have been esteemed from ancient times among the curses of Egypt. Leprosy is well known but not common, unlike elephantiasis, which in more than one form has numerous victims. Smallpox was formerly very severe, but its virulence has been checked by the use of vaccination. There are various other diseases of lesser importance, the most remarkable being the so-called guinea-worm, which, however, is perhaps not indigenous.

Of the diseases of the eye, ophthalmia is the most formidable from its prevalence and malignant character; yet perhaps no malady is more amenable to treatment if promptly commenced. Where the predisposition exists, a slight cause, such as the irritation caused by a grain of dust or sand, is sufficient to produce an inflammation, which, if allowed to increase, inflicts a lasting injury if it do not produce blindness. For this disease also Mr Lane has published a very efficacious mode of treatment.

Clot-Bey affirms that pulmonary consumption is extremely rare among the native inhabitants; yet another physician of ability has asserted, though not in print, that he had met with not a few cases in a short practice. The opinion of the former is corroborated, primum facie, by the circumstance that the Romans sent their consumptive patients to Egypt, and that modern European physicians have adopted the same course; yet the ill success of this change argues unfavourably for the climate of Egypt for persons thus afflicted. Its effect is not that of the climate of Madeira, and the patient rarely improves. A residence in the desert, however, a mile or two from Cairo, under canvas, would probably have a beneficial result in cases of incipient consumption. Asthma and bronchitis are among the common disorders.

The occurrence of coup-de-soleil is not unusual, but it is rarely attended with fatal results. Madness is common, but it generally assumes the milder form of idiocy. Maniacs alone are confined; idiots are regarded with much respect as saints, and it is probable that some persons feign idiocy to become objects of popular veneration, supported by alms given ungrudgingly. One of the Mameluke Sultans, Kalioum, after the example of Salih-ed-Deen or Saladin, founded a madhouse or manistan at Cairo, which yet remains, but in a grievously neglected state. Of late it has been found necessary to remove the patients thence to a modern hospital.

Nervous affections are uncommon, probably owing to the calm life which the inhabitants lead. Rheumatism is of more usual occurrence; but gout is, according to Clot-Bey, unknown. It is very remarkable that hydrophobia is also unknown in Egypt. Although ownerless dogs are very numerous in Cairo and the smaller towns, and the heat of summer is so great, there is no recorded instance of rabies; yet Clot-Bey is probably in error when he says that it has not been observed at any period in that country, for the formularies of the Coptic church contain a prayer to be used for a person afflicted with hydrophobia, and such a prayer is not likely to have been derived from a foreign source.

In considering the geology of Egypt, its deserts claim our first notice. By a desert is generally understood a wide plain of shifting sand; but this is usually an erroneous description of such a tract, and especially inapplicable to the deserts which border the valley of the Nile. These are raised mountain regions, the surface of which is often covered with sand, débris, and pebbles, intersected by valleys, and diversified, in the case of the western desert, by some oases.

On both sides of the Nile the mountains are limestone, until a little above Thebes, where the sandstone commences. At the First Cataract red granite and other primitive rocks burst through the sandstone beneath the bed of the Nile, and for a considerable space on the east, obstructing the course of the river by numerous small islands and rocks, and thus forming the rapids. In several places, chiefly on the eastern side, bold promontories or steep mountains approach the river, and sometimes reach it. They are always utterly devoid of vegetation, and, except the granite, generally of a yellowish or reddish colour, though in some places they are greyish. Near the cataracts the sandstone mountains are partially covered with a bright yellow sand in drifts. The mountains on both sides near the river are usually about 300 feet in height, and rarely much loftier. The highest point on the western bank at Thebes is four times that altitude. If one leaves the river and ascends the mountains, he finds a great rocky tract before him, the only easy paths through which are along valleys often very winding. The eastern desert gradually rises until about midway between the Nile and the Red Sea, where primitive rocks burst through the later formation, and the loftiest of them, a granite mountain called Gebel-Ghareb (cir. Lat. 28.) at-

---

1 Clot-Bey, De la Poste, Paris. 2 Modern Egyptians, App. E. 3 Id., ibid. 4 Clot-Bey, Aperçu Général, tom. II., p. 372. 5 Abulfeda Anwad Malonici, ed. Reiske, Hafn., 1790–1794, tom. iv., pp. 30, 31. 6 Englishman in Egypt, vol. i., p. 166. 7 Clot-Bey, Aperçu Général, tom. II., p. 377. 8 Id., tom. ii., p. 378. 9 This is stated on the authority of the Rev. J. R. T. Leader of Cairo, who has been long engaged in endeavouring to educate the Copts, and has succeeded in removing many of their prejudices, especially against Protestants. While occupied in this labour, he has collected a valuable amount of information respecting the ancient and remarkable church to which this remnant of the old inhabitants of Egypt belong. 10 For an account of the diseases of Egypt, see Clot-Bey's two works Aperçu Général and De la Poste, and Dee, de l'Egypte, tom. xiii., p. 22 et seqq. tains the height of about 6000 feet. In this portion of the desert are porphyry, breccia, and basalt rocks, which were much prized by the ancient inhabitants for purposes of architecture and sculpture. The western desert is of a lower elevation, and is principally remarkable for its oases, which are deep valleys containing alluvial soil, but they are little productive except in dates. Their beauty and fertility has been much, though naturally, exaggerated. Notwithstanding the inequalities of their surface, it is evident that these deserts gradually rise towards the Red Sea, attaining their greatest height in the peninsula of Sinai, which is but a continuation of the same tract.

The most remarkable geological change which has been observed to have taken place in Egypt, and which is still in operation, is the depression of the northern shore and the corresponding elevation of the southern part of the isthmus of Suez. The consequence of this change of level has been the ruin of places on the shore of the Mediterranean, and the extension of the salt-marsches, and at the same time the drying up of a considerable part of the northernmost portion of the Gulf of Suez. It is very interesting to find this latter result predicted in the Scriptures at a time when it could not have been humanly foreseen. Thus Isaiah prophesied, "The waters shall fall from the sea, and the river shall be wasted and dried up;" and, in another place, "The Lord shall utterly destroy the tongue of the Egyptian sea; and with his mighty wind shall he shake his hand over the river, and shall smite it in the seven streams, and make [men] go over dryshod" [Heb., in shoes]. In the latter passage, "the river" may mean Euphrates, and instead of "in the seven streams," we may read "into seven streams," but the former passage, as well as another, are sufficient to show that a diminution of the streams of the Nile was also prophesied, which likewise has been remarkably fulfilled. The bed of the Red Sea may be traced for a course of several miles north of Suez, which now stands at the head of its western gulf; and places considerably north of that town were on the coast within the historical period. Indeed, the change appears to have occurred chiefly, if not wholly, during that time.

The form of the plain and valley inclosed by the deserts and mountains is remarkably regular. In Lower Egypt the cultivable land little exceeds the limits of the ancient Delta, but considerably those of the space between the two remaining branches of the Nile. The northern coast is protected by shoals and a low range of sand-hills. To the south of these are extensive salt-marshes and lakes, or waste tracts, and then the cultivable land commences. The form of the valley, or Upper Egypt, may be more accurately described. For the first 70 miles above Cairo, by the course of the river, the valley is nearly north and south, until it takes a westerly direction, which it maintains for about the same distance. It then bends in an easterly course for a few miles, and again runs north and south for a longer distance, until, about 60 miles higher than the point where it turned towards the east, it again takes that direction, which is first E.S.E., then S.E., then due E., and at last a little to the N. of E. After this easterly course of near 200 miles, the valley becomes N. and S. for about 30 miles; it then turns to the W. for about 20 miles, and to the E. for about 50, when it again assumes a southerly direction for the remaining 60 miles below the First Cataract, the boundary of the country. The mountains and desert on the western side throughout Upper Egypt (or Middle and Upper), that is above Cairo, are generally farther from the river than those on the eastern, which frequently reach to the water's edge. The difference is most remarkable as far as the town of Farshout, which is by the course of the river about 350 miles above Cairo, and about 70 miles below Thebes. Near Farshout commences a continuous series of canals, which flow parallel to the Nile, and near the Libyan chain, until they terminate in Lower Egypt, not far north of Cairo. South of Farshout, the western mountains gradually approach the Nile, until, halfway between Thebes and the First Cataract, the cultivable soil is equally narrow on each bank; for, with the exception of a tract about 70 miles in length, commencing a little above Farshout, and terminating a little above Thebes, the mountains and deserts on the eastern bank are very near the river throughout Upper Egypt. The greatest breadth of the cultivable land, all of which is not now cultivated, on the western bank seldom exceeds about 8 or 10 miles, and on the eastern bank, about 3 miles, but it is usually much narrower.

There is in Upper Egypt one striking deviation from the uniform character of the country. About 70 miles above Cairo, by the course of the Nile, an opening in the Libyan range leads to a kind of oasis, the Feiyoum, a fertile tract, lying in a hollow of the desert, and having at its further extremity a considerable lake of brackish water.

In the hieroglyphic inscriptions, the Nile receives the name of Hapimou, or the "abyss of waters," under which Nile it was worshipped as a god. This divinity is represented as a stout man having woman's breasts, and sometimes painted red, but at others blue, to indicate the river at the season of its rise and during the rest of the year, or High and Low Nile. The names of the Nile in Coptic are Ἀφράτος or "the river," which was probably likewise an ancient Egyptian name, and its variations, and Ἀφράτος. Other supposed Coptic names rest upon doubtful authority.

We find in the Bible three names of the Nile. It is frequently called Ἐρυθρὰ Ῥᾶς, or "the river of Egypt." The appellation Ἐρυθρὰ Ῥᾶς, and its plural, is similar to this, and is probably of Egyptian origin. The Nile also receives the name of Ἐρυθρὰ Ῥᾶς —that is, if the word Ἐρυθρὰ be a proper name—Nahal, and Nahal-Mizraim; or, if it bear its ordinary Hebrew signification, "the brook," and "the brook of Egypt." Hence a difference of opinion has obtained respecting this name, some maintaining that it was a name of the Nile, while others concluded that it applied to a mountain torrent, which is usually dry, on the border of Egypt and Palestine, sometimes called the river of Egypt. In parallel passages, however, "the river of Egypt" and "the Nahal of Egypt" are used synonymously, and almost certainly, also, the latter and the name Shihor, which is undoubtedly a name of the Nile. It becomes a question, then, whether Nahal is to be taken in its ordinary Hebrew signification, or as a proper name of the river, and the origin of the Greek Ἀγγελός. That it usually signifies a brook when applied to a stream cannot be denied, but its proper and first meaning is a valley, and thence a mountain-torrent. The Arabs, in like manner, have often used the word "wadée," properly signifying "a valley," to designate rivers, because mountain-torrents in the valleys of Arabia are the streams to which the natives are accustomed; hence the names of several Spanish rivers commence with this word, as the Guadalquivir, a corruption of the Arab name, El-Wadee el-Kebeer, or "the great river." It is not unreasonable, therefore, to suppose Nahal not to be a proper name. On the other hand, it may be argued that it is scarcely likely that two such similar appellations as Nehar-Mizraim and Nahal-Mizraim would be employed to designate the same stream, particularly as they ordinarily bear different significations; that the Arabs have the parallel appellation, Neel-Misr, or the Nile of Egypt; and that Nahal bears a resemblance to Néos which can hardly be accidental. The name Shihor, which occurs in the Bible, as already noticed, is derived from יָם, "to be black," and signifies turbid and black.

The proper name of this river in Greek is Néos, by which it is known among the Arabs, who call it نيل إسحاق, En-Neel, the Nile, or نيل مصر Neel-Misr, the Nile of Egypt. A famous Arab lexicographer gives the following explanation of this word: "نيل إسحاق" is the river (lit. the inundation) of Egypt: Es-Saghánee says—But as to the نيل [indigo] with which one dyes, it is an Indian word Arabised."

As the Hebrew word Shihor signifies black or turbid—and, with that signification, properly applies to the river during the inundation—it is very remarkable to find a name properly signifying the Nile during the inundation, to be the same as that of the dye indigo. It should be remembered also that the Low Nile was painted blue by the ancient Egyptians. The river is turbid and reddish throughout the year, and turns green about the time when the signs of rising commence, but not long afterwards becomes red and particularly turbid. Not to extend these remarks further, and to show more clearly the connection between the different names of the Nile mentioned above and others, a comparative list is here appended.

| Hebrew | Arabic | Greek | Latin | |--------------|----------|-----------|----------| | Nahar-Mizraim | نهر مزيّم | Νεῖλος | Nilus | | Nahal-Mizraim | نهر مزيّم | Νεῖλος | Nilus | | Nahal | نيل | Νεῖλος | Nilus | | Shihor | شهور | | Melo | | Bahr (Sea) | بحر | | |

The Gihon, which is mentioned as one of the four rivers which arose in Eden, has been supposed by early commentators, as well as by certain modern critics, to be identical with the Nile. This opinion, however, is irreconcilable with the position of the other rivers, two of which are indubitably the Tigris and the Euphrates, and the third, probably the Phasis.

The present article is not the place in which to examine the various opinions which have obtained respecting the source of the Nile. It is enough to say, that the interesting discoveries by Dr Krapf and Mr Rebmann, the missionaries stationed at Mombas, leave no room to doubt that the Bahr el-Abyad, or White Nile, flows from snowy mountains south of the equator. These must be the Mountain or Mountains of the Moon spoken of by Ptolemy and the Arabian geographers, and so called, according to Aristotle, from their whiteness. The Arabs generally have placed the source of the river considerably south of the equator; and the errors of our modern European geographers must be ascribed to the Greeks. For farther details, see the article Nile.

A remarkable change has been ascertained to have occurred in the level of the Nile above Gebel-es-Silsilé (the ancient Silsilis, more than 80 miles south of Thebes), and throughout a considerable portion of Nubia. Indications of this change were first observed by Dr Lepsius, who discovered hieroglyphic inscriptions on rocks at Semneh, not far above the Second Cataract, showing that the river attained a much higher level about 2000 years before the Christian era than it does now. Sir Gardner Wilkinson pursued the inquiry in a paper read before the Royal Society of Literature, and published in their Transactions, wherein he argues that the cause of this alteration must have been the bursting through of a barrier at Silsilis, where the low mountains confine the river to a narrow channel. There must have been at this place, therefore, an ancient fall of far more importance than the First Cataract, and those above it throughout Nubia; and from it may have arisen the accounts in classic writers of the greatness of the cataracts of the Nile, which are wholly inapplicable to the present First Cataract. This change seems to have been already complete about the beginning of the fourteenth century before our era, and we cannot tell if it had not been effected considerably earlier. All that is known for certain is, that it took place after the middle of the twentieth century B.C., and before the later date first mentioned. Its result has been to place the cultivable soil of a great portion of Nubia beyond the reach of the inundation, so that it is irrigated alone by water-wheels.

The water of the Nile differs considerably in appearance and purity at various seasons of the year. A little after deposits, midsummer it becomes very turbid, and not long afterwards it assumes a green colour for more than a fortnight, owing to the quantity of vegetable matter which it brings down from its upper course. It then resumes its turbid character for the period of the rise, and retains it, though in a less degree, for the remaining portion of the year, until the following midsummer. The water is extremely sweet, particularly if drunk in its turbid state, and is easily filtered through porous jars manufactured in the country. Too careful a filtration destroys its peculiar flavour, and diminishes its excellence. It is very wholesome, except during the short period at which it is green; and the inhabitants of Egypt hold it in such high esteem, that they say, that he who has once drunk of the water of the Nile must return to drink of it again. Its turbid appearance, particularly during the rise and inundation, is owing to the presence of large quantities of earthy matter, which are annually deposited. The deposit, or mud of the Nile, has been thus analysed by M. Regnault. The specimen was dry, and taken from a canal which conducted the waters of the inundation. He obtained the following results:

| Substance | Percentage | |--------------------|------------| | Water | 11 | | Carbon | 09 | | Oxide of iron | 05 | | Silica | 04 | | Carbonate of magnesia | 04 | | Carbonate of lime | 18 | | Alumen | 48 |

M. Regnault remarks that the quantities of silica and alum are very according to the places whence the mud is taken. "On the banks of the Nile the mud contains much sand; and, when it is carried by the waters of the inundation to distant tracts, it loses on the way a quantity of sand proportionate to its distance from the river; so that, when this distance is very considerable, one finds the argillaceous matter almost pure: thus the soil of Egypt presents argillaceous matter in those different states of purity which the arts require."

The Nile shows the first signs of rising in Egypt about Rise and the time of the summer solstice. At Khartoom, where the inundation White River and the Blue River join, the commencement of the increase is observed early in April. The slowness of the rise at first causes this difference. Usually the regular increase does not commence in Egypt until some days after Egypt.

The summer solstice, and the inundation begins about two months after that solstice. The river attains its greatest height at, or not long after, the autumnal equinox, and then, falling more slowly than it had risen, sinks to its lowest point at the end of nine months, when it remains stationary for a few days, until it begins again to increase. The inundation continues rather longer than it naturally would do, because the waters are retained for some time upon the lands by closing the mouths of the canals. The river's banks being a little higher than the rest of the cultivable soil, the water is conveyed by canals or cuttings, and does not pour over the banks.

The inundations vary considerably, and, by either failing or rising to too great a height, cause much damage and distress. In the great French Description of Egypt, there is a table of sixty-six inundations, whereof eleven were very high, thirty good, sixteen feeble, and nine insufficient. This table was taken from the official records of the Nilometer on the Island of Er-Rodah, near Cairo, and comprehends the inundations of the years A.D. 1150-1215; that is, A.D. 1787-1800.

The Nile rises about 40 feet at the First Cataract, about 36 at Thebes, about 25 at Cairo, and about 4 at the Rosetta and Damietta mouths of the Nile, during a good inundation. When it is said, however, that the river has attained to a certain height in feet or cubits, the height at the Nilometer of Er-Rodah above-mentioned is meant; and by ancient writers, that of the river at Memphis, which was situated on the western bank, a little higher than Er-Rodah. If the river do not attain a greater height than 18 or 20 feet, the rise is scanty; if only 2 or 4 feet more, insufficient; if it attain to 24 feet, or a greater height, not exceeding 27 feet, the inundation is good; but a higher rise must be characterized as a destructive flood. Sometimes the inundation has failed altogether; as for seven years (A.D. 457) in the reign of the Fatimee Khaleefeh El-Mustansir bi-Ish, when there was a seven-years famine; and low inundations always cause deaths. Excessive inundations, on the other hand, produce, or at least foster, the plague and murrain; so that a variation of a few feet is productive of the most serious consequences.

The current, when at the lowest, has been estimated at about 2 feet a second, or a mile and a third in the hour, and at about 3 miles an hour during its height. The volume of water which the Nile pours into the Mediterranean in 24 hours, is as follows, according to M. Linant, an engineer in the employ of the Egyptian government:

| Current Volume | |----------------| | During the Low Nile, by the Rosetta Branch, | 79,532,551,728 | | by the Damietta Branch, | 71,033,840,610 | | During the High Nile, by the Rosetta Branch, | 478,317,838,960 | | by the Damietta Branch, | 227,190,828,480 |

Although the water is so abundantly charged with alluvium throughout the year, and especially during the inundation, the annual deposit by the river, except under extraordinary circumstances, is very much smaller than would be conjectured by any one unacquainted with researches into subjects of this nature. Various opinions have obtained as to the exact deposit left in a century on the land, but the inquirers have not usually differed in their results above an inch. If, however, we compare the quantity of deposit on certain very ancient structures, whereof we know the date, we shall find that the amount has materially differed in various places. Such differences are the natural results of irregularities in the river's course, of the strength or weakness of the current at particular places, of the nature of the country, and many other disturbing causes, from which we might have expected even greater variations. The ordinary average rate of the increase of the soil of Egypt may however be stated as about four inches and a half in a century.

The cultivable land of Egypt must be regarded as wholly the deposit of the Nile, but it is vain to attempt a calculation of the period at which this process commenced, since we cannot conclude that the same ratio has always obtained, and we must suppose that the causes then in operation were very different from those which now regulate the phenomenon.

From the table of the superficies of Egypt, it will be seen that the cultivable soil occupies only 5626 square miles, and that which might be cultivated only 1295 square miles, altogether 6921 square miles, or somewhat more than two-thirds of the whole space included between the deserts; but the quantity actually under cultivation does not exceed 5469 or 5500 square miles, or six-elevenths of the entire surface. This was not always so, and the deficiency of the population is the principal cause that near one-half of the soil which might possibly be brought into a state of culture is left uncultivated.

Throughout Egypt the cultivable soil does not present any very great difference, being always the deposit of the river; it contains, however, more sand near the river than at a distance from it. Towards the Mediterranean, its quality is injured by the salt with which the air is impregnated, and therefore it is not so favourable to vegetation. This, however, does not usually extend far south of the sea or the salt-marshes which intervene for the most part between it and the land. In Lower Egypt we find the greater portion of the neglected tracts principally to the E. and W. of the modern Delta, and in its northern portion. In Upper Egypt the narrowness of the valley, and the more numerous population, preserve the country in a better state of cultivation, and the soil is somewhat richer. The largest uncultivated tracts lie on the western bank, where the valley is broadest, and in places where the great canal running parallel to the Nile has fallen into a neglected condition. It may not be uninteresting to endeavour to trace the causes which have produced this change in Egypt.

Although some of the accounts of classic writers may be deemed exaggerated when they speak of the population and prosperity of Egypt in ancient times, we cannot accuse them of errors, except in the numbers of cities and villages, and of the inhabitants of the country; for the monuments show us how rich was Egypt under native rulers, and indicate to what causes this condition may reasonably be assigned. From the time at which the Great Pyramid was built, to the Persian invasion, a period of not much less than 2000 years, the population of Egypt and its extent of cultivated land far exceeded what they are in the present day. The country does not seem to have been over-populated; and many causes conduced to prevent this, such as the serious wars in which the Pharaohs engaged, the formation of colonies, and the like. The conquest by Cambyses, and the subsequent long and desolating struggle with the Persians, inflicted a severe blow on the interests of the country. Under the Macedonians it recovered much of its former prosperity; and when the Romans held Egypt, it was one of their most productive provinces, and the granary... of the empire. During the period of their rule, or for nearly seven centuries, various causes contributed to the decline of the population, but they were all of a political character. The chief of these were the contests of rival emperors, the occasional attempts of the natives to regain their independence, the incursions of savage tribes whom the Romans often had not power enough to repulse, notwithstanding that Egypt was in part protected by German mercenaries, until they had inflicted much loss on the inhabitants; and lastly, the religious struggles, first the persecutions of the Christians by the idolaters, and then the differences of Christian sects. After the Muslim conquest, this decay continued almost uninterruptedly until the accession of the Fatimées; but from that time until the Turkish invasion, although foreign wars certainly diminished the population, the kings of that and the succeeding independent dynasties generally governed the country with a regard for its best interests, and cannot be accused of the tyranny and misrule of which the Turkish pashás have been guilty. To them must be attributed the present miserable condition of Egypt. The great evil then is an insufficient population, and their consequent inability to cultivate the whole of the land fit for culture.

Physical causes have been assigned to account for what is in the main simply traceable to political ones. The geological change producing the elevation of the tract north of the head of the Gulf of Suez, and the depression of the north coast of Egypt has considerably diminished the cultivable soil in the Delta, by increasing the salt lakes and marshes which occupy its southern portion. There is, however, no greater fallacy than to suppose that the sands of the deserts have done injury by encroaching on the alluvial tracts, and that once fertile regions are buried beneath them. In some places they have undoubtedly encroached upon the valley or plain; but the deposit of the Nile has been constantly, and in almost every part of the country, encroaching upon the deserts, and thus diminishing their extent. It is neglect which might easily be remedied, that has permitted the sands thus to cover the soil where there have been no labourers to cultivate it. Above Gebel-es-Silsilah (Silsilis), in Upper Egypt, the change in the level of the Nile has placed fertile tracts almost wholly beyond the reach of the inundation, and thus made agriculture very laborious, but this is only for the space of about 40 miles in Egypt, where the extent of cultivated soil must always have been small on account of the narrowness of the valley. The failure of five of the seven branches of the Nile is partly to be charged to the neglect of the inhabitants, since all might have been maintained as constantly running canals; and the decay of the great canal which runs parallel to the Nile throughout the chief part of Upper Egypt is traceable to the same cause.

Various projects have been undertaken of late to better the condition of Egypt. The most promising of these was the construction of a barrage across both branches of the Nile at the point of the Delta, in order to regulate the inundation, and thus to render the country more fertile and easy of cultivation. This great engineering work was commenced under the government of Mohammad 'Alej, and continued under that of Ibrahim Pasha. Abbas Pasha ordered it to cease; but it is said that Sa'eed Pasha, the present governor (Jan. 1855), intends to complete it. There is no doubt that, if successful, this barrage would produce the most happy results; but many other changes must take place before we can hope that Egypt will begin to recover anything of its ancient prosperity. A better government, and the placing the commerce of the country in native hands, would do much to effect this desirable result; but as far as we can judge, such a reform is unlikely. The pashalic will cease at the expiration of the present treaty with the Porte to be hereditary, and the governors will have no desire but to extract as much wealth as they can from their unfortunate province. The destiny of Egypt may indeed be different, but this is not the place in which to discuss the Oriental Question.

Under the Pharaohs Egypt was an agricultural country, and both commerce and manufactures were comparatively unimportant. They judged rightly, that the main energies of the people should be expended in turning to the best account a soil of unexcelled richness, annually watered and renewed by the river. From the sculptures and paintings of the tombs, we form a clear idea of the agriculture of the ancient Egyptians, while the Scriptures and the classical writers give us information respecting the tenure of land, and the laws affecting the cultivators.

From the representations on the walls of the tombs, we learn what especial attention the great proprietors of land paid to the processes of agriculture. We see them constantly overseeing the labourers, and thus watching the interests of their lands; and this indicates one of the causes of the national prosperity of those times. The Egyptians were especially anxious to have a sufficient supply of water, both to draw the waters of the Nile upon those tracts which were not above their level at different periods, and to raise them by manual labour to the higher portions of the land. To effect the former object, they displayed great mechanical skill, as well as in the construction of dams and dikes, to retain the waters upon the lands; but for the latter they seem to have been contented with the rudest contrivances. Indeed, we know of but two methods that were employed in raising water, the use of the simple machine called in the present day the shadoof, and buckets carried by men. The shadoof is still employed, and is of the same form as that used by the ancient Egyptians. It consists of a pole resting upon a beam placed across two columns of brick or mud, and having at one extremity a weight, and at the other a rude bowl-shaped bucket suspended by a stick. A man stands beneath it, and pulling down the bucket to the water, raises it again, assisted by the weight.

Immediately after the water of the inundation had subsided, the land was ploughed or broken up by the hoe, and sown, the seed being sometimes trodden in by goats driven over the field for the purpose. Wheat being the most important of the field produce, we find the various agricultural processes connected with it frequently represented. Besides the ploughing and sowing, the harvest is depicted, the reapers cutting the wheat just below the ear, the ears being carried in nets or baskets by men or on asses to the thrashing-floor, where they were threshed by oxen or cows. Sometimes the wheat was bound in sheaves. The same or similar processes with reference to other kinds of grain are portrayed in the tombs, wherein we find also curious representations of the vineyards and gardens. The vineyard was not the least valuable part of an estate when Egypt was famous for its wines in the days of the Greeks and Romans; and it is evident that wine must have been highly prized in earlier times from several kinds being enumerated in the inscriptions, and from its always being seen at the feasts. Besides the vine, other fruit-trees were cultivated, and especially the palm-tree. These will be afterwards mentioned in speaking of the productions of Egypt, which are now, for the most part, the same as in early times. The gardens were often extensive, and laid out with great formality (partly the result of their being watered in the same manner as the fields generally), and containing tanks for fish as well as for purposes of inundation. The Egyptians paid great atten-

---

1 For the ancient form of the shadoof, see Ancient Egyptians, vol. II., p. 4; and for the modern, Modern Egyptians, chap. xiv. 2 Wilkinson's Ancient Egyptians, vol. iv., p. 38. 3 Id., p. 86, 87, 90, 94. 4 Id., p. 93. 5 Lepsius's Denkmäler, abth. iii., bl. 95. tion to preserving fish, and the product of the fisheries of one great artificial lake, that of Moris, formed an important branch of the revenue. There were also tracts left to reeds, which, if not planted, were at least carefully maintained, on account of their value for manufactures, and as covers for wild-fowl.

The agricultural labourers, like the herdsmen, were regarded as a degraded class, and seem not to have possessed land of their own, except in very early times. Indeed, it is stated in the Bible that Joseph purchased the whole of the land of the Egyptians for Pharaoh, and gave the people seed to sow it, claiming a fifth of the produce as the king's right. The land of the priests alone was not purchased.1 Dio- dorus Siculus relates that anciently the land was the property of the priests, of the king, and of the military class,2 and the monuments leave little room to doubt that such was generally the case. The two accounts are reconciled by supposing that the military class soon regained their land.

The agriculture of the modern Egyptians differs little from that of the ancient inhabitants. In one respect it is the converse of the old culture, for while the ancients excelled in the management of dikes and dams, and neglected the raising of water except by a simple and rude machine, or the still simpler method of carrying it in buckets, the moderns, while they have paid less attention to the great canals, and the means by which they were regulated, have employed far more ingenious means of artificial irrigation. The deficiency of population has partly caused the decay of many of the canals, and the neglect of many of the dams and dikes, and has at the same time necessitated the economizing of human labour, for which that of oxen has been substituted in a great measure.

Of the machines the most common is the shadoof, already described, but there are also two kinds of water-wheels. The more usual of these is that called the sakiyeh, which is composed of a horizontal wheel turned by oxen, and connected with a vertical wheel which is on the same axis as another around which are earthen pots in which the water is raised and poured into a trough. The taboot is a similar machine, which differs from the sakiyeh principally in having a hollow wheel instead of the wheel with pots, in the jaunts or flicles of which the water is conveyed. Sometimes a katweh is employed, which is a bucket like that of the shadoof, having four cords by which two men dip it into the river or canal and raise the water.3

"The 'rei' lands (or those which are naturally inundated) are, with some exceptions, cultivated but once during the year. After the waters have retired, about the end of October or beginning of November, they are sown with wheat, barley, lentils, beans, lupins, chick-peas, &c. This is called the 'shitaewe' (or winter) season. But the 'sharakee' lands (or those which are too high to be subject to the natural inundation), and some parts of the rei, by artificial irrigation are made to produce three crops every year; though not all the sharakee lands are thus cultivated. The lands artificially irrigated produce, first, their shitaewe crops, being sown at the same period as the rei lands, generally with wheat or barley. Secondly, in what is called the 'seyfe', or in the southern part of Egypt the 'keydeee' or 'geydee' (that is, the summer) season, commencing about the vernal equinox, or a little later, they are sown with millet ('durah seyfe'), or with indigo or cotton, &c. Thirdly, in the 'demeerch' season, or period of the rise of the Nile, commencing about or soon after the summer solstice, they are sown with millet again, or with maize ('durah shamee'), &c., and thus crowned with a third harvest. Sugar is cultivated throughout a large portion of Upper Egypt; and rice in the low lands near the Mediterranean."4

The culture of cotton was introduced by Mohammad 'Alee with a view to promote his manufacturing schemes, and the Turkish grandees have found it a source of temporary profit. The necessity, however, of constructing dams to exclude the Nile water from the cotton-growing fields has rendered the inundations destructive, and the speculation seems on the whole to have injured the welfare of Egypt.

The agricultural implements of the modern Egyptians are rude in construction, and similar to those anciently employed in the country. One of these, however, was not known to the earlier inhabitants. This is the nérág, a machine "in the form of a chair, which moves upon small iron wheels or thin circular plates, generally eleven, fixed to three thick axle-trees, four to the foremost, the same number to the hindmost, and three to the intermediate axle-tree. This machine is drawn in a circle by a pair of cows or bulls over the corn." It is employed to separate the grain of wheat, barley, &c., and to cut the straw, which is used for fodder.5 The ancient Egyptians, as before remarked, generally cut the wheat near the ear.

An Egyptian garden is in some respects a miniature of Egypt. It is intersected by numerous small channels which are filled by one or more water-wheels. By these channels the water is spread over the garden, divided by them into many square compartments, edged with ridges of earth. This system of course makes it very difficult to keep a garden in good order, and no great variety of flowers is cultivated.

Though Mohammad 'Alee Páshá was very desirous to encourage European manufactures, he did not sufficiently endeavour to apply modern science to the improvement of the native agriculture. Ibraheem Páshá, however, who succeeded him, always maintained that the country should be agricultural rather than manufacturing, and introduced important improvements during his father's government. In particular, he watered large tracts by means of powerful engines, and his estates were always noted for the excellence of their culture. But the shortness of his rule did not permit him to extend these plans, and they ill suited the oriental apathy of Abbás Pásha. Whether the present governor will adopt a wiser policy than his predecessor cannot yet be perceived, but his abolition of certain government monopolies augurs well for the future. The first popular acts of a new ruler do not, however, always indicate the course he will pursue.

Before the time of Mohammad 'Alee a kind of feudal tenure of system prevailed, and much of the land was possessed by land, small proprietors under the protection of the great emirs. By the massacre of the Membooks, the pashá destroyed feudalism, and by arbitrarily seizing almost all the landed property, rendered private tenure of land a most rare condition. He allotted to those whom he thus unjustly dispossessed annual pensions for life, as the only compensation for an act of tyranny to which even the history of Egypt scarcely affords a parallel.6 But this cruelty was carried still farther, and those whose lands were not confiscated, through fear yielded them up, so to speak, voluntarily, and buried their title-deeds, which are yet so concealed. A system of government which suffers the supreme authority to overlook such acts, and subordinate governors to perpetrate them, in defiance of the Muslim code and Arab jurisprudence, demands the most thorough and searching reform.

Egypt has always been famous for its lakes, which have Lakes of either aided commerce or supplied the inhabitants of the Egyptian country with fish and wild fowl, or with some valuable production, or assisted in regulating the effects of the inundation. All have enriched the land in some one of these

---

1 Gen. xlvii. 18-26. 2 Lib. i., ch. 73. 3 Modern Egyptians, ch. xiv. 4 Id., ch. xiv. 5 Modern Egyptians, ch. xiv. 6 Id., ch. iv. Commencing our examination at the north-western extremity of Egypt, we first observe the lake now called Bohéryet-Maryoot, and anciently Lake Mareotis. This is an extensive salt marsh rather than a lake, excepting during the inundation, when its contents are augmented by filtration. Its shape is that of an irregular right-angled triangle, whereof the hypotenuse extends from east to west for a space of about forty miles. At its eastern extremity the lake is of little breadth, and separated by only a narrow strip of land from the sea. It scarcely widens for about half its length, and then suddenly becomes very broad to the south of Alexandria. Not far beyond that city its shore changes in direction, and the distance from the sea for the first time becomes greater. The eastern side, which is the shortest, has a south-easterly direction, and the lake is here of considerable breadth. Anciently Lake Mareotis was navigable, and thus contributed to the commercial importance of Alexandria. The country around was cultivated, and produced the famous Mareotic wine. The relations of various travellers show that it was still a lake during the fifteenth and sixteenth, and as late as towards the close of the seventeenth century after the Christian era; and one of these writers, Villamont (in 1590), mentions that in his time the fisheries produced a considerable sum. When, however, the French army conquered and occupied Egypt (1798–1801) they found its basin to be “a sandy plain, of which the lower portion retained the rain-water, which remained there for a great part of winter.” It probably had dried up towards the close of the seventeenth century or beginning of the eighteenth. On the 4th of April 1801 the English army, which was co-operating with that of the Grand Vezir against the French garrison of Alexandria, cut the dikes of the canal of that city, and thus admitted the waters of the Lake of Aboo-Keer into the ancient bed of Lake Mareotis, in order to cut off the water supply of the besieged. The basin of the lake being, however, partially inhabited, some loss of life and property was the result of this act, which has been much called in question, and not without reason. The unhealthiness of Alexandria is also traceable to the formation of this marsh. The precedent thus set has been twice imitated, first by the Turks in 1803, and a second time by the English army under General Fraser in 1807. At the present day the lake or marsh is unprofitable, and its shores are uncultivated and uninhabited, the whole wearing the most dreary and melancholy aspect.

To the north of Lake Mareotis is situated that of Aboo-Keer, called by the modern Egyptians Bohéryet-Aboo-Keer. It is simply the northernmost portion of the former lake, from which it is separated by the Mahmoodeeyeh Canal (which here occupies the site of the older Canal of Alexandria), and the embankments or dikes which form its banks. It is very small, nowhere measuring ten miles across; and extremely shallow, usually not exceeding three feet in depth. The water is salt, being chiefly derived from the sea, from which it is separated by a narrow strip of land on the western side, and on the eastern by a similar strip of far less breadth, the shore of the ever memorable Bay of Aboo-Keer.

To the east of the lake of Aboo-Keer is that of Atkoo, or Bohéryet-Atkoo. It spreads when full nearly to the town of Rosetta, and is separated from the sea by a narrow neck of land on which stands the large village of Atkoo. Its extent varies according to the quantity of water which it receives from the inundation.

The great lake of El-Burullus commences a little to the Lake of eastward of the Rosetta branch of the Nile, and stretches El-Burullus somewhat beyond where the canal which was anciently the Sebennytic branch enters it, and passing through it reaches the sea. Like the other northern lakes, it is separated from the Mediterranean by a narrow strip of land, and its shore on that side is similar in direction to the coast of Egypt. For two-thirds of its extent from its western end it takes a north-easterly direction, and then turns towards the south-east. Its southern shore is extremely irregular, and not far from it are most of the numerous islands which diversify its surface. The greatest extent of the lake, measured in a line from the eastern to the western extremity, exceeds forty miles, and it is throughout very shallow. It is chiefly known for its water-melons, which are yellow within instead of being red or pink, and come into season after those grown on the banks of the Nile.

The extraordinary of the lakes of Egypt is Bohéryet-el-Lake of Menzeh, which greatly exceeds the others in size. It extends from very near the Damietta branch of the Nile zeleh to the mouth of the old Tanitic branch, which is now called the canal of El-Moizz, and passes through this lake to the sea. It also receives the waters of the canals which were once the Mendesian and Pelusiac branches. The northern shore is separated from the sea by an extremely narrow strip of land, and slopes from the west in a south-easterly direction, and the southern shore is very irregular, although its distance from the northern generally does not vary much. At its south-eastern extremity is a long marshy creek extending into the desert. Its average length is about forty miles, and its average breadth about fifteen. Its depth is greater than that of the other lakes, and the water is salt, though mixed with fresh, and therefore not pure sea-water. Upon the surface are numerous islands, and the whole lake abounds in reeds of various kinds. It supports a considerable population of rude fishermen, who dwell in villages on the shore and islands, and live upon the fish of the lake. This fishery was a government monopoly, and probably is so still unless Sa'eed Pashá has abolished it with the other monopolies. The reeds are cover for water-fowl of various kinds which the traveller sees in great numbers, and wild boars are found in the marshes to the south.

The Lake Serbonis, so well known in ancient times as Lake having swallowed up those passing over its marshes concealed by shifting sands, is now dry, and little danger is to be feared by those who cross it. It cannot indeed be any longer included in the list of the lakes of Egypt.

Besides the lakes above mentioned are those called the Bitter Lakes, which should rather be termed marshes, oc.-Lakes, occupying part of the ancient bed of the Red Sea between Suez and Lake Menzeh, and the Natron Lakes. The Natron latter are very small, and situate in a valley of the western Lakes desert, not very far from the river; this valley will be noticed in a future place.

In Upper Egypt there is but one lake of sufficient importance to claim a separate notice. It is the Birket-el-El-Karn, Karn or Lake of El-Karn, at the extremity of the Fezyoom, which is, as already mentioned, an oasis on the western side of the river, to which an opening in the mountains leads. It is about 36 miles long, and its widest part a little exceeds 7 miles, according to Sir Gardner Wilkinson, while in several places it is considerably narrower. About the middle is a single island. The depth is not great, and the same author,

---

1 "Boheyreh" (pronounced "Boheyret") when followed by a genitive signifies "a little sea," being the diminutive of "bahr" a "sea," and is applied to large lakes, smaller ones receiving the appellation "birchek." The distinction is however not always maintained, and the great lake of the Fezyoom is called Birket-el-Karn, although from its size it should be called a boheyreh.

2 Description de l'Egypte, tom. xvi., p. 201.

3 Id., pp. 200, 201.

4 Id., 201, 202.

5 See section ii.

6 Description de l'Egypte, tom. xvi., p. 204.

7 Id., p. 205.

8 Modern Egypt and Thebes, vol. I., p. 446. who "sounded in several places," "found what is considered the deepest part to be only 28½ feet." Its level is considerably below that of the Nile, as the bank of the river at Benese-Sweyef, which is at the entrance of the valley leading to the Feiyoum, is upwards of a hundred feet higher than the water of the lake. The shores are barren or uncultivated; the northern is desert and bounded by sandy mountains; the southern was in ancient times partly cultivated. The water is brackish and unwholesome, though the fishermen, of whom there are a few, drink it habitually.

The famous Lake Morris lay between the Feiyoum and the Nile, and not far from the river. It was an artificial work executed by an ancient Pharaoh, whose name it bore, and may rather be described as having been a broad canal than a lake. The irrigation of neighbouring tracts was regulated by Lake Morris, and its fisheries, as before mentioned, formed an important part of the revenue. Subsequently to the subjugation of Egypt by the Romans its dikes were neglected, and by degrees it became ruined. Until lately its position and extent were considered doubtful, but M. Linant's excellent memoir, published by the Egyptian Society of Cairo, has established these points most satisfactorily from the remains of its basin, which are yet traceable.

The canals of Egypt deserve especial attention from their great importance in extending the beneficial influence of the inundation. In Lower Egypt we find, beginning from the east, first the Mahmoodeyreh Canal, which connects Alexandria with the Rosetta branch of the Nile, taking a similar direction to that of the ancient canal which it has succeeded. It was dug by the orders of Mohammad 'Alee, and although not quite 50 miles in length, and not 100 feet broad, about 12,000 labourers are said to have died in ten months while the work was in progress. This is well known to be a tolerably accurate statement of the losses experienced by the unfortunate workmen, and is only one of the many instances which the history of our own times affords of that reckless disregard of human life, which is one of the worst traits of Turkish character, and strikingly distinguishes the cruel 'Osmânîee from the humane Arab."

Between the Rosetta and Damietta branches of the Nile are several canals, some of which are of importance, particularly the short canal of Manoof connecting the two branches not far from the point of the Delta. To the east of the Damietta branch are others, whereof the most remarkable occupy the beds of the Tanitic and Pelusiac branches, which have been cleared to a sufficient extent to form canals. The former of these, which lies to the westward of the other, is called the Canal of El-Moizz, the first Fatîme khaleefeh who ruled in Egypt, having been dug by his orders, and the latter bears the name of the Canal of Abu-l-Munegega, a Jew who executed this work, under the Khaleefeh El-'Amir, in order to water the province called the Sharkeeyeh. The last-mentioned canal is connected with the remains of that which anciently joined the Nile and the Red Sea. Of this important work the greater part has been destroyed through neglect, but it might be restored without a very great expenditure. It was of the Pharaonic times—having been commenced according to ancient writers by Sesôstri or by Neco II.; most probably by the former, since Rameses II., who is generally intended by the Sesôstri of the Greeks, has left a record of his reign in its vicinity. It was continued by Darius Hystaspis, and at length finished by Ptolemy Philadelphus. The reopening of this canal, or the cutting of another from the Mediterranean to the Red Sea, has been proposed in our own times, but both projects have given way to that of a railway, which is now in course of construction. A ship canal joining the Mediterranean and the Red Sea is now (January 1855), however, contemplated, but it is generally believed that it will not be carried out.

The extent and character of the great canal called the Bahr-Bahr-Yosef or River of Joseph, which runs parallel with Yosef, the Nile on its western side, from a little below Cairo to near Farshout, a distance by the river of about 350 miles, render it the most important work of the kind in Egypt. It is a continuous series of canals rather than one canal. Although the Joseph whence it takes its name is the celebrated Salih-ed-deen, the Saladin of our historians, yet it is related that he merely repaired it, and it is not doubted to be of a much earlier period. Most probably it was executed under the Pharaohs; and there would seem some reason in the Arab tradition that it was the work of the patriarch Joseph, were it not for the circumstance that such a story would naturally arise from its name. In the present day it is not navigable except during the season of the inundation, and at other times is dry in various places. To restore it would not be a work of extreme difficulty, and would greatly benefit the commerce and agriculture of the country, perhaps more than any other undertaking of the kind.

Egypt differs from most other countries in having neither Botany, woods nor forests. Besides the palm groves, we rarely see even a grove of trees, except in Lower Egypt. The largest common trees are acacias, sycamore-fig-trees, and mulberry-trees, all of which are frequently planted on each side of the great roads near Cairo; and the most beautiful trees are the date-palm and the banana. The beauty of the palm is, however, in a great measure owing to art; for its lowest branches are annually cut, which causes it to grow high, and renders its head of elegant form. On this account the ancient Egyptians adopted a palm branch as the symbol of the year. When wild, this tree has a far inferior appearance, being low, and having long ragged branches reaching to the ground; and its dates are small and poor in flavour. The Theban palm is a very different tree, having two great branches, each of which divides into two other branches, a subdivision which continues still farther. The weeping-willow, myrtle, elm, and cypress, are found in the gardens and plantations, with various trees bearing the fruits to be next mentioned; and the tamarisk is to be seen everywhere.

The more common of the fruits are dates of various kinds; which are sold half-ripe, ripe, dried, and pressed in their fresh moist state in mats or skins. Many different sorts are enumerated as known in Egypt. The dependencies,

---

1 Modern Egypt and Thebes, vol. ii., pp. 344–5. 2 Id., p. 346. 3 Englishmen in Egypt, vol. i., pp. 47–8. 4 Writers on the East have not generally been careful to distinguish the Turkish and Arab national character, and the former has thus had the advantage of the virtues of the latter, which has received in return the stigma of the other's vices. The remarkable characteristics of Arab character are high honour, generous hospitality, and humanity; coupled with much deceit in small matters not considered points of honour, carelessness as to religion, though not irreligion, and a love of plunder. The Turkish character is strongly marked by treachery, often of the blackest kind; little hospitality, particularly to strangers; cruelty and disregard of human life; bigotry as to their religion, which is now giving way to deism; and the same love of plunder which is so common among the Arabs, as well as darker vices unknown to them, which have rendered the Turkish race a bye-word in the East as well as in the West. The conquests of the Arabs were not marked by desolation; their rule has preserved and even improved the philosophy of Greece, which was welcome at that time; but the Barbary states, which have been the seat of architecture among them attained an excellence scarcely rivalled elsewhere in modern times. The rule of the Turks is traced by ruined cities, and whole provinces laid waste; literature has forsaken its most famous seats, Constantinople, Athens, Alexandria, and Antioch; the arts have decayed. Until they held Egypt and Mesopotamia, these were the richest countries of the world, now they are half deserts. All these are facts which can be proved. 5 Aristot. Meteor. i. 14; Str. l. and xvii.; Plin. Hist. Nat. vi. 29; Herod. ii. 158; Diod. i. 33. 6 Materia Hieroglyphica, appendix No. 4. 7 Horae Aegyptiacae, p. 9–11. however, and not Egypt, produce the finest of these dates.

The hotter and drier climates of the Oases and Lower Nubia best suit the date-palm; and the pressed dates of Seewah, the ancient Oasis of Jupiter Ammon, are among the most esteemed. The dates of Mount Sinai are generally poor, but the good monks of the convent of St Catherine make of them an excellent conserve, taking out the stones and placing almonds in their stead, and then pressing them together and packing them in gazelle-skins. The grape is a common fruit, but wine is not made from it on account of the prohibition of Mohammed. The Feifyoom is celebrated for its grapes, and chiefly supplies the market of Cairo. The most common kind of grape is the white, of which there is a small kind far superior to the ordinary sort. The black grapes are large, but comparatively tasteless. The vines are trailed on trellis-work, and form agreeable avenues in the gardens of Cairo; but little attention is paid to their culture, the common fault of Egyptian agriculture and gardening, resulting from the generosity of nature and the indolence of the inhabitants.

The best known fruits, besides dates and grapes, are figs, sycamore-figs, and pomegranates, apricots and peaches, oranges and citrons, lemons and limes, bananas, which are believed to be of the fruits of Paradise (being always in season), different kinds of melons (including some of aromatic flavour, and the refreshing water-melon), mulberries, and Indian figs, or prickly pears, the fruit of the lotus-tree, and olives. Many of these are excellent, especially the figs and melons. The trees and plants which produce most of them are chiefly confined to the gardens. The cactus bearing the Indian fig is extremely common, and forms the hedges of gardens and plantations.

The general plan of an Egyptian garden has been already described. Although seldom in good order, such a garden is often picturesque; having a few date-palms and bananas, and perhaps overlooked by a house of the old style of architecture. No great variety of flowers is cultivated. Among the more usual are the rose (which has ever been a favourite among the Arabs), the jasmine, narcissus, lily, oleander, chrysanthemum, convolvulus, geranium, dahlias, basil, the himèè plant (or Egyptian privet, which is said to be a flower of Paradise), the helianthus, and the violet.

The vegetables, &c., are very common and of various kinds, so that we cannot wonder that the Children of Israel longed for them in the desert. The principal are beans, peas, vetches, lentils (whereof a pottage is made, which is the common food of the Nile boatmen), lupins, chick-peas, the lubia (Dolichos labia), fenugreek, mallows, the bamiyeh (Hibiscus esculentus), spinach, purslain, melokheeyeh (Corchorus olitorius), leeks, onions, garlic, celery, parsley, chicory, cress, radishes, carrots, turnips, colocassium, lettuce, cabbage, fennel, gourds and cucumbers (both of several kinds), the tomato, the egg-fruit or badiningh (black and white), caraway, coriander, cumin, aniseed, and red pepper.

The chief field-produce is wheat (which is more grown than any other kind of corn), barley, several sorts of millet, maize, rice, oats, clover, peas, the sugar-cane, roses, two species of the tobacco-plant, and cotton. The sugar-cane is extensively cultivated, and excellent sugar is manufactured from it. There are fields of roses in the Feifyoom, which supply the market with rose-water. The tobacco produced in Egypt is coarse and strong compared with that which is used by the middle and upper classes, and imported from Syria and Turkey. That of Syria is considered the best. Of textile plants, the principal are hemp, cotton, and flax; and of plants used for dyeing, bastard saffron, madder, woad, and the indigo plant. The intoxicating hashesh—which some smoke in a kind of water-pipe formed of a cocoa-nut, two tubes, and a bowl, seldom used for any other narcotic—is not, as has been erroneously supposed, opium, but hemp. The effect is most hateful. The leaves of the himèè plant, already mentioned, are used to tinge of a bright red colour the palms of the hands, the soles of the feet, and the nails of both hands and feet, of women and children, the hair of old ladies, and the tails of horses. Indigo is very extensively employed to dye the shirts of the natives of the poorer classes, and is, when very dark, the colour of mourning; therefore, women at funerals, and generally after a death, smear themselves with it. Oil is extracted from the seeds of the cotton plant, hemp, colowort, the poppy, the castor-oil plant, sesame, and flax. The high coarse grass called halfeh (Poa cynosuroides) grows in great quantity in waste places and among ancient ruins.

Many kinds of reeds are found in Egypt, though, if we compare the representations in the tombs of the ancient Egyptians with what we see in the present day, it is evident that they were anciently much more common. That they should be wasted away, was prophesied by Isaiah (xix, 6, 7). The famous byblus or papyrus, from which paper was manufactured in old times, appears to be nearly, if not quite extinct, since Sir Gardner Wilkinson has never seen it. M. Delille, in his excellent account of the Egyptian flora, merely mentions it by name in his list as the Cyperus papyrus, called in Arabic berdy, and found at Damietta, but gives no figure of it. The lotus, so prized for its flowers by the ancient inhabitants, is still found in Egypt, though it is not common. The French naturalist above mentioned enumerates three species which formerly grew in that country—one with white flowers, another with blue, and a third with rose-coloured, the last of which is now extinct there.

The zoology of Egypt is not of remarkable interest, although it contains some very curious points. The absence of jungle and of forests, and the little shelter thus afforded to beasts of prey, as well as other wild animals, partly causes this; and we observe few birds of beautiful plumage for the same reason. Such an open country is rather fitted for birds which will not be so easily remarked as would be the brilliant ones of the forests of India and Brazil.

One of the most characteristic of the beasts is the camel, which is more at home in the dry climate of Egypt than elsewhere out of its native deserts. It has been remarked, however, that the camel, like his master the Arab, degenerates when removed into a city or a cultivated tract—that the former commonly becomes mangy, and the latter experiences a physical and moral degradation. The Egyptian camel is of the one-humped kind, which has been erroneously called the dromedary, whereas the dromedary is merely a swift camel standing in the same relation to the ordinary camel that our saddle-horse does to our cart-horse. Camel's flesh is for the most part eaten only by the peasants and the Arabs of the desert; by the Copts it is considered unlawful food.

It is very remarkable that no representation of the camel has been found in the sculptures and paintings of the Egyptian monuments, among the very numerous figures of the animals of Egypt both tame and wild, and of those brought from foreign lands as presents. It does not appear to have been introduced into other African countries, until after the Christian era; but it must have been known to the Egyptians, although it is by no means certain that it was one of their domestic beasts. Two passages in the Bible which speak of camels in the possession of Pharaohs refer to the time at which the foreign tribes called Shepherds were in Egypt; and it is almost certain that those very Pharaohs were of the Shepherd races. Perhaps the camel was peculiarly the animal of one or all of those races, and therefore omitted in the representations of the monuments as an ill-omened and hateful beast.

To modern Egypt the camel is very valuable, since the traffic with Syria, Arabia, Western Africa, and Ethiopia, is mainly carried on by caravans. But the ancient Egyptians appear to have derived their wealth more from tributary presents than from commerce, to have allowed their land commerce to be much in the hands of foreign merchants, like those who brought Joseph into Egypt, and to have left even their sea commerce partly at least in foreign hands.

In old times the horses of Egypt were famous, and the armies of the Pharaohs were noted for their war chariots. From Egypt Solomon, and in his time all the kings of the Hittites and the kings of Syria, had horses and chariots. And long after, when first the kingdom of Israel and then that of Judah endeavoured to throw off the yoke of the great kings of the East and make alliance with Egypt, they put their trust in Pharaoh's horses. In the representations of battles fought by the kings of the Eighteenth and Nineteenth Dynasties we see no Egyptian cavalry, but only chariots, called cavally in the inscriptions. At later times they may have had cavalry, properly speaking, of their own, and perhaps at all times among the mercenary or auxiliary forces.

In the present day the horses of Egypt are of a very indifferent breed, and the best that one sees in that country have been brought from Arabia and Syria, but these are seldom of great excellence. It is indeed surprising to find so few really good horses in a country bordering on Arabia; and not many years ago this was still more remarkable, though not during the existence of the Memlooks. The finest Arabs, however, are kept in the background by their possessors, partly for fear of the "evil eye," and partly, in the case of all but the highest personages, to avoid their forcible seizure by those of greater rank and power.

The Egyptian ass holds a middle place between that of Great Britain and the wild ass, which is more swift of foot than the horse. It is tall and handsome, docile, and having excellent paces, particularly a quick and easy amble. Thus it is well suited to the narrow streets of the metropolis, and of the other towns of Egypt, and is therefore commonly used for riding by persons of the middle and lower classes. Although asses are generally much cheaper than horses, the price of a fine ass exceeds that of an ordinary saddle-horse. The mules are handsome, but noted for vice, and what is very remarkable, for not being sure-footed.

The neat cattle are short-horned, rather small, and, as of old, very beautiful, speaking artistically. They are exceedingly quiet in disposition, and much valued for agricultural labour by the people, who therefore very rarely slaughter them for meat, and then only for the Franks. Buffaloes of an uncoth appearance and of a dark slaty colour, strikingly contrasting with the neat cattle, abound in Egypt. When voyaging on the Nile, one often sees them standing or lying in the river by herds. They are perfectly mild, and the little children of the villagers often ride them to or from the river. They are sometimes slaughtered, but their flesh is tough and coarse. Sheep (of which the greater number are "black") and goats are abundant in Egypt, and the flesh of the former is the ordinary butcher's meat. Swine are very rarely kept, and then almost wholly for the Franks; the Copts generally abstain from eating their meat. It appears that the ancient Egyptians, though they were not forbidden this flesh, in like manner rarely eat it, perhaps because it is so extremely unwholesome in a hot climate.

The Muslims consider dogs unclean, and therefore those of Cairo and most of the towns are half-wild and without masters, living upon offal, and upon food thrown to them by charitable persons. In the villages, however, and particularly in the Thebais, their case is better, for they are kept as guards to protect live-stock from thieves, and from hyenas and other wild animals, which come down from the mountains and deserts by night in quest of prey. The common dog of Egypt is generally of a sandy colour and strong, though not remarkable for courage; but in Upper Egypt, about Thebes, there is a fierce breed of dogs with wiry hair, generally black, and much esteemed for courage by their masters. Cats are as numerous in Cairo as dogs, and many of them are as homeless. They are, however, regarded with favour by the natives, who assign as their reason that the prophet Mohammad was fond of cats. This may perhaps be regarded as a relic of the veneration in which they were held by the ancient Egyptians. By them the cat was considered one of the sacred animals, and more highly reverenced than was perhaps any other. It was the emblem of the goddess Pasht, whom the Greeks called Bubastis. Diodorus Siculus relates an anecdote which shows to what an extent the veneration for this animal was carried. He tells us, that when he was in Egypt he was an eye-witness of the popular vengeance on a Roman who had accidentally killed a cat. Although the people were most anxious to conciliate the Romans, and were in great fear of them, neither this fear nor the interference of the king, prevented the unintentional culprit losing his life through their rage. It is not a little curious, that there is at Cairo a royal foundation for the support of destitute cats. The author of this charity was the famous Memlook Sultan, Edh-Dhahir Beybars, whose humane intentions have of late years been sadly neglected by the trustees.

The wolf, fox, jackal, and hyena, chiefly inhabit the deserts and waste places of Egypt, and lurk in the ancient tombs and deserted quarries. The wild cat is also found in that country, though it is not common. The weasel abounds in Cairo, and is proverbial for its mischievous and revengeful disposition, and rats and mice are not among the least of the plagues. The ichneumon, jerboas, hare, and hyrax, are likewise natives of Egypt or its deserts, and the tame rabbit is kept for food.

The beasts of the chase which inhabit the deserts on either side of the Nile are antelopes of various kinds, and the wild ass esteemed by the Arabs and Persians to be the prince of game. It is found in the southern part of the Eastern Desert. The most beautiful of the antelopes is the gazelle, which is often tamed and kept in the large courts of the houses of Cairo. In Lower Egypt, principally in the desolate marshes near the Mediterranean, the wild boar is found and occasionally hunted. It is however a timid and rare animal, so that the sport is not, like the boar-hunting of other countries, exciting and dangerous.

From the representations in the tombs of the ancient Egyptians we see that in old times the hippopotamus was one of the wild beasts of the country. It has now retreated above the First Cataract, the southern boundary of Egypt, and is rarely observed below the Second Cataract. The crocodile has retreated in the same manner, and instead of being found throughout the Nile in Egypt, is rarely seen by one who is ascending the river, until he is many miles south of Cairo. The name of the island of Elephantine, situate a little to the north of the First Cataract, bearing the same signification in hieroglyphics as in Greek, makes it probable that at some remote period elephants were found in Upper Egypt, though now they are not seen north of Abyssinia.

In exploring the tombs and dark parts of the temples the traveller is annoyed by crowds of bats, which extinguish his candle, fly into his face, and cling to his clothes, some- times rendering examination impossible without a lantern.

One species is very large, but the common one is small.

Birds of prey are numerous in Egypt, and of many kinds. Of the most remarkable are three species of large naked-necked vultures, the Arabian (Vultur monachus), the sociable (Ottoops auricularis, G. R. Gray—Vultur nubicus, Ham. Smith), and the fulvous (Gyps vulgaris, Sav.) as well as the smaller species called the aquiline vulture (Neophron percnopterus). The aquiline vulture has a feathered neck, and when standing is by no means a handsome bird, but it is much to be admired when on the wing from the contrast of the black and white of its plumage, and the steady manner in which it soars in circles. Perhaps the bearded vulture breeds in the most lofty parts of the desolate mountains of the desert between the Nile and the Red Sea; for when the French army was in Egypt, one of these birds was killed. It was of extraordinary size, for M. Lartet states that it measured more than fourteen Parisian feet, that is, more than fifteen English, from point to point of its expanded wings. Several species of eagles and falcons, two kinds of hawks, the common buzzard, and the moor-harrier, live in Egypt, or visit that country, according as they are migratory, erratic, or sedentary.

The common kite abounds at Cairo, and is one of the chief scavengers of the city; the others being the crow, the aquiline vulture, the half-wild dog, and the cat. The ruins and tombs of Egypt, and the modern houses, scarcely ever in perfect repair, shelter owls of various kinds.

The Spanish sparrow, which differs little from that of Britain, the water-wagtail, linnets, and larks, are among the birds of Egypt. The kind of kingfisher which is commonly seen on the Nile, perched on some eminence, and darting suddenly to seize a fish, is very inferior in its plumage, which is speckled, black and white, to the common kingfisher, which is also occasionally seen. The beautiful hoopoe is among the least rare birds, and there are also three species of bee-eaters. The hoopoe may be often seen in Cairo, where it is not only unmolested, but regarded with a sort of reverence, as the bird of Solomon; for the Muslims believe that there existed friendship between it and the wise king of Israel. Crows of the kind which we call the Royston crow are very numerous at Cairo. Birds of the swallow tribe, the woodpecker and the cuckoo, are also known in Egypt.

In the metropolis, in the towns and villages, and in the fields, no bird is more common than the pigeon, tame or wild. Pigeon-fancying is a favourite amusement of all classes at Cairo, and in the villages the pigeon-houses are often loftier than the huts upon which they are raised. Wild turtle-doves build in the courts of the houses of the capital. These courts often serve for the purpose of poultry-yards, in which fowls wander about without any care being taken of them, except that food is occasionally thrown to them. They are consequently meagre, and produce very small eggs. Turkeys, ducks, and geese are kept in the same manner.

Quails migrate to Egypt in great numbers, and sandgrouse, called by the natives kata, from their cry, are common in the deserts. There also the Arabs, like the ancient Egyptians, hunt the ostrich. A kind of red-legged partridge is likewise found in Egypt.

The islands of the Nile, the sand-banks which appear when the river is low, some of the lakes and marshes, the sheets of water caused by the inundation, and the mountains near the river, are the favourite resorts of many kinds of wading and of web-footed birds.

Of the waders the most interesting would be the sacred ibis of the ancient Egyptians, if that bird be really found in Egypt at the present day. But it does not appear certain that but one species was anciently held sacred; nor, if we admit that but one was revered, does it seem clear that this is the Ibis religiosa of Cuvier which is now known in Egypt.

The Egyptian plover is famous on account of the story, which modern observation has confirmed, related by Herodotus respecting it and the crocodile.

Among the most common waders are the spur-winged plover, the snow-white egret, which has been erroneously called the ibis, and the pelican. The cormorant, too, is often seen, as are wild geese and ducks, both of several kinds.

Of the many reptiles the crocodile deservedly occupies the first place. It is seldom observed in the present day far north of Asyoot, the capital of Upper Egypt. Several crocodiles are generally seen basking in the sun in the heat of the day on a sand-bank; at the approach of a boat they quickly plunge into the stream. They rarely attack a human being, but it is unwise to bathe in the river at places where they are reputed to be fierce, and to bathe at any distance from a boat in the part of Upper Egypt where they are found. It is said that the crocodile's common mode of attacking a person on shore who is near the river's edge, is to approach stealthily and sweep him into the stream by a blow of his tail, the great weapon of all the lizard-tribe. The smaller saurians are found in great numbers: of these a species of chameleon may be particularized.

Serpents and snakes are among the most common reptiles, and of various kinds, including the deadly cernastes and cobra di capello. The house snakes, however, which are so numerous at Cairo, are perfectly harmless.

Fishes abound in the Nile and in the Lake Menzeleh. The modern inhabitants of the country are partial to fish as food, but they say that only those fishes which have scales are wholesome. The fishes of the Nile are generally insipid in comparison to those of the sea; though a few of them, particularly the buluce (Labrus niloticus, Linn.), the kishr (Percia nilotica), and the binnee (Cyprinus bynni, Arted.), are of a delicate flavour.

One of the commonest insects is the dangerous scorpion. Its sting is very painful, and if no remedy is applied, sometimes fatal, particularly if a person is stung in the heel. Large spiders are abundant, including more than one species of solpuga, incorrectly called tarantulas by the Europeans, and believed by the natives to be very venomous, but this is most likely an error. Egypt has ever been famous for what may be termed insect-plagues, but not to the extent that has been asserted by some modern travellers. Caution will enable one partially to escape the attacks of fleas and bugs, and altogether to avoid the more dreaded insect which is usually spoken of with them. Beetles of various kinds are found, including that which was anciently held sacred—the scarabaeus. Locusts are seldom seen at all, and very rarely in large numbers. When, however, such is the case, they commit great havoc in the fields and gardens, reminding the beholder of the description of the plague of locusts which preceded the Exodus. Sometimes they merely cross the valley of Upper Egypt, and leave the mark of their passage in desolated fields, entirely stripped of verdure; and at other times they spread themselves for days, or even weeks, over the cultivated lands, committing far more extensive mischief. On an occasion of this sort, the government offered rewards for locusts killed and brought to the officials by the villagers.

Bees are kept in Egypt, and their honey is much prized by the inhabitants, who usually eat it in the clarified state. It is inferior to that of England, and also to the famous Greek honey. Butterflies and moths of many kinds are observed in the fields. There are plantations of mulberry-trees in the eastern part of Lower Egypt, for the rearing of silk-

---

1 A little ipecacuanha, made into a paste with water and applied externally to the place stung, has produced, in the many instances in which the writer has seen it used, almost instant relief. worms. The manufacture of silks was a government monopoly, but has probably lately ceased to be so. The silks of Egypt are generally inferior to those of Syria and other eastern countries, though some have been produced of great excellence. Among the other insects may be mentioned the common fly, rightly deserving a place among the plagues of Egypt, as does also the mosquito, which, however, is not found throughout the country.

In the following remarks on the ancient Egyptians great assistance has been derived from the valuable work of Sir Gardner Wilkinson on their manners and customs, which has made us better acquainted with them than we are with any other people of antiquity. From the representations of their monuments, and from the mummies which have been unrolled, we are enabled to form an accurate idea of the personal characteristics of the ancient Egyptians. In consequence of a misconception of a passage in Herodotus (ii. 104), and confused notions respecting the inhabitants of Africa, it has been often supposed that the Egyptians were very nearly allied to the negro race. A careful examination of the most distinct data in our possession has, however, produced a far different result; and it is now acknowledged that they were more related to the Caucasian than to the negro type. It has also been shown that most of the modern inhabitants have preserved many of the characteristics of their ancient predecessors, and that it is, therefore, erroneous to suppose that the former are chiefly of Arab origin, although the intermixture of Arab as well as other blood has so much changed the national type, that it would not be safe to describe the earlier people from the appearance of the present. Nevertheless, one is often struck, among the remains of ancient monuments, by the similarity of an early representation to some one of the natives standing by, priding himself upon an Arab origin, and repudiating the stigma that he is of the race of Pharaoh.

Judging, then, from the monuments and mummies, the countenance of the ancient Egyptians was oval, and narrower in the case of the men than of the women. The forehead was small and somewhat retiring, but well-shaped; the eyes large, long, and generally black; the nose rather long, and with a slight bridge; the mouth expressive, with rather full lips, and white and regular teeth; the chin small and round, and the cheek-bones a little prominent. The hair was long, full, crisp, and somewhat harsh, and almost always of a black colour. The men had black beards, but they wore them in so artificial a mode that one cannot judge whether they were full or not. The skin of the men was of a dark brown, that of the women varied from olive to pink flesh-colour in different persons. The colour of the women was natural, and the darker hue of the men the result of exposure to the sun, and the scantiness of their clothing explains why their faces were not darker than the rest of their bodies.

The dress of the ancient Egyptians did not much vary at different periods. At the time of the building of the Great Pyramid it was, however, simpler than under the rule of the Eighteenth and Nineteenth Dynasties, about a thousand years later. As the period last mentioned is that of which most sculptured and painted monuments remain, it will be best to describe what was then the dress of the inhabitants, and this description will apply, in its main particulars, to the preceding and subsequent times of their ancient history.

The men of all classes either had shaven heads, with skull-caps, or wore their own hair, or wigs, very full, and in numerous plaits or curls, falling to the shoulders, but sometimes much shorter and in the form of a bag; there is, indeed, reason to suppose that the practice of shaving the head was universal, except among the soldiers. All the hair of the face was also shaven, except in the cases of kings and great persons, who had a small formal beard beneath the chin.

The king was distinguished from his subjects by the richness of his apparel. His head-dress was sometimes his own hair, or the wig, alone, in various forms, but not much differing in length; and at others he wore the high crowns of Upper and Lower Egypt—the former being a kind of conical helmet, and the latter, a short cap with a tall point behind, worn outside the other. He is also occasionally represented with another form of high cap. The king often had the figure of an asp, the emblem of royalty, tied just above his forehead. His beard was about three inches long, and one inch broad and deep, and formally plaited.

The simplest royal dress was a kilt, usually reaching nearly to the knees, rather full in front, having a girdle above, from which hung before a broad band, richly ornamented, and peculiar to the king, like the lion's tail (natural or artificial) which was attached to it behind, and reached nearly to the ground. Sometimes a large and full shirt was worn over the kilt, descending almost to the ankles, and having wide sleeves reaching to the elbow: this outer dress is occasionally simply a skirt. Both these dresses were usually of white linen, and the upper dress was apparently very fine and transparent. Sandals were worn on the feet, and the ornaments were armlets, bracelets, both flat and broad, and deep necklaces, besides those above mentioned.

The ordinary costume of men of the upper and middle classes was the same as that of the king—the short kilt, with sometimes the long shirt or skirt of fine linen above it, tied in various forms. Their beards were very short, scarcely exceeding an inch in length, and of a formal square shape, and they wore the full hair or wig, or a skull-cap. They generally went barefooted, but sometimes used sandals. The priest was occasionally clad in a leopard's skin, either tied or thrown over the shoulder, or worn as a shirt, the fore-legs forming sleeves. Military personages are often represented with helmets, and sometimes with short coats or corslets of plate-mail. The royal princes were distinguished by a side-lock of curiously-plaited hair.

The men of the lower class wore the kilt and girdle alone, or, especially when engaged in laborious work, went altogether naked. They shaved the head and face, and had no head-covering but the skull-cap. The soldiers had kilts of different kinds, coats or corslets of plate-mail, and either wore full hair or helmets.

The dress of the queen differed from that of other ladies alone in certain royal ornaments. It consisted of a tight skirt, supported by shoulder-straps, and bound at the waist by a girdle or sash, with long ends falling in front, and descended to the ankles. Over this was usually worn a full shirt of fine linen, with wide sleeves reaching below the elbows, and having a broad skirt falling to the ground. It much resembles the upper dress of the king, or of men of the better classes. The queen was distinguished by her head-dress, which was in the form of a vulture with outspread wings, the bird's head projecting over the forehead, and the wings falling on either side, while the tail extended behind. Sometimes the queen is also known by the uraeus or royal asp above her forehead, and at other times she is represented with various forms of head-dress.

---

1 "Gins Fara'on," or "Race of Pharaoh," is a common form of reproach addressed by the Turks to the Egyptians; the latter respect by calling their oppressors "Gins Nemrod," or "Race of Nimrod." 2 Ancient Egyptians, vol. iii., p. 357. 3 Id., vol. iii., pp. 351-354. 4 Id., vol. i., p. 277-280. 5 Id., vol. iii., pp. 350-352. 6 Id., vol. i., p. 350, seq. 7 Id., vol. i., p. 350, seq. 8 Id., vol. iii., pp. 358-369. 9 Id., vol. iii., pp. 342-350. 10 Id., vol. i., p. 291 et seqq. The queen also wore sandals. The princesses were dressed in the same manner. The dress of the ladies of the upper and middle classes was exactly the same as that of the queen, except that they more frequently appeared in the under garment or skirt alone. The women of the lower class wore that garment only; sometimes it was much shorter than that of the ladies, particularly when they were engaged in manual labour. The public female musicians and dancers usually were clad in the upper garment alone, and it appears to have been of the finest and most transparent stuff. Occasionally the dancers had no dress whatever. The women's hair was worn in the same manner as the men's, but it was, of course, of greater length, usually reaching about halfway from the shoulders to the waist, being rarely longer, and sometimes much shorter. It was ornamented in various ways, but the general form was always the same.

The dress of the children of all classes, when they were dressed at all, was very plain, though those of rich persons were sometimes attired as their elders. Boys were distinguished by the side-lock, which the princes also wore in a peculiar fashion, as before mentioned.

The religion of the ancient Egyptians cannot be said to be as yet fully unravelled. Notwithstanding the very numerous materials that we possess, the subject is so difficult that no one has advanced any distinct system of explanation applicable to the whole. In the following observations it is intended to arrange the principal tenets of this religion in as logical an order as may be, to enable the reader to judge for himself in the many points of difficulty which the matter presents.

The authorities for this part of the inquiry are the monuments and papyri of ancient Egypt: reference may be advantageously made to Greek and Roman works, such as Herodotus, Plutarch De Iside et Osiride, or whoever wrote that treatise, Macrobius, Iamblichus, and others; yet it is unsafe to base anything wholly on the statements found in these works, and with the ample materials which the monuments present, wholly unnecessary. Great care should also be taken not to acquire an incorrect view of this religion from the accounts of some of the late writers who interpreted it according to a philosophic system, whereof the monuments and papyri afford no distinct evidence. Many modern writers have accepted such interpretations, even since the Egyptian records have been accessible to them, and thus rendered the mythology more difficult of comprehension. The peculiar circumstances of these ancient interpreters should be borne in mind. They lived at a time when Greek philosophy had established among the learned a kind of deism in place of various forms of idolatry, and was endeavouring by it to oppose the spread of Christianity. That philosophy had rendered much of the ancient Egyptian religion ridiculous unless understood mystically, and it became the endeavour of the learned to systematize and explain so as to make the main doctrines of this faith consistent with one another, and the seeming absurdities, allegorical representations of physical and moral truths. Hence have arisen the errors of supposing the Egyptian religion to be, properly speaking, a system, and of concluding that everything contained in it must have some important significance, which errors have retarded the true explanation in a very high degree. If it can be shown that this religion is the offspring of various faiths, and that they have never been moulded together, on the one hand, and if it be admitted that other religions, such as those of ancient Greece and Rome, contained much that was puerile and unreasonable, on the other hand, then it must follow that the religion of ancient Egypt cannot properly be called a system, and that its tenets are not necessarily capable of a philosophical explanation.

Manetho, and Herodotus, with other writers of less importance, agree with the historical Turin Papyrus in stating or implying that the reign of the gods, and then, according to the historian first mentioned, that of the demi-gods or heroes, and lastly, that of the manes, preceded the rule of mortals in Egypt. The consideration of the historical bearing of this statement belongs to a subsequent portion of the present article; but it must be here mentioned, as, had we a complete list of the mythic rulers, we should probably possess one Egyptian classification of the divinities. The only reliable records are, however, so mutilated a condition that it is unsafe to build any hypothesis upon them.

Herodotus states that the Egyptians had three orders of gods, the first, second, and third, whereof the first was the most ancient. From what is said respecting them it is evident that these orders were mythic dynasties, while it appears almost as certain that the gods were arranged according to the importance of the towns in which they were worshipped, and not according to the importance of the offices ascribed to them. This should be borne in mind when examining the relation of these dynasties to history. The orders of the gods therefore have nothing to do with the principles of the religion.

In order to form an opinion respecting those principles, it is desirable first to enumerate the chief divinities and their offices; then the ceremonies of their worship; and, lastly, the main doctrines with reference to man. From these data some leading ideas respecting the sources of the religion may be derived.

Num, or Nu, called Kneph by the Greek writers, was one Num, the most important of the gods; he was worshipped throughout Ethiopia, in the island of Elephantine, and in the southern part of the Thebais. He is represented as a man having the head of a ram and curved horns, with above the head broad horns more or less twisted. The signification of his name, as stated by ancient writers, and verified by the most reasonable etymology, is "soul," and to him was ascribed the creation of both men and divinities, and of the material universe. He seems thus to have corresponded to the soul of the universe of the philosophers, whereof so remarkable an account is given by Virgil in the Æneid.

---

1 Ancient Egyptians, vol. ii., p. 167. 2 Ancient Egyptians, vol. ii., p. 167. 3 Id., vol. iii., p. 162. 4 Id., vol. ii., pp. 235-7. 5 Cory's Ancient Fragments, pp. 91 and 92. 6 Diod. Sic., i., 13, 14, 15, &c. Diodorus cited by Schol. in Apoll. Rhod. Arg., lib. iv., v. 276, p. 86, ed. Shaw, &c. 7 Herod. ii., 43. 8 See Sir Gardner Wilkinson's edition. This is better than that given by Dr Lepsius in his Auswahl, as it is accompanied by a transcription into hieroglyphic characters, and the writing on the back is given. 9 See infra, section ii. 10 Herod. ii., 145, and 43, 46. 11 Chev. Bunsen advances this view. Egypt's Place, vol. i., p. 364. 12 Ancient Egyptians, vol. iv., p. 235. 13 Bunsen's Egypt's Place, vol. i., p. 375. 14 Id., plate 21. 15 Id., p. 377.

---

Principio colum ac terras, campeaque lquentia, Locantemque globos Lune, Titanique extra, Spiritus intus alit, totamque infusa per artus Mens agitat molem, et magno se corpore miscet. Inde hominum pseudumque genus, vitaeque voluntam, Et quae marmoreo fert monstris sub aequore pontus. Kneph must not be confounded with Amen, who is sometimes, as in the Oasis called after him, represented under the form usually assigned to Kneph. His consort is generally either the goddess Seti or Anka, the former of whom is represented as a female with the crown of Upper Egypt with high horns, or the crowns of Upper and Lower Egypt united, and the latter likewise as a female, with a high head-dress, as if of feathers. Sometimes, according to Sir Gardner Wilkinson, these form a triad.—The question of triads in the Egyptian religion is one of great difficulty. It cannot be denied, however, that triads were more frequently worshipped than one divinity or two divinities, and that the personages composing these triads were held to be related to one another.

The chief god of Thebes, Amen, bears more than one name, and is variously represented. His proper name, Amen, signifies the "hidden" or "concealed," as both the hieroglyphic inscriptions and ancient writers show, being derived from the verb amen, to "enwrap" or "conceal." He is also called Amen-ra, the name of the sun-god, Ra, being added to his own; and in the inscriptions of the Roman times, Hammon-Cenubis, that is Amen-Num (Kneph). His peculiar form is that of a man wearing a cap with two very high and narrow plumes, and he is painted of a blue colour. But he is also represented with the figure of Khem the generative principle, when he is generally called Amen-ra ka-mut-f, that is "the husband of his mother," according to the usual interpretation, which, however, may be considered doubtful. Amen is further portrayed under the form of Kneph, the ram-headed god; and though when thus represented on the monuments he bears the name Amen-ra, he must also have received the name Amen-Num or Hammon-Cenubis before-mentioned. Amen was worshipped in the Great Oasis and in that called after him under the form last-mentioned, and hence arose the mistake of the Greeks and Romans who always assigned to him that figure.

The goddess Mut, or "the mother," is the companion of Mut-Amen, and seems to be the female form of Khem, or of Amen in the character of Khem. She is usually represented as a female wearing the crowns of Upper and Lower Egypt, and the vulture-head-dress of a queen. There was also a feminine Amen, Ament ("E" being the feminine article), whose figure is that of a female with the crown of Lower Egypt.

Khems formed with his parents Amen and Mut the triad Khems of Thebes. He is usually represented as a mummy-shaped male figure, differing from Ptah in having the crescent and globe of the moon upon his head, and in wearing the side-lock of a child. He is sometimes portrayed as a hawk-headed figure, likewise with the moon on his head; in this form he is connected with Ptah-Sokari-Osiris, and Ra the sun-god.

Khem was a god by whom the productivity of nature Khem was emblazoned. He was represented as a swathed Phallic figure with a single arm, above which was a flail, raised behind his head, and wearing the high-plumed cap of Amen.

The reading of his name is still doubtful; the most probable one, Khem, reminds one of the patriarch Ham from whom the Mizraites were descended. The Greeks identified him with Pan, and called Chemmis, a city in the Thebais where he was worshipped, Panopolis. The monuments afford no evidence that obscene rites were celebrated to him; indeed nothing is more remarkable than the coarseness of allegorical representations of Khem and other divinities, which

---

Igneus est ollis vigor et celestis origo Semibinis, quantum non moxia corpora tardant, Terrenique habent artus, moribundaque membra. Ille metuens, explantaque : dolent, gaudentque : neque auras Displeunt clamans tenebris et carcere exco.—Aen., lib. vi., v. 724-734.

Know first, the heavens and earth, and liquid plains, And the moon's shining orb, and sun-like stars, A spirit nourishes within, and mind Prevailing every part, governs the whole, With the vast fabric mixing: hence the race Of men and beasts, and all the flying tribes, And the great monsters which the far-spread sea Beneath its shining surface comprehends. A fiery energy and heavenly source Are theirs, though evil bodies counteract, And earthly limbs and members that must die. Hence 'tis they fear and hope, they mourn and joy, Though heaven they see not from their prison dark.

Some apology is needed for venturing to translate a passage differently from that best and most eloquent of translators, Dryden: but in this case he is too free in his rendering, and has permitted poetic feeling somewhat to take the place of close accuracy.

1 Modern Egypt and Thebes, vol. ii., p. 375. 2 Ancient Egyptians, vol. iv., p. 237. 3 Id., pl. 21. 4 Id., pl. 21. 5 Id., pl. 48. 6 Id., pl. 21. 7 Id., pl. 21. 8 Id., pl. 21. 9 Id., pl. 21. 10 Id., pl. 46. 11 Id., pl. 26.

---

Manetho, cited by Plut., De Is. et Osir., c. 9. Comp. Iamblichus, De Mysteriis, viii., 3. Bunsen's Egypt's Place, vol. i., pp. 63, 370. Mr Birch suggests "who is male and female," a probable rendering. For the different representations of Amen, see Ancient Egyptians, pl. 20 and 22. Ancient Egyptians, pl. 20. Id., pl. 59. Id., pl. 46. Id., pl. 26. Evidently were intended to contain nothing indecent, whence we may reasonably suppose that the ceremonies were likewise free from intentional indecency. We must be particularly careful in receiving what was written of the Egyptian religion by those who were unfriendly to it or positively inimical, at a time when it had been much corrupted by Greek and Roman influence; and we must not receive the stories of passing travellers without caution because they lived two thousand years ago, when indeed it was more difficult to obtain accurate information, and the educated class was more credulous than now. Khem is usually accompanied in the sculptures by a stand wherein are representations of trees and of a flower, or a single flower. This exactly corresponds to the asherah or idolatrous grove mentioned in the Bible. The "groves," however, were sacred to Baal, and the Egyptians called Seth Baal, and not Khem. The cause of this may be, that Baal was the chief divinity of many of their enemies, and that the Egyptians were therefore more ready to consider him the same as Seth, or physical evil, than as Khem, the personification of productivity, and in some sense of physical good.

Ptah, or Phtha, the god of Memphis, is one of the most important personages in the Egyptian Pantheon. He has two ordinary forms; the one that of a mummy-shaped male figure, holding in his hands a long and complex sceptre; the other that of a pigmy or child, with a large head. In the latter form he was worshipped at Memphis, if we may decide from the account of Herodotus, and the number of small figures which have been found of Ptah as a pigmy on the site of that city. The temples have been so entirely destroyed, that we cannot judge of the worship of Memphis as we can of that of Thebes and many of the other towns of Egypt. The pigmy Ptah generally received the name Ptah-Sokari-Osiris (an appellation which connects him with Osiris, the judge of the dead), and has been supposed to be the same as the Phoenician Ἀραχοῦς. He was held to be the demiurgus or creator of the universe, and is thus connected with Kneph, and Seb, the father of Osiris.

The goddess Neit or Neith is often associated with Ptah. She was the chief divinity of the ancient and famous city of Sais in the Delta; and the Greeks relate that Cecrops, leading a colony thence to Athens, introduced her worship into Greece, where she was called Athena. This Greek name may be derived from the Egyptian, if we suppose the latter to have been sometimes pronounced Thenei, with the article prefixed; and the name of the goddess of truth and justice, Ma-t or Ma-th, may have been in the same manner the original of Themis. She is represented as a female having upon her head the crown of Lower Egypt, or the initial and chief character of her hieroglyphic name, supposed to be a shuttle. She appears to have been a female form of Ptah. The fact of her being the chief divinity of Sais, shows that it was not necessary that the most important person of a triad, or the principal object of worship, should be a god, and other instances support this view.

Ra, or the sun, was worshipped at Heliopolis as chief god, and in many other places as a cotemporal divinity. His usual figure is that of a man having a hawk's head, upon which is placed the solar disk and the royal asp. Sometimes he was adored as the solar disk Atin-ra, an object of worship portrayed in the form of the sun, whence issue numerous rays terminating in human hands, one of which gives the sign of life to the person supplicating. This form of Ra is, however, almost entirely confined to the monuments of a foreign race of sun-worshippers, whose religion and history belong to a subsequent portion of this article.

Thoth, the god of letters, was especially regarded as the patron of the town of Hermopolis Magna, in Middle Egypt. His usual form is that of a man having the head of an ibis, and often bearing the crescent and disk of the moon; the latter, however, being distinguished from that of Khnum by its elongated and depressed form. He presided over science, art, and every mental pursuit, and hence his position among the Egyptians was very high; and Hermes Trismegistus, a form of Thoth, has scarcely ceased to be regarded as a mysterious and powerful personage from the connection of his name with magic.

Atum, and Pasht, or Pakht, were children of Ptah. The Atum former was an important divinity with respect to the deceased, but inferior to Osiris. He is portrayed as a man, often wearing the crowns of Upper and Lower Egypt. His sister Pasht, who is sometimes styled his mother, was called Bubastis by the Greeks, who identified her with Artemis Pasht, or Diana, and was the goddess of the town Bubastis, in Bubastis, Lower Egypt. She is usually represented as a lion-headed, or cat-headed female, having the globe of the sun, and an uraeus upon her head. A great festival was annually held at Bubastis in her honour, whereof Herodotus gives some account. Her offices are not clearly made out.

The children of Ra were eight in number. Among the most important of these were the goddesses Athor or Hathor, and Ma-t or Thma. The former of these was identified with Aphrodite by the Greeks. Her name signifies "the abode of Horus," and she is portrayed as a female having a cow's head with a globe between her horns, or a human head above which are the horns of a cow and a globe and uraeus. She was the goddess of beauty and mirth, and her worship was very prevalent in Egypt. The town of Tentyris (Dendera) was under her protection, and a magnificent temple to her yet stands there. Her name connects her with Isis, the mother of Horus.

The god Mu, and goddess Ma-t, brother and sister, would Mu and seem to be male and female personifications of one and the Ma-t same principle; for each wears on the head the ostrich feather, and that is always the chief sign of the name of the former, and the symbol and sometimes name of the latter. Mu is solar light, and Mat the goddess of truth and justice, and it seems therefore most probable that the former represented physical light, and the latter moral light. That the male divinity should personify physical excellence and the female moral, is remarkable, as indicating a philosophy which acknowledged that while man was more powerful of body, woman possessed a soul of greater delicacy and more capable of religious feelings.

Tafnet and Munt must also be noticed as children of Ra. Tafnet, the former has the head of a lioness, and may be regarded as only another form of Pasht; and the latter is represented Munt, as a hawk-headed figure having a disk and uraeus on his head, above which rise the high plumes of Amen. He appears to have corresponded to Mars, and the king is likened to him when he is waging a successful war against the enemies of Egypt, of which country Munt was regarded as a protector. Another son of Ra was Sebak, who is usually Sebak, depicted with the head of a crocodile, and a head-dress composed of ram's horns, a disk and two ostrich feathers. His offices are not as yet ascertained.

Last of the children of Ra, Seb and Nutpe must be men. Seb, tioned as the heads of the Osirian group of divinities. Seb Egypt.

is represented as a man upon whose head usually stands a goose, which is also the initial letter of his name. It refers to his character as creator, in which he is likened to a goose producing the egg so famous in the Orphic writings. He is thus connected with Ptah, to whom the office of creator is likewise assigned. Nutpe, the consort and sister of Seb, is represented as a woman having sometimes upon her head a small vase, her symbol and the initial of her name. That name is believed to signify "the abyss of heaven." She is stated in the hieroglyphics to have been the parent of the gods, like Seb, and she presided over the soul. From these two sprung Osiris and Isis, Seth and Nephthys, and Aroeris.

Osiris is the most remarkable personage in the Egyptian Pantheon, and was probably more highly reverenced than any of the other gods. His usual form is that of a mummied figure holding the crook and flail, and wearing the crown of Upper Egypt, generally with an ostrich feather on each side. He was regarded as the personification of physical and moral good, and hence one of his commonest names, Un-nufr, signifies "the opener" or "revealer of good things." He is related to have been on earth instructing mankind in useful arts, to have been slain by his adversary Typhon, by whom he was cut in pieces, to have been bewailed by his wife and sister Isis, to have been embalmed, to have risen again, and to have become the judge of the dead, the righteous among whom were called by his name and received his form, in which indeed they are always represented. Although in this extraordinary story we may possibly trace a physical meaning, yet the moral meaning is far more prominent; and the intention appears rather to point to the struggle between moral good and moral evil, than between physical good and physical evil. Indeed, although the opponent of Osiris personified both physical and moral evil at a comparative late period, there is strong reason for supposing that such was not originally the case; and it is therefore not probable that the story of Osiris was intended to typify the opposition of good of both kinds to evil of both kinds. Admitting, then, that it teaches the doctrine of the conflict between moral good and moral evil, it is to be inquired why this doctrine was embodied in so remarkable a narration. Considering all the points of resemblance—bearing in mind that mankind must have been granted a primeval revelation, and what evidence of there having been such a revelation is afforded by the great doctrines of the immortality of the soul, the resurrection of the dead, judgment to come, and future rewards and punishments, all so closely interwoven with the story of Osiris—carefully weighing all this, it seems an unavoidable conclusion that this story is derived from some prophecy of the remotest times respecting the future Saviour of mankind. The discovery of this remarkable analogy was made some years since by Mr Lane, and a careful comparison of all the hieroglyphic documents which bear upon it in our hands, has afforded it a complete confirmation.

Isis, the consort of Osiris, was scarcely less venerated than he, and shared the honours of his temples at the sacred city of Abydos and the holy isle of Philae. She is usually represented with a small throne, her symbol, on her head, and more rarely with the globe and cow's horns as a head-dress, and sometimes as winged. She is connected with Athor both in her figure and some of her offices, &c. She mourned over the dead, presided over the funeral rites, and was present, as well as Nephthys, with Osiris at the judgment of the dead. Her titles were so numerous that she received the appellation of Myrionyma, or one having ten thousand names.

Set, or Seth, called by the Greeks Typhon, was the brother Set, or of Osiris, and the personification of physical evil. He was Typhon, represented as having the head of a fabulous animal, with a long snout and high square ears. He was worshipped until at least the close of the Twentieth Dynasty, but after that period his figures were erased from the walls of the temples, even when forming part of the names of kings. This change is conjectured, with great ingenuity, by the Chevalier Bunsen to have been effected by the kings of the Twenty-second Dynasty, who were, partly at least, of an Assyrian or Babylonian origin. Among the Persians and the neighbouring nations the doctrine prevailed that all good was traceable to the good principle and all evil to his opponent. Hence hard drinking was esteemed among the Persians a virtue, and calamities were not received as either ordained of the good principle or permitted by him. With the introduction of this doctrine into Egypt, Seth was at once expelled the Pantheon, and thenceforward regarded as the personification of both physical and moral evil, instead of being held to be a good being.

The only representation that we find of moral evil is that Apop, or of an enormous serpent called Apop, which was, in the Greek form, Apophis. The gods are portrayed in the mystic subjects on the walls of the Tombs of the Kings at Thebes engaged in warfare with this monster, whom they ultimately destroy. Moral evil being represented by a serpent, affords another link in the argument that much of primeval revelation was retained, more or less distorted, by the ancient Egyptians.

The consort of Seth was Nephthys his sister, called in the hieroglyphic inscriptions Nebt-hi, whose figure is that of a female having upon her head either her symbol, a basket and house, or the cow's horns and globe. She much resembles Isis, and there can be little doubt that she stood in the same relation to Seth that Isis did to Osiris, being merely a female form of the male divinity. The monuments have afforded no light on this matter, but although not expelled with Seth, the statements of Plutarch show that she was regarded as the barren condition, and in some sort destructive power of nature. We can, therefore, scarcely suppose with Bunsen that this explanation of the personification can be the result of the late notions respecting the story of Osiris. Like Isis, she presided over the funeral rites, and was present with her at the judgment of the dead.

Aroeris is called in the hieroglyphics Har-oer, or El-Har-oer, or Horus. He is represented as hawk-headed, and wearing the crowns of Upper and Lower Egypt. In one character he was called Har-Het, Horus of Het or Adfo, Apollinopolis Magna, and by the Greeks Agathodemon, having the usual form of Aroeris, or that of a winged globe. He thus corresponded to the Ferohor of the Persians, or the protecting good genius. It is very difficult to distinguish between Aroeris and Har the Younger, or Horus; indeed there is so much connection between these two divinities and Harpocrates, that they must be regarded as simply different forms of one personage.

The children of Osiris and Isis require the next notice: Har, or they were Har, or Horus, Har-pi-chruti or Harpocrates, and Harun or Anubis. The god first mentioned was represented as Aroeris, hawk-headed and wearing the crowns of Upper and Lower Egypt. He was distinguished, like Osiris, for his part in the strife between good and evil, in which he assisted his father, as well as in the judgment of the deceased, whom he conducted before him. To his brother Anup, or Anubis, the jackal-headed god, was assigned the weighing of the souls of the departed in the judgment, and he especially presided over embalming and funeral rites. He and another jackal-headed god, Hepu-her, who was also connected with the future state, were the guards of the paths of the sun, which would seem to indicate a cosmic character, but they are probably so called in relation to the cycles of the future state. Harpocrates, in the hieroglyphics, Har-pi-chruti, or Horus the Child (a reading and etymology which we owe to the ingenuity of Bunsen, aided by Lepsius), is represented as a naked boy wearing a side-lock, and sometimes the crowns of Upper and Lower Egypt. He is often portrayed seated upon a lotus-flower, and with his finger in his mouth, not to denote silence, but a childish action, as Sir Gardner Wilkinson has justly remarked. Osiris was likewise parent of the four genii of Amenti or Hades, who were supposed to protect the parts of the body which, being not embalmed, were placed in jars, bearing the names of these genii, and having lids in the form of their heads.

Several other divinities might be mentioned, but those enumerated above are the most important. The androgynous Nilus, who has been already described in an earlier portion of this article, and the goddess Seben or Lucina, who was especially held to protect Upper Egypt, may be particularized. There are not, however, many more divinities, several which have been supposed to be distinct being merely different forms of those before described, while others must be regarded as foreign, or as merely mystical, and having no place in the Pantheon.

The distinguishing peculiarity of the ancient Egyptian religion, with respect to worship, is the adoration of sacred animals as emblems of the gods. It was a custom of great antiquity, for Manetho tells us that in the reign of Chabochos, the second king of the Second Dynasty (about B.C. 2400), the bulls Apis at Memphis, and Mnevis at Heliopolis, and the Mendesian goat, were called gods. This shows not only that the Egyptian religion was not wholly developed until that time, or later, but probably that animal worship was unknown in the most ancient form of that religion. Afterwards, however, this strange custom had become so prevalent that we find at the time of the Eighteenth Dynasty (about B.C. 1525–1340) one animal at least sacred to every god, and no city without such an object of worship. No satisfactory cause has been assigned as the origin of this superstition, as it has been the endeavour of those who have written respecting it to furnish a philosophical explanation of an unphilosophical custom. The existence and popularity of such worship proves, however, whence it originated; for the desire felt by mankind for a living or material object of adoration has in all ages led priests to offer them something to satisfy this desire, by giving them a material representation of a divinity, and the common people have entirely lost sight of the immaterial in the material, while their instructors have not been willing to undeceive them, and thus lose a source of wealth and influence.

Of certain if not all of these animals, one was always held especially sacred, and during its lifetime received peculiar honours, and at its death a magnificent funeral. The most celebrated of these were the bulls Apis at Memphis and Mnevis at Heliopolis, both sacred to Osiris, though some say the latter was sacred to the sun, and the Mendesian goat—which three Manetho mentions as having been made objects of worship at the same time. Of the sacred animals generally a mere enumeration must suffice, in the order of their importance, as nearly as can be ascertained. The most important seem to have been bulls, sacred to Osiris, and cows, to Athor; a kind of hawk, to Ra and other gods; the ibis, to Thoth; the crocodile, to Sehak; the asp, to Num and the goddess Rannu; the cat, to Pash; the scarabaeus (beetle), to Ptah and Ra; and the goat, to the god called Mendes by the Greeks, whoever he may be. As of secondary rank may be mentioned the ram and sheep, sacred to Num; the cynocephalus, to Thoth; the cerasites, to Amen; the jackal, and probably more than one allied species, to Anubis; a great vulture, to the goddess Seben; the kind of heron called in the hieroglyphics bennu, to Osiris; and five kinds of fish—the oxyrhinchus, the latus, the lepidotus, the phagrus, and the moxotes, the first of which was sacred to the goddess Athor. Among the animals of the least note may be remarked the lion, sacred to Hercules or Mu; the shrew-mouse, to the goddess Buto, whoever she may be, and the ichneumon. From this enumeration, which is taken from the list and excellent account of the sacred animals by Sir Gardner Wilkinson, it is evident that the selection of many of them must have been inconvenient, and that of others dangerous, so that it is vain to endeavour to trace wise motives in their choice. None of the animals, except some of those selected from their fellows, such as the bull Apis, received more than a local veneration, and some of them were as much execrated, or as little respected, in one nome, as revered in another.

The worship of the Egyptian divinities was conducted with much ceremony and mystery. The objects sacrificed or offered were animals of various kinds, and parts of animals, vegetables and fruit, first-fruits of the corn, libations of wine, and incense. There is no representation of an undoubted human sacrifice on the Egyptian monuments. The king is sometimes portrayed slaying a group of foreign captives before a divinity, but the accompanying inscriptions render it most probable that the subject has merely a symbolical meaning, being intended to signify the destruction of enemies generally. Manetho, however, related that the custom of human sacrifices in Heliopolis was abolished by Amosis, almost certainly the king having that name who is the head of the Eighteenth Dynasty; and Plutarch says, on his authority, that such sacrifices were performed in the city Elefthyas. The human sacrifices at the latter place were probably abolished, like those at the former, in early times. Magnificent temples, some of which will be described in a later part of this article, were raised in honour of the gods, and a numerous body of priests was engaged in their service.

The most interesting aspect of the religion of ancient Egypt is in its influence on the people. Man was held to be accountable hereafter for his actions done in this life, and to be judged or condemned according to his works. He was to be brought before Osiris, and his heart weighed against the feather of truth; he was to be questioned respecting his actions by the forty-two assessors, as to whether he had committed the forty-two sins concerning which they inquired. If guiltless, he took the form of Osiris his judge, and entered into a state of happiness, living among the gods in a region of perpetual day, by the banks of the celestial Nile; but if guilty, he was taken by ministers of vengeance, sometimes changed into the form of some base animal, such as a sow, and consigned to a fiery place of punishment and perpetual night. It is not certain whether the judgment was believed to occur at each man's death, or generally at a remote future period; nor whether the rewards and punishments were believed to be of eternal duration, but the soul was held to be immortal. Many good results of these important doctrines can be traced, but they were unfortunately neutralized by the baseness of the idolatry, so that we can only detect the effect on the mind in accustoming it to think of eternity, and thus giving it sublime ideas, while the soul was debased from true religion by the superstitions and allegories wherein what the Egyptians possessed of it was hidden.

From the preceding account of the Egyptian religion, some opinion of its origin may be deduced. We trace in it certain well-defined relics of what can only have been a primeval revelation; we observe a strong Sabarian element, particularly as the verb "to adore" is expressed by the symbol of a man in an attitude of worship to a star; we find much of a cosmic religion or nature-worship, besides Sabaeism; and, lastly, we remark an intellectual polytheistic system in the adoration of abstract intelligences. Hence we must conclude that this religion had at least a triple origin; but having been evidently comparatively complete at a very remote period, coeval with the earliest inscribed monuments now remaining, or antecedent to them, we cannot attempt to guess the manner in which its sources became moulded, and the time which was occupied in this being effected.

The monuments tell us little respecting the laws of the country, and that little is gathered inferentially. Ancient writers in some measure supply this deficiency, as far as we can venture to rely upon their statements.—Some of the kings were celebrated as lawgivers, as were also the gods, and especially Thoth or Hermes.

The laws respecting crimes and offences must have been generally severe in their nature, and unbending in their application, as the sculptures show that men and women of all classes went for the most part unarmed and unprotected. Now, it is usual in the Turkish empire to see the ploughman with pistols in his belt, and a gun over his shoulder, or at least armed with a dagger or a heavy staff. Murder was punished with death, whether the person killed were a free man or a slave, but otherwise capital punishment was sparingly inflicted. Indeed, at one time, under the rule of Sahaco the Ethiopian (of the Twenty-fifth Dynasty of Manetho), according to Herodotus, who may mean the whole Ethiopian dynasty, the king's power of commutating the sentence was exercised in all cases of persons capitally condemned, and the culprits were employed to raise the mounds on which their cities stood. Adultery was punished by the man being beaten with a thousand strokes of rods, and the woman's nose being cut off. Forgery of money and deeds, and similar crimes, were punished by the loss of both hands of the guilty person. Theft was not regarded as a heinous offence, if we may believe Diodorus, but this can only apply to petty theft. The common punishment for this and such like breaches of the law was beating with a stick; and the right thus to chastise was permitted to masters and all persons of authority, to ensure the obedience of inferiors, and avoid the inconvenience of having to refer all causes to a legal tribunal. Respecting debt, king Bocchoris, surnamed the Wise, of the Twenty-fourth Dynasty, enacted that if a man were sued for a borrowed sum of money by one who produced no written agreement, he should be quit of the debt if he denied having borrowed on oath. Usury was not permitted to the lender above what would double the sum lent, and payment was taken from the debtor's property, but it was not lawful to imprison him. Of the laws relating to the tenure of land mention has been made in an earlier place. It may be repeated here, that under Joseph's administration the whole of the land, except what belonged to the priests, became the property of the king, but that it appears that the military class soon regained possession of their lands.

The government of Egypt was of the monarchical form, but limited so as by no means to deserve the character of a despotism. The will of the king was restrained by the power and wisdom of the priesthood, into whose class he was admitted, though not as head of the religion, on or before his accession. The priests could refuse an unjust king the rites of burial, for every one was judged before those rites were permitted to be performed; and there is no doubt that in other ways they restricted the unlimited exercise of regal authority. The power of various kings was, of course, more or less despotic, but on the whole it does not seem to have been unreasonably exercised; and the greatest of them appear generally to have been regarded as benefactors by the common people, if we except, perhaps, the builders of the Great Pyramid and of the Second. The government of the country under the king was administered by nomarchs or governors of nomes, and toparchs or governors of toparchies, into which the nomes were subdivided, as well as minor officers. Some of these seem to have been hereditary rulers, and those of Eltebyan appear at one time to have been not only hereditary but of royal descent. The governor of Ethiopia, under the Pharaohs of the Eighteenth and Nineteenth Dynasties, always received the title, "Prince of Cush," and was probably a kind of viceroy. The king's sons do not seem to have been made governors, although they commanded bodies of troops, and held court appointments.

The subjects on the walls of the ancient Egyptian tombs give us a great insight into the domestic life of that people. Of their infancy and youth we know little, but it is evident that boys were trained to manly sports and exercises, and educated to read and write, as well as instructed in their religion. Circumcision was practised from the earliest periods, but it does not appear whether it was considered a religious rite. On attaining to manhood they married, and appear to have restricted themselves to but one wife. Diodorus Siculus relates that, while the priests were allowed but a single wife, the rest of the people were permitted to marry as many as they pleased. If such were the case, this privilege was very rarely taken, and the monuments have not as yet afforded a decided instance of it. No marriage ceremonies are represented, as far as is known, but the state was evidently considered honourable and binding. Concubines were allowed, and their children, though acknowledged, were probably held to be inferior to those of wives. The women, doubtless, received a lower education to that of the men, but not so much so as among the modern Egyptians. They were not restrained by any system resembling the harem-seclusion of El-Islam, and always mixed freely with the other sex. Those of the upper classes were treated with marked respect; the wife being called the "lady of the house," and held in all respects to be her husband's equal. Among the poor, the wife was very subject, as in all other countries. There was also no separation into castes, as has been supposed, and we can only distinguish the classes of soldiers, priests, and labourers. These were not prohibited from intermarrying, and sometimes a man held both a military and a sacerdotal appointment. There were no hereditary titles, although some families appear, or one, at least, to have possessed a hereditary government, as above mentioned. In these circumstances, therefore, it is not to be wondered that the condition of society was flourishing, and the intercourse of the people for the most part comparatively liberal and friendly. Foreigners, however, were regarded with dislike and jealousy, perhaps especially after the rule of the Shepherds.

---

1 Herod., ii., 137. 2 For the laws of the ancient Egyptians, see particularly Diod. Sic., i., 27, 70-80. 3 Diod. Sic., lib. i., cap. 80. 4 M. Ampère first proved that the Egyptians were not divided into castes. lower class being uneducated, and for the most part very poor, seems to have been despised by the higher; and the agricultural labourers and herdsmen appear to have been regarded with particular contempt. The servants were chiefly free Egyptians, but were sometimes negro and other captives.

The rich were very hospitable, delighting in giving feasts at which the guests were provided with very varied entertainments. The host and hostess sat together, as did other married people, and the rest of the company were arranged in various ways, the men and women generally being seated apart. The seats were single or double chairs, but many sat on the ground. Each guest was adorned with necklaces of flowers by the servants, and a lotus flower was bound to the head, on which was likewise placed a lump of ointment. Small tables were set before them, whereon were piled meat dressed in many ways, fruits, cakes, and other viands, and wine-cups were carried round. Before the repast, hired musicians and dancers amused the company, and often the entertainment seems to have been solely music and the performances of actresses, the guests being offered wine and flowers, and anointed. The ancient Egyptians had many other amusements, such as various games, one of which resembles chess in appearance, but probably is rather to be likened to the game of draughts, and they were diverted by divers, and the male and female performers of various feats. Of their everyday life the sculptures give us some idea. The proprietor of land and cattle went out in the morning and superintended agricultural processes on his estates, such as sowing or reaping; or he saw the flocks and herds brought before his scribes to be registered. Sometimes he directed the shipment of his produce for some town, or went to view the fisheries. When he was at liberty he divested himself by going among the fenny tracts in a canoe, generally with some of his children of both sexes, to spear the hippopotamus, or more frequently to knock down birds with the curved throw-stick. At other times he fished with a line in the preserves of his gardens or lands, or went to the desert, generally afoot, to hunt various animals of the antelope kind, which he shot with arrows, often stone-tipped, sometimes coursing with hounds. Every man of the better classes had a chariot, generally drawn by two horses, which he usually drove himself, standing in it. The life of the ladies was not unlike that of the men, except that they did not join in the sports, but sometimes as spectators. They seem to have spent their time principally in household matters, in visiting, and walking in the gardens. Occasionally they rode in heavy chariots drawn by oxen. Their manners seem to have been indolent and luxurious, and in these respects similar to those of the modern inhabitants of the same class, unlike the men who were so much more active than those of the present day. Among the lower orders the men were employed as labourers and artisans, while the women were engaged in work which was generally lighter than that of the other sex. Both led hard lives, having scanty clothing and poor food; yet the cheapness of living, and the mild climate, rendered their condition easier than one would at first suppose.

The language of the people was that which has been called the Egyptian, and in its later form, after the people had become Christians, the Coptic. The Egyptian was kindred to the Syro-Arabian class, though not actually belonging to that group. At least two dialects appear to have prevailed, which we find in the Coptic, besides a third: these are the ordinary Coptic or Memphitic dialect, that of Lower Egypt; the Sahidic or Theban, that of Upper Egypt; and the Bashmuric, prevailing in the Bucolia, and perhaps the Oases. The last-mentioned may therefore be almost considered as provincial. The language was monosyllabic in its roots, and abounding in vowels. Its sound must have been somewhat harsh if the Copts have rightly retained the pronunciation. The inscribed and written character was the hieroglyphic, an extremely complex system, which expressed words partly by representations of objects and symbols of ideas, and partly by signs which denoted phonetically all or the chief letters of a word. From this was formed the hieratic, which is but a running hand or common written form of the other, in which documents were usually written on papyrus, and from which sprang another system. This last was the demotic, or echorial writing, composed of a few characters selected from the phonetic signs in hieratic, usually two to each letter, and more simply written, forming a convenient system of writing for deeds and other legal documents, as well as for ordinary use among the people. The hieroglyphic and hieratic writing, we find to have prevailed at very early periods; the former is found on monuments of the age of the Great Pyramid (B.C. 2400), and the latter in the time of the Ninth Dynasty (B.C. 2100). The demotic appears to have been introduced at a comparatively late period, as we find no examples of it earlier than under the Twenty-sixth Dynasty; and it did not come into general use until the period of Greek and Roman rule. For further details on this subject, the reader is referred to the article Hieroglyphics.

Much remains to us of the literature of ancient Egypt. Literature. Numerous papyri have been discovered containing religious Papyri. and historical documents, the former generally in hieratic, the latter always, and these with the inscriptions of the tombs and temples, as well as of almost countless tablets, afford us specimens of the character of this literature. The religious papyri are all portions or complete copies of one work which Champollion entitled "the Funeral Ritual," and Funeral Lepsius "the Book of the Dead." This is a strange ritual, rambling composition, which some have supposed to be a collection of various pieces of different ages (a hypothesis that must be cautiously accepted, as it is such a favourite one of German criticism, often used to explain what needs no explanation of the sort), and divided into many chapters headed by rubrics. It consists of a series of prayers to be said by the soul during its wanderings after death until reunited to the body, and instructions as to what will happen in this intermediate state. Although much study has been bestowed upon it, its contents have not been understood in detail; which is owing partly to the use of words which are not found in the Coptic, having been abandoned at the conversion of the Egyptians to Christianity, and partly to the extreme obscurity of the subject. It has not been found to contain any passages of eloquence or beauty, and as a composition is certainly most disappointing. The religious inscriptions are often portions of this great work, but many are simply addresses to the gods, or lists of their titles. The historical papyri do not Historical much, if at all, excel the religious in the matter of composition, though far exceeding them in the interest of their subjects. Some of these are a kind of poetical account, probably in measured prose, if not in verse, of the exploits of the king of Egypt, while others are merely narratives of various matters from one official to another. The historical inscriptions are generally inflated panegyrics of the king, relating the overthrow of his enemies inscriptions, and other great actions of his reign, whether civil or military.

---

1 Ancient Egyptian, vol. ii., p. 207, et seqq. 2 Id., vol. ii., p. 414, et seqq. 3 Id., vol. iii., p. 1, et seqq. 4 Der Todtenbuch der Ägypter, Leipzig 1842. 5 The Rev. Dunbar Heath is about to publish a work on some of these historical papyri, which is expected to throw much light upon their contents, and to afford great assistance to others who may endeavour to decipher them.

VOL. VIII. Some moral sayings have been discovered, and one romance, of which the Vicomte de Rougé has published a very interesting account. It is full of curious incidents, and displays a most remarkable supernatural machinery. A complete translation of this and other works of the same kind, should they be discovered, would furnish us with much curious matter, and, in particular, throw light upon the question as to how much of the superstitions of the Arabs and modern Egyptians, and their fairy mythology, may be traceable to the ancient people of Egypt. It is also to be hoped that the books relating to sacred ceremonies, to laws, to arts and sciences, and the like, or some of them, may be recovered, and that we may thus be enabled to form a tolerably fair estimate of the state of literature, science, and art among this remarkable people.

Respecting the sciences we have chiefly to depend upon the evidence founded on the monuments, and some of the sculptures and inscriptions which remain—evidence which is therefore partly inferential, and when direct, is only based on incidental data. It is nevertheless of the most satisfactory character, and corroborative of the accounts of ancient writers. Astronomy was the chief of the sciences, and it was carried to the highest point which it could attain without the aid of modern instruments. In order to determine the length of various periods, and the times at which certain religious ceremonies should be celebrated, a very accurate observation of the heavenly bodies became necessary; and the belief that these bodies influenced the well-being of mankind induced the most careful registry of their movements, and in particular of those phenomena so difficult to observe, the heliacal risings of stars. It has been asserted by ancient writers, and modern scholars have supported their statements, that the Egyptians, besides being acquainted with the Julian year, had even ascertained its inaccuracy as a tropical year, having attained to a knowledge of the precession of the equinoxes. When we consider the long period through which their observations must have been carried on, and that the Greeks must have discovered this doctrine if they did not derive it from the Egyptians or Chaldees, without being more favourably placed, such an opinion seems in nowise unreasonable. Geometry held the next place to astronomy. The necessity of measuring the height of the rise and inundation of the Nile, the construction of dams and dikes, and many such like matters, must have required a knowledge of geometry and the kindred sciences quite as much as mechanical skill; and we find that the ancient Egyptians were famous in these branches of science, which, indeed, is sufficiently attested by existing works. Their mechanical skill is remarkably evidenced by the construction of the pyramids of Memphis at a very early period of their history. The transport of part of the materials for these structures from quarries on the opposite bank of the Nile, of part from those of Syene, nearly 550 miles above Memphis by the course of the river—the transport of such masses of stone by water and land, the elevation of the blocks, some of enormous size, while the buildings were in progress, the beautiful fitting of the polished masonry, and the accurate excavation in the rock of part or all of the passages and chambers, show a very great mechanical knowledge, the results of which have not been excelled by that of Europe at the present day. With chemistry the Egyptians must have possessed considerable acquaintance, as we may conclude from the state of various arts which in a great measure depend upon it. The workers in metals used the blow-pipe, and made knives of steel, though these words were usually of a hard bronze; and the manner in which Moses destroyed the golden calf is an evidence of the chemical skill of the Egyptians, from whom it is reasonable to suppose he had acquired the knowledge of which he then made use. Medicine and surgery, including anatomy, were much studied, and attained a high degree and surplus of excellence relatively speaking. Of the purely abstract sciences we can scarcely judge, and it is dangerous to reason from the character and religion of the people.

Of the arts architecture claims the first place, painting and sculpture being subservient to it among the Egyptians. Temples were not raised to contain statues, but statues were set up to adorn temples whereof they formed architecturally a part, and the walls were decorated with painted sculptures and paintings, which again formed parts of the architectural whole. The group of these arts may therefore be considered as one, and it should be our object to discover the grand principle which was intended to be expressed by the Egyptians in their application of them. Their houses were slight and temporary; they cared only for two classes of edifices, temples and tombs; the former as abodes of the gods, the latter as resting-places for bodies they deemed sacred and to be preserved for ever. In both the builders aimed at solidity of material, massive grandeur of form, richness and sobriety of colour—that they should last for ever, and express at once the solemnity of the present and of the future. The idea that originated this architecture was the contemplation of eternity and of the immortality of the soul; and in recognising that idea, and the noble manner in which it was carried out, we find something great and admirable in the ancient Egyptians. If we compare the same arts of Assyria and of Greece, we trace a far different leading idea. In Assyria the greatness of the king as the vicegerent of the gods is constantly brought before us; his figure crowds the temple walls, where the gods are ever represented protecting him, and he rarely offering to them, while in Egypt the king is constantly portrayed worshipping and sacrificing, and not so constantly attended by the gods. In Assyria the palaces contain temples, but in Egypt the temples are palaces. In Assyria, and afterwards in Persia, the great king was the one object of respect or fear; and when the Persian princes introduced that famous edict, that none was to ask a petition of any god or man for thirty days save of the king only, they were but carrying into effect what had been virtually practised by almost all the people; and their being able to procure such a decree sufficiently proves this. The leading idea then that influenced the Assyrian artist, was the majesty of the king. In Greece we see another leading idea. However it may have been in older times, at the best period of art among the Greeks, we perceive that sculpture, which was their highest art, was designed to express the perfection of human beauty, not ideal beauty, as it has been called, but a perfect form composed, like the famous picture of Zeuxis, from a study of the most beautiful human examples. The architecture expresses the same idea; it is always symmetrical, elegant, pure in taste, but never massive or sublime. The leading idea here is beauty, and that of a material kind. In ancient art, therefore, the Egyptian has the highest place with respect to intention, and equals that of Greece and Assyria in the excellence with which the intention has been carried out. He who has been pleased with the temples of Greece and interested with the palaces of Assyria, is confounded by the Great Pyramid, and struck with awe in the hypostyle hall of El-Karnak.

---

1 In Champollion's Lettres écrites de l'Egypte et de la Nubie, the reader will find much information as to the historical and religious inscriptions, conveyed in an interesting style of writing. 2 Revue Archéologique, 1852, p. 385. 3 The evidence from ancient writers on this point has been collected by Lepsius in his Chronologie der Ägypter. 4 Dan. vi. 7. 5 "Aucun peuple ancien ni moderne n'a conçu l'art de l'architecture sur une échelle aussi sublime, aussi large, aussi grandiose, qui le Egypt has always been regarded as the home of magic arts; as early as the time of Joseph there was a class of magicians, and by them was Moses opposed. The monuments have not been found to contain any distinct notice of such persons, and our information respecting them is derived from the Bible, and from the narratives of Greek and Roman writers: there are also some magical papyri of the Roman period. The magicians were interpreters of dreams and omens, and they also pretended to work wonders. They endeavoured to bring about what they desired by invocations composed in a great measure of a strange jargon, and partly of foreign words, and they even threatened to reveal the mysteries. And it is not a little remarkable, that the performances of the modern Egyptian magicians, and their reputed results, bear a strong resemblance to one of the ancient modes of working an enchantment and the effect it was said to produce. Probably the magicians were of the priestly class, but magic was most likely practised by persons of all positions, not being deemed a black art. Some kinds of magic were however regarded to be unlawful, as the invocation of Typhon after he had been expelled from the Pantheon, and the use of enchantments to produce illegal results.

Character. From the foregoing observations and other data, we may gain a not inaccurate idea of the character of the ancient Egyptians. They were religious, though much given to superstition, and of a contemplative disposition; in war they were brave, without the hideous cruelty of the Assyrians; to their country they bore a patriotic affection, and were hospitable to their fellow-countrymen; in their dress they were usually simple, and frugal in their diet. On the other hand they sometimes indulged in wine to excess, and were very sensual, especially the women, as in modern times; they were much addicted to falsehood, and did not show that kindness to foreigners that they did to their own people. This last fault is however chargeable to their religious and political system.

Industrial arts. The industrial arts were carried to a great degree of excellence in ancient Egypt. In weaving, and all the processes connected with the manufacture of linen and the like, they have not been surpassed in modern times. Their pottery was very good, and their glass is not inferior to that of the Greeks, except in beauty of colour. In the making of instruments of music, and household furniture, of vases, and various vessels of metal, alabaster, and other materials, arms, and domestic implements, they displayed equal taste and skill, and we can trace in many instances how greatly the Greeks were indebted to them for patterns and forms which they often rendered more elegant.—The agriculture and gardening have been already noticed.

Music. In the sculptures we find representations of a great variety of musical instruments of which scarcely more than the names can be mentioned here, the multiplicity of which shows how much attention had been bestowed on music. Various kinds of harps are represented, often richly ornamented, and differing from one another in their size and the number of their strings: they were played with the hand. We also see lyres, varying in the number of strings, and played with or without the plectrum, and the guitar which always had three chords. Besides these, there were other stringed instruments for which it is difficult to find modern appellations. The Egyptians had also flutes as well as single and double pipes, the tambourine of various forms, cymbals, cylindrical maces, drums of different kinds beaten with the hands or sticks, including that called by the modern inhabitants the darabukkeh, the trumpet, and the sacred sistrum. The military music was that of the trumpet, drum, and cylindrical maces, the first of which was confined to the army; but almost all the instruments were used in the services of the temples. Respecting the character of the ancient Egyptian music it is difficult even to form a guess.

The musicians often likewise sang or danced while playing on their instruments. The dances of both men and women were of various kinds, from what might be called feats of agility to slow and graceful movements. The dancers were chiefly women, and their performances seem generally to have resembled those of the modern dancing-girls of Egypt. They wore either a very transparent and full dress of fine linen, or nothing but a narrow girdle. These circumstances would give us a very low opinion of the civilization and morals of ancient Egypt, did we not find almost their parallel in modern Europe, at exhibitions which the great of both sexes especially favour by their presence.

The festivals of the gods, or panegyries, were very numerous; and some of them attracted a great number of pilgrims to the chief temple of the divinity in whose honour they were held. The most important of these were, according to Herodotus, the festival of Bubastis, at the city called after her, then that of Isis at Busiris, next that of Neith at Sais, that of the Sun at Heliopolis, that of Latona, at the city of Buto, and lastly that of Mars at Papremis. In this enumeration of the chief festivals in the order of importance, it will be observed that they were nearly all celebrated in the Delta, and none at all south of that tract except that of the Sun at Heliopolis, which indeed was situated only a little above the ancient point of the Delta. As we find Herodotus was imperfectly acquainted with Upper Egypt, and as in his time some great towns of the earlier period had fallen into decay, we may conclude that both then and in preceding times there were other great periodical festivals. The panegyry of Amen at Thebes must have been very anciently of the highest rank; and subsequently so long as Thebes was a town, it cannot have sunk to the condition of an ordinary religious festival. These great celebrations were distinguished, not only by the grandeur of the ceremonies performed and the expense lavished upon the sacrifices, but by the concourse of people who flocked to them rather to divert themselves than to perform a religious duty, and among whom every kind of amusement was unrestrainedly practised. The festivals in honour of Osiris, whereof two were annually kept, though inferior to none in solemnity, were probably less popular, as only the initiated were admitted to the mysterious rites, which seem to have been more characteristic of them than of the other festivals.

We know little of the private festivities of the ancient Egyptians, and, in particular, there is no evidence of any festivities having been usual at a marriage, the marriage-ceremony itself being, as has been previously remarked, not represented upon the monuments. The most remarkable ceremonies connected with their private life were those celebrated at a funeral. At the time of death the period of mourning commenced, and lasted seventy-two days or a shorter time. During this time the body was embalmed and swathed in many bandages, the outermost of which was covered with a kind of pasteboard, on which were painted the features of the deceased, and various emblems and inscriptions. A mummy fired les vieux Égyptiens; ils concevaient en hommes de 100 pieds de haut, et l'imagination qui, en Europe, s'élançait bien au-dessus de nos portiques, s'arrêté et tombe impuissante au pied des 140 colonnes de la salle hypostyle de Karnac."—Champollion's Lettres, p. 98.

1 See a very curious fragment of a Greco-Egyptian work on magic edited by Mr Goodwin, published by the Cambridge Archaeological Society, and a notice of it in the Archaeological Journal, No. 41.

2 Reuvens, Lettres, &c., cited supra, p. 438.

3 Ancient Egyptians, vol. ii., p. 256, et seqq.

4 The reverence in which it was held, its use in the sacred ceremonies, and the numerous and very different instruments, would lead us however to suppose that music had attained no little excellence, unless indeed the priests restricted it to conventional limits.

5 Id., vol. ii., pp. 329, 330.

6 Herod., iii., 59. was thus formed, bearing the shape of a bandaged human figure, of which the form of the head and hands alone was seen. When the tomb, which had been long previously commenced, and was either an excavated grotto or stone structure, was complete, the funeral ceremony usually took place, though it was often delayed to a later period. The mummy was inclosed in a case of wood having the same shape as itself, and this was again inclosed, when the deceased was a wealthy person, within another wooden case, or more usually a sarcophagus of stone, sometimes of the same form as the mummy, but generally rectangular, or nearly so. The mummy was then placed upon a sledge, drawn by oxen or by men, and taken to the bank of the river, or shore of a sacred lake, which was to be crossed in order to reach the place of burial. This procession by water was an important part of the ceremony. The mummy, attended by mourners, was placed in a sacred baris or boat, which was towed by another boat, and followed by others carrying mourners, offerings, and all things necessary for the occasion. On arriving at the tomb the sarcophagus was deposited in a sepulchral chamber, usually at the bottom of a pit within the tomb, and offerings to the deceased and others of his family buried there were made by the relatives, as well as to the gods presiding over the future state. Visits were afterwards paid to the tomb in order to make these offerings, probably at stated periods. One tomb sufficed for each family, and sometimes for two generations; and, in the case of the poorer classes, many were buried in the sepulchral chambers of a single pit, above which was no structure or grotto. The law has already been noticed whereby every one was judged by a legal tribunal before the right of burial was permitted.

The modern inhabitants must now be considered. Mr Lane (1834) estimates the population of Egypt at less than 2,000,000, and gives the following numbers as nearly those of the several classes of which it is mainly composed—

| Class | Population | |------------------------|------------| | Muslim Egyptians | 1,750,000 | | Christian Egyptians | 150,000 | | 'Osmaklees, or Turks | 10,000 | | Syrians | 5,000 | | Greeks | 5,000 | | Armenians | 2,000 | | Jews | 5,000 |

and the remainder, exclusive of the Arabs of the desert, about 70,000.

Sir Gardner Wilkinson (1843) computes the total at about 1,800,000; but Clot-Bey (1840), not always an impartial writer, places it much higher, upwards of 3,000,000. The following result of the government census, taken in 1847–8, is remarkable as showing the system of falsifying statistics for state purposes. It is copied from an official return.

| Province | Population | |------------------------|------------| | Middle Egypt | 591,994 | | El-Gharbia | 529,930 | | El-Fayoum | 184,940 | | Upper Egypt | 1,190,118 | | El-Sharkieyeh | 342,509 | | El-Geezeh | 223,554 | | El-Boheyreh | 215,810 | | El-Mansoofeyeh | 440,519 | | El-Dakahleyeh | 347,347 | | Shubra | 10,116 | | El-Kasr | 8,405 | | Rosetta | 18,605 | | Dairatet | 28,922 | | Sohag | 17,899 | | El-Areesh | 2,347 | | Alexandria | 143,134 | | Cairo | 253,541 |

Of the present population of Egypt, the Muslims constitute seven-eighths, and nearly four-fifths of that of the metropolis; and to this class, and more particularly to the people of Cairo, the following sketch of personal characteristics and customs will relate, excepting in some few cases, which will be distinguished from the rest.

In describing the personal characteristics of this remarkable people, Mr Lane, in his admirable work, *The Manners and Customs of the Modern Egyptians* (which was written just before European influence was felt in the country, and now deservedly ranks as the only book of authority on the subject), says: "In general the Muslim Egyptians attain the height of about five feet eight, or five feet nine inches. Most of the children under nine or ten years of age have spare limbs and a distended abdomen; but as they grow up their forms rapidly improve. In mature age most of them are remarkably well proportioned; the men muscular and robust; the women very beautifully formed, and plump; and neither sex is too fat. I have never seen corpulent persons among them, excepting a few in the metropolis and other towns, rendered so by a life of inactivity. In Cairo, and throughout the northern provinces, those who have not been much exposed to the sun have a yellowish but very clear complexion, and soft skin; the rest are of a considerably darker and coarser complexion. The people of Middle Egypt are of a more tawny colour, and those of the more southern provinces are of a deep bronze, or brown complexion—darkest towards Nubia, where the climate is hottest. In general the countenance of the Muslim Egyptian (I here speak of the men) is of a fine oval form; the forehead of moderate size, seldom high, but generally prominent; the eyes are deep sunk, black, and brilliant; the nose is straight, but rather thick; the mouth well formed; the lips are rather full than otherwise; the teeth particularly beautiful; the beard is commonly black and curly, but scanty. I have seen very few individuals of this race with grey eyes; or rather, few persons supposed to be of this race; for I am inclined to think them the offspring of Arab women by Turks, or other foreigners. The Fellaheen, from constant exposure to the sun, have a habit of half shutting their eyes; this is also characteristic of the Bedawees. Great numbers of the Egyptians are blind in one or both eyes. They generally shave that part of the cheek which is above the lower jaw, and likewise a small space under the lower lip, leaving, however, the hairs which grow in the middle under the mouth; or, instead of shaving these parts, they pluck out the hair. They also shave a part of the beard under the chin. Very few shave the rest of their beards, and none their moustaches. The former they suffer to grow to the length of about a hand's-breadth below the chin (such at least is the general rule, and such was the custom of the Prophet), and their moustaches they do not allow to become so long as to inconvenience them in eating and drinking. The practice of dyeing the beard is not common; for a grey beard is much respected. The Egyptians shave all the rest of the hair, or leave only a small tuft (called 'shooshel') upon the crown of the head. The general form and features of the women must now be described. From the age of about fourteen to that of eighteen or twenty, they are generally models of beauty in body and limbs; and in countenance most of them are pleasing, and many exceedingly lovely; but soon after they have attained their perfect growth, they rapidly decline;" the relaxing nature of the climate, and other predisposing causes, contribute to render many of them absolutely ugly at the age of forty. "In the Egyptian females the forms of womanhood begin to develop themselves about the ninth or tenth year; at the age of fifteen or sixteen they generally attain their highest degree of perfection. With regard to their complexions, the same..." remarks apply to them as to the men, with only this difference, that their faces, being generally veiled when they go abroad, are not quite so much tanned as those of the men. They are characterized, like the men, by a fine oval countenance, though in some instances it is rather broad. The eyes, with very few exceptions, are black, large, and of a long almond-form, with long and beautiful lashes, and an exquisitely soft, bewitching expression—eyes more beautiful can hardly be conceived: their charming effect is much heightened by the concealment of the other features (however pleasing the latter may be), and is rendered still more striking by a practice universal among the females of the higher and middle classes, and very common among those of the lower orders, which is that of blackening the edge of the eyelids, both above and below the eye, with a black powder called "kohl." Both sexes, but especially the women, tattoo several parts of the person, and the latter stain their hands and feet with the red dye of the henna.

Their dress can be but briefly described. That of the men of the upper and middle classes consists of cotton drawers, and a cotton or silk shirt with very wide sleeves. Above these are generally worn a waistcoat without sleeves, and a long vest of silk, called kaftan, which has hanging sleeves, and reaches nearly to the ankles. The kaftan is confined by the girdle, which is a silk scarf, or cashmere or other woollen shawl. Over all is worn a long cloth robe, the gibbeh (or jubbeh) somewhat resembling the kaftan in shape, but having shorter sleeves, and being open in front. The dress of the lower orders is the shirt and drawers, and waistcoat, with an outer shirt of blue cotton or brown woollen stuff; some wear a kaftan. The head-dress of all is the turban wound round a skull-cap. This cap is usually the red cloth fez, or tarboosh, but the very poor wear one of coarse brown felt, and are often without the turban. Many professions and religions, &c., are distinguished by the shape and colour of the turban, and various classes, and particularly servants, are marked by the form and colour of their shoes; but the poor go usually barefoot. The ladies wear a shirt and drawers, a very full pair of silk trousers, and a close-fitting vest with hanging sleeves and skirts, open down the front and at the sides, and long enough to turn up and fasten into the girdle, which is generally a cashmere shawl; a cloth jacket, richly embroidered with gold, and having short sleeves, is commonly worn over the vest. The hair in front is combed down over the forehead and cut across in a straight line; behind it is divided into very many small plaits, which hang down the back, and are lengthened by silken cords, and often adorned with gold coins and ornaments. A small tarboosh is worn on the back of the head, sometimes having a plate of gold fixed on the crown, and a handkerchief is tastefully bound round the temples. The women of the lower orders have trousers of printed or dyed cotton, and a close waistcoat. All wear the long and elegant head-veil. This is a simple "breadth" of muslin, which passes over the head and hangs down behind, one side being drawn forward over the face in the presence of a man. A lady's veil is of white muslin, embroidered at the ends in gold and colours; that of a person of the lower class is simply dyed blue. In going abroad the ladies wear above their indoor dress a loose robe of coloured silk without sleeves, and nearly open at the sides, and above it a large enveloping piece of black silk, which is brought over the head, and gathered round the person by the arms and hands on each side. A face-veil entirely conceals the features, except the eyes; it is a long and narrow piece of thick white muslin, reaching to a little below the knees. The women of the lower orders have the same outdoor dress of different materials and colour. Ladies use slippers of yellow morocco, and abroad, inner boots of the same material, above which they wear, in either case, thick shoes having only toes. The poor wear red shoes, very like those of the men.

In religion the Muslim Egyptians are Sunnites, professing the creed which is commonly termed "orthodox," and are principally of the persuasion of the Shafe'eecs, whose celebrated founder, the Imam El-Shafee, is buried in the great southern cemetery of Cairo. Many of them are, however, Hanafiees (to which persuasion the Turks chiefly belong), and in parts of Lower, and almost universally in Upper, Egypt, Malikies. For the tenets of El-Islam, the reader is referred to the article Mahomedanism.

The civil administration of justice is conducted in four principal courts of judicature; that of the Zabit, or chief of police, where trivial cases are summarily disposed of; that of the Deewan el-Khodeecee, in the citadel, in which the justice, pasha or his deputy presides, and where judgment is given in cases which either do not require to be referred to the two other courts yet to be mentioned, or which do not fall within their province; the Deewan el-Mahkemeh, the court of the kádee, or chief judge, who is a Turk sent annually from Constantinople, and who must be a Hanafée; and that of the Muftee of the Hanafiees, or chief doctor of the law, who decides all cases of difficulty. There are besides five minor mahkemehs or courts in Cairo, and one in each of the neighbouring towns of Boolak and Masr El-Ateekah, from which cases are always referred to the court of the kádee; and each country town has a native kádee, whose authority is generally sufficient for the villages around. The Council of the 'Ulama, or learned men, consists of the sheykh, or religious chief, of each of the four orthodox persuasions, the sheykh of the great mosque called the Azhar, who is of the persuasion of the Shafe'eecs, and is sometimes its sheykh, the kádee, and the chief (Naceeb) of the Shereefs, or descendants of the Prophet, with several other persons. This body was until lately very powerful, but now has little influence over the Páshi. Cairo is divided into quarters (Hárah, pl. Hárát), each of which has its sheykh, who preserves order among the people; and the whole city is partitioned into eight larger divisions, each having a sheykh called Sheykh et-Tunn. Various trades also have their sheykhos or chiefs, to whom reference is made in disputes respecting the craft; and the servants have similar heads who are responsible for their behaviour. The country is divided into governments, as before stated, each presided over by a Turkish officer, having the title of Muideer, and sub-divided into districts under the control of native officers, bearing the title "Mamoor" and "Názir." A responsible person called Sheykh el-Beled (or "sheykh of the town," or "village"), presides over each small town and village, and is a native of the place. It must also be mentioned that the Sa'eed, or Upper Egypt, is governed by a pasha, whose residence is at Asyoot. Notwithstanding the consistent, able, and in many respects commendable, code of laws which has been founded on the Kur-án and the Traditions, the administration of justice is lamentably faulty. As is the custom throughout the East, judgment in Egypt is usually swayed by bribes, and a poor man's case is generally hopeless when his adversary is rich. To this rule there have been some notable exceptions, and the memory of a few virtuous judges is cherished by the people, but such instances are very rare. The moral and civil laws observed by the Egyptians being those of El-Islam will be found under another article.

It is very worthy of notice, that in Cairo, as in some Infantry, other Muslim cities, any one may obtain gratuitously an elementary education, and he who desires the fullest attainable education may receive that also without the payment of a single fee, by joining a class of students in a collegiate mosque. The elementary instruction which most boys receive consists chiefly of reading, and learning the Kur-án by heart; day-schools, as charitable institutions, abound in Cairo, and every town possesses its school; a trifling fee to the fikse (or master) is the only expense incurred by the scholars. Girls are seldom taught anything beyond needlework. The children of both sexes, except those of the wealthy, have generally a very dirty and slovenly appearance; and often intentional neglect is adopted to avert the effects of the "evil eye," of which the Egyptians entertain great dread. The children of the upper classes are excessively indulged, while the poor entirely neglect their offspring. The leading doctrines of El-Islám, as well as hatred for all religions but their own, and a great reverence for their parents and the aged, are early inculcated. This deference towards parents cannot fail to strike every foreigner who visits Egypt, and does not cease with their growth; presenting an example well worthy of imitation in the west. Circumcision is observed at about the age of five or six years, when the boy is paraded, generally with a bridal procession, on a gaily caparisoned horse, and dressed in women's clothes. Some parents, however, and most of the learned, prefer a quieter and less expensive ceremony.

It is deemed disreputable for a young man not to marry when he has attained a sufficient age; there are therefore few unmarried men. Girls, in like manner, marry very young, some even at ten years of age, and few remain single beyond the age of sixteen; they are generally very prolific. The bridegroom never sees his future wife before the wedding night, an evil which is somewhat mitigated by the facility of divorce. A dowry is always given, and a marriage ceremony performed by a fikse (a schoolmaster, or one who recites the Kur-án), in the presence of two witnesses; the ceremony is very simple, but constitutes a legal marriage. The bridal of a virgin is attended with great festivity and rejoicing; a grandee's wedding sometimes continuing eleven days and nights. On the last day, which should be that terminating with the eve of Friday, or of Monday, the bride is taken in procession to the bridegroom's house, accompanied by her female friends, and a band of musicians, jugglers, wrestlers, &c. As before stated, a boy about to be circumcised joins in such a procession; or, frequently, a succession of such boys. A Muslim is allowed by his religion four wives, but advantage is rarely taken of this license, and very few attempt to keep two wives in one house; the expense and discomfort which polygamy entails, act, therefore, as a restriction to its general adoption. A man may however possess any number of concubine slaves, who though objects of jealousy to the legal wife, are yet tolerated by her in consideration of her superior position, and conceded power over them, a power which she often uses with great tyranny; but certain privileges are possessed by the concubine, especially if she have born a son to her master. Such slaves are commonly kept only by grandees, the generality of the Muslim Egyptians being content with one wife. A divorce is rendered obligatory by the simple words, "Thou art divorced," and a triple divorce is irrevocable under ordinary circumstances. The harem system of appointing separate apartments to the women, and excluding them from the gaze of men, is observed in Egypt as in other Muslim countries, but less strictly. Mr Lane says on this subject—"I believe that in Egypt the women are generally under less restraint than in any other country of the Turkish Empire; so that it is not uncommon to see females of the lower orders flirting and jesting with men in public, and men laying their hands upon them very freely. Still it might be imagined, that the women of the higher and middle classes feel themselves severely oppressed, and are much discontented with the state of seclusion to which they are subjected; but this is not commonly the case; on the contrary, an Egyptian wife who is attached to her husband is apt to think, if he allow her unusual liberty, that he neglects her, and does not sufficiently love her; and to envy those wives who are kept and watched with greater strictness." The females of an Egyptian household never sit in the presence of the master, but attend him at his meals, and are treated in every respect as inferiors. The mother, however, forms a remarkable exception to this rule; in rare instances, also, a wife becomes a companion to her husband. On the other hand, if a pair of women's shoes are placed outside the door of the harem apartments, they are understood to signify that female visitors are within, and a man is sometimes thus excluded from the upper portion of his own house for many days. Ladies of the upper or middle classes lead a life of extreme inactivity, spending their time at the bath, which is the general place of gossip, or in receiving visits, embroidering, and the like, and in absolute dolce far niente. It is therefore no cause for wonder that their tone of morals is generally low. Both sexes are abstemious in their food, though fond of pastry, sweetmeats, and fruit. The principal meals are breakfast, about an hour after sunrise; dinner, or the mid-day meal, at noon; and supper, which is the chief meal of the day, a little after sunset. Coffee is taken at all hours, and is, with a pipe, presented at least once to each guest. Tobacco is the great luxury of the men of all classes in Egypt, who begin and end the day with it, and generally smoke all day with little intermission. Many women, also, especially among the rich, adopt the habit. Men who can afford to keep a horse, mule, or ass, are very seldom seen to walk, and numberless excellent asses are to be hired in Cairo. Ladies always ride asses and sit astride. The poorer classes are of course unable to observe the harem system, but the women are in general carefully veiled. Some of them keep small shops, and all fetch water, make fuel, and cook for their households. The food of the poor is very meagre; flesh meat is rarely tasted by them, and (besides bread), dates, raw cucumbers, and onions, are their common food, with soaked beans, roasted ears of Indian corn, &c.

In their social intercourse the Muslim Egyptians are regular, and observe many forms of salutation and much etiquette; yet they are very affable, entering into conversation with strangers at shops and elsewhere. Their courtesy and dignity of manner are very striking, and are combined with ease, and a fluency of discourse. Of their mental qualifications Mr Lane remarks—"The natural or innate character of the modern Egyptians is altered, in a remarkable degree, by their religion, laws, and government, as well as by the climate and other causes; and to form a just opinion of it is, therefore, very difficult. We may, however, confidently state that they are endowed, in a higher degree than most other people, with some of the more important mental qualities, particularly quickness of apprehension, a ready wit, and a retentive memory. In youth they generally possess these and other intellectual powers; but the causes above alluded to gradually lessen their mental energy." Their principal virtues are piety and strong religious feeling, a strict observance of the injunctions of El-Islám, and a constant sense of God's presence and overruling providence, combined however with religious pride and hypocrisy. Their common discourse is full of asseverations and expressions respecting sacred things, often however used with a levity which it is difficult for a person unacquainted with their feelings easily to reconcile with their respect for God. They entertain an excessive reverence for their Prophet; and the Kur-án is treated with the utmost respect—never, for example, being placed in a low situation—and this is the case with everything they esteem holy. They are fatalists, and bear calamities with perfect resignation to the Divine will. Their filial piety and respect for the

---

1 Modern Egyptians, chap. xxvii. 2 Id., vi. 3 Id., xiii. Egypt, aged have been before mentioned, and benevolence and charity are conspicuous in their character; poverty is therefore not accompanied by the distressing circumstances which too frequently attend it in Europe. Humanity to dumb animals is another virtue, and cruelty is openly discountenanced in their streets, even to unclean animals; this is however unfortunately wearing off in consequence of their intercourse with Franks. Their affability, cheerfulness, and hospitality, are remarkable, as well as frugality and temperance in food and drink, scrupulous cleanliness, a love of country, and honesty in the payment of debt. It should be added, however, that the Egyptians rarely, if ever, exercise their social virtues but towards persons of their own persuasion and country. Their vices are indolence, obstinacy, and liberality, especially among the women, curiosity (mitigated by generosity), envy, a disregard for the truth, and a habit of cursing. Murders, and other grave crimes of this nature, are rarely committed, but petty thefts are very common.

"The Arabic spoken by the middle and higher classes in Cairo is," on the unquestionable authority of the Modern Egyptians, "generally inferior, in point of grammatical correctness and pronunciation, to the dialects of the Bedawees of Arabia, and of the inhabitants of the towns in their immediate vicinity, but much to be preferred to those of Syria, and still more to those of the Western Arabs." The language varies in Upper and Lower Egypt, and is more correct inland than near the shores of the Mediterranean.

In the decay of Arab literature, Cairo still holds the chief place as a seat of learning, and its University, the Azhar, is undoubtedly the first of the Eastern world. Its professors teach "grammatical inflexion and syntax, rhetoric, versification, logic, theology, the exposition of the Kur-an, the Traditions of the Prophet, the complete science of jurisprudence, or rather religious, moral, civil, and criminal law, which is chiefly founded on the Kur-an and the Traditions, together with arithmetic as far as it is useful in matters of law." Lectures are also given on algebra, and on the calculations of the Mohammedan calendar, the times of prayer, &c. The students, as already remarked, pay no fees, and the professors receive no salaries. The latter maintain themselves by private teaching, and by copying manuscripts, and the former in the same manner, or by reciting the Kur-an. The number of students may be, on an average, from 1500 to 2000. Except the professors of literature, few Egyptians are taught more than to read and write; and of these, still fewer can read and write well. The women, as before mentioned, are very rarely taught even to read.

Science is but little studied, and barbers generally practise medicine and surgery. Mohammad 'Alee endeavoured to improve this state of things, by sending young men to Europe for the purpose of scientific study, and by establishing various schools, with the same object, in Egypt. His improvements were discouraged by Abbas Pasha, who, happily for the country, is not now living; and we may hope that Sa'eed Pasha may follow the example of his father, Mohammad 'Alee.

In common with other Muslims, those of Egypt have very many superstitions, some of which are peculiar to themselves. Tombs of saints abound, one or more being found in every town and village; and no traveller up the Nile can fail to remark how every prominent mountain has the sepulchre of its patron saint. The great saints of Egypt are the Imám Esh-Shafe'e, founder of the persuasion called after him, the seyyid Ahmad El-Bedawee, and the seyyid Ibrahim Ed-Dasookee, both of whom were founders of orders of Darweeshees. The former of these two is buried at the town of Tanta, in the Delta, and his tomb attracts many thousands of visitors annually to his principal festival; the latter is also much revered, and his festival draws together, in like manner, great crowds to his birthplace, the town of Ed-Dasook. But, besides the graves of her native saints, Egypt boasts of those of several members of the Prophet's family; the tomb of the seyyideh Zeynab, daughter of 'Alee, that of the seyyideh Sekeeneeh, daughter of El-Hoseyn, and that of the seyyideh Nefeseeh, great-grand-daughter of El-Hasan, all of which are held in high veneration. The mosque of the Hazaneyn (or that of the "two Hasans") is the most reverenced shrine in the country, and is believed to contain the head of El-Hoseyn. As connected with the superstitious practices of Egypt, Darweeshees must be mentioned, of whom there are many orders found in that country, the following being the most celebrated:—1. The Rif'eceyeh, and their sects the Ilwaneceyeh, and Saadeceyeh. 2. The Kárideceyeh. 3. The Ahmedceyeh, or followers of the seyyid Ahmad El-Bedawee, and their sects the Beiyoonceyeh, Shaaraweceyeh, Shiomaweceyeh, and many others. 4. The Baráhineh, or followers of the seyyid Ibrahim Ed-Dasookee. These are all presided over by a direct descendant of the Khaleceyeh Aboo-Bekr, called the Sheykh El-Bekree. The Saadeceyeh are the most famous for charming and eating live serpents, &c., and the Ilwaneceyeh for eating fire, glass, &c. The charms. Egyptians firmly believe in the efficacy of charms, a belief which is associated with that in an omnipresent and overruling Providence. Thus, the doors of houses are inscribed with sentences from the Kur-an, or the like, to preserve from the evil eye, or avert the dangers of an unlucky threshold; similar inscriptions may be observed over most shops, while almost every one carries some charm about his person. Among so superstitious a people, with whom, as we have already seen, science is in a very low state, it is not to be wondered that the so-called sciences of magic, astrology in the place of astronomy, and alchemy in that of chemistry, are in a comparatively flourishing condition.

Since the time of the Turkish Conquest, the arts in Egypt have rapidly fallen into decay; this is partly attributable to the deportation of most of the skilled artificers of Cairo to Constantinople by the Sultan Selim; but it is mainly owing to the misrule of the Turkish pashas, who have successively domineered over this unfortunate country. Cairo contains the most splendid specimens of Arab architecture of any part of the Arabian empire; but at present new buildings are erected after the Constantinopolitan model, or, what is still worse, the purely European—both styles immeasurably inferior to the Arab, and very ill suited to the requirements of the climate. In like manner, every other kind of native art is gradually perishing; and it is to be feared that even should the people be relieved from oppression and bad government, their industry will be encouraged rather to adopt imaginary improvements imported from Europe, than to cultivate the beautiful taste of their ancestors. The manufactures of the present inhabitants of Egypt are generally inferior to those of other eastern nations; their handicrafts are clumsy, and the inevitable results of tyranny are everywhere evident; nevertheless, the curious shops, the markets of different trades (the shops of each trade being generally congregated in one street or district), the easy merchant sitting before his shop, the musical and quaint cries of the picturesque vendors of fruit, sherbet, water, &c., with the ever-changing and many-coloured throng of passengers, all render the streets of Cairo a delightful study for the lover of Arab life, nowhere else to be seen in such perfection, or with so fine a back-ground of magnificent buildings.

---

1 Modern Egyptians, chap. ix. 2 Id., ibid. 3 For very interesting details on the subject of Eastern magic, with its kindred sciences, the reader should consult the Modern Egyptians, and Lane's Thousand and One Nights, Knight, London, 1839, vol. i. chap. i., note 15. Among the luxurious habits of the Egyptians must be classed the immoderate use of tobacco (as before mentioned), and coffee. They are, however, rarely guilty of the vice of drunkenness, wine being prohibited by the Kur-an. Eaters of opium, and smokers of hemp, called hashesh, are not uncommon, though they are always of the dregs of the people. The bath is a favourite resort of both sexes and all classes. In Cairo alone are upwards of sixty public baths, and every good house has a private bath. Their amusements are generally not of a violent kind, being rather in keeping with their sedentary habits, and the heat of the climate. They are acquainted with chess, draughts, backgammon, and other games, among which is one peculiar to themselves, called Mankalah, and played with cowries. The game of the gereed requires great bodily exertion; and wrestlers, &c., are found in the country, though not in any number. Music is the most favourite recreation of the people of Egypt; the songs of the boatmen, the religious chants, and the cries in the streets, are all musical. There are male and female musical performers; the former are both instrumental and vocal, the latter (called 'Almeh, pl. 'Awálím) generally vocal. The 'Awálím are, as their name ("learned") implies, generally accomplished women, and should not be confounded with the Ghawázeé, or dancing-girls. There are many kinds of musical instruments. The music, vocal and instrumental, is generally of little compass, and in the minor key; it is therefore plaintive, and strikes a European ear as somewhat monotonous, though often possessing a simple beauty, and the charm of antiquity, for there is little doubt that favourite airs have been handed down from remote ages. The prophet Mohammad condemned music, and its professors are in consequence lightly esteemed by the generality of Muslims, who nevertheless scruple not to enjoy their performances, and resort to the coffee-shops and to private festivities, where they are almost always to be found.

The Ghawázeé (sing. Gházeeyeh) form a separate class, very similar to the gypsies. They always intermarry among themselves only, and are all brought up to the venal profession. Their performances are too well known to need a description here; but it should be observed that the religious and learned Egyptians hold them to be improper. They dance in public, at fairs and religious festivals, and at private festivities, but not in respectable houses, whether before the men or the ladies. Mohammad 'Aleé banished them to Isná, in Upper Egypt; and the few that remained, occasionally dancing in Cairo, called themselves 'Awálím, to avoid punishment. A most objectionable class of male dancers also exists, who imitate the dances of the Ghawázeé, and dress in a kind of nondescript female attire.

Not the least curious of the public performances are those of the serpent-charmers, who are generally Rifá'ee, or Saadée Darweeshes. Their power over serpents has been doubted by most European travellers, yet their performances remain unexplained; and apparently they possess means of ascertaining the haunts of these and other reptiles, and of alluring them forth; they, however, always extract the fangs of venomous serpents. Jugglers, rope-dancers, and farce-players, must also be mentioned. In the principal coffee-shops of Cairo are to be found reciters of romances, surrounded by interested audiences. They are of three classes, and recite from several works, among which was included, until lately, the Thousand and One Nights; but manuscripts of the latter have recently become so rare, as to render it almost impossible to obtain a copy.

The periodical public festivals are exceedingly interesting, and many of the remarkable observances with which they abound are passing away; but, happily, the Modern Egyptians contains the descriptions of its learned and minute accurate author, an eye-witness of what he relates. The first ten days of the Mohammadan year are held to be blessed, and especially the tenth; and many curious and superstitious practices are observed on these days, particularly by the women. The tenth day, being the anniversary of the martyrdom of El-Hoseyn, the mosque of the Hasneyn is thronged to excess, mostly by women. Following the order of the lunar year, the next festival is that of the Return of the Pilgrims, which is the occasion of great rejoicing, many having friends or relatives in the caravan. The Mahmal, a kind of covered litter, first originated by the celebrated Queen, Sheger-ed-Durr, is brought into the city in procession, though not with as much pomp as when it leaves with the pilgrims. These and other processions have lost much of their effect since the extinction of the Memlooks, and the gradual disuse of gorgeous dress for the retainers of the officers of state. A regiment of regular infantry makes but a sorry substitute for the splendid cavalcade of former times. The Birth of the Prophet (Moolid en-Nebee), which is celebrated in the beginning of the third month, is the greatest festival of the whole year. During nine days and nights its religious ceremonies are observed at Cairo, in the open space called the Ezbekeeyeh. Next in time, and also in importance, is the Moolid El-Hasaneyn, commemorative of the birth of El-Hoseyn, and lasting fifteen days and nights; and at the same time is kept the Moolid of Es-Salih Eycoob, the last king but one of the Eyooobe Dynasty. In the seventh month occur the Moolid of the Seyyedeh Zeyneb, and the commemoration of the Mearig, or the Prophet's miraculous journey to heaven. Early in the tenth month (Shabaán), the Moolid of the Imám Esh-Shífeé is observed; and the night of the middle of that month has its peculiar customs, being held by the Muslims to be that on which the fate of all living is decided for the ensuing year. Then follows Ramadán, the month of abstinence, a severe trial to the faithful; and the Lesser Festival (El-'Eed es-Sagheer), which commences Showwal, is hailed by them with delight. A few days after, the Kisweh, or new covering for the Kaabah at Meckeh, is taken in procession from the citadel, where it is always manufactured, to the Mosque of the Hasaneyn to be completed; and, later, the caravan of pilgrims departs, when the grand procession of the Mahmal takes place. On the tenth day of the last month of the year, the Great Festival (El-'Eed el-Kebeer), or that of the Sacrifice, closes the calendar.

The rise of the Nile is naturally the occasion of annual Observations, some of which are doubtless relics of antiquity; since these are observed according to the Coptic year. The period of commencement of the rise is fixed to the night of the eleventh of Ba-ooneh (Páoni), the seventeenth of June, and is called that of the Drop (Leylet en-Nuktab), because a miraculous drop is then supposed to fall, and cause the swelling of the river. The real rise commences at Cairo about the summer solstice, or a few days later; and on about the third of July a crier in each district of the city begins to go his daily rounds, announcing, in a quaint chant, the increase of water in the Nilometer of the island of Er-Rodah. When the river has risen twenty or twenty-one feet, he proclaims the Wefa en-Neel, "Completion" or "Abundance of the Nile." On the following day, the dam which closes the canal of Cairo is cut with much ceremony, and

---

1. Mahmal is probably the correct pronunciation of this word. 2. With reference to this curious fact, and also in connection with the subject, it may here be mentioned that the period of the hot winds, called the Khamaseen, that is "The Fifteens," is calculated from the day after the Coptic Easter, and terminates on the day of Pentecost, and that the Muslims observe the Wednesday preceding this period, called "Job's Wednesday," as well as its first day, when many go into the country from Cairo "to smell the air." This day is hence called Shemm en-Nessem, or "the smelling of the zephyr." The 'Ulama observe the same custom on the first three days of the spring quarter. this is the signal for letting the inundation over the surface of the country. A pillar of earth before the dam is called the "Bride of the Nile," and Arab historians relate that this was substituted, at the Muslim conquest, for a virgin whom it was the custom annually to sacrifice, to ensure a plentiful inundation. A large boat, gaily decked out, representing that in which the victim used to be conveyed, is anchored near, and a gun on board is fired every quarter of an hour during the night. Rockets and other fireworks are also let off, but the best, strangely, after daybreak. The Governor of Cairo attends the ceremony of cutting the dam, with the Kādēe and others. The crier continues his daily rounds, with his former chant, excepting on the Coptic New-Year's Day, when the cry of the Wefa is repeated, until the Sa-līc, or Discovery of the Cross, the 26th or 27th of September, at which period, the river having about attained its greatest height, he concludes his annual employment with another chant, and presents to each house some lines and other fruit, and dry lumps of Nile mud.

This brief account of the modern Egyptians would be incomplete without a few words concerning the rites attendant on death. The corpse is immediately turned towards Mekkeh and the females of the household, assisted by hired mourners, commence their peculiar wailing, while fikses recite portions of the Kur-ān. The funeral takes place on the day of the death, if that happen in the morning; otherwise on the next day. The corpse, having been washed and shrouded, is placed in an open bier, covered with a Cashmere shawl, in the case of a man; or in a closed bier, having a post in front, on which are placed female ornaments, in that of a woman or child. The funeral procession is headed by men called "Yemeneeyeh," chanting the profession of the faith, followed by male friends of the deceased, and a party of schoolboys, also chanting, generally from a poem descriptive of the latter state. Then follows the bier, borne on the shoulders of friends, who are relieved by the passers-by, such an act being deemed highly meritorious. On the way to the cemetery the corpse is generally, in Cairo, in the case of the northern quarters of the city, carried either to the Hasaneyn, or, if the deceased be one of the 'Ulama, to the Azhar; or, in the case of the southern quarters, to the seyvādch Zeyneb, or some other revered mosque. Here the funeral service is performed by the Imām, or minister of the mosque, and the procession then proceeds to the tomb. In the burials of the rich, water and bread are distributed to the poor at the grave, and sometimes a buffalo or several buffaloes slaughtered there, and the flesh given away. The tomb is always a vault, surrounded by an oblong stone monument, with a stela at the head and feet, and a cupola, supported by four walls, covers the whole in the case of sheykhs' tombs and those of the wealthy. During the night following the interment, called the Night of Desolation, or that of Solitude, the soul being believed to remain with the body that one night, fikses are engaged at the house of the deceased to recite various portions of the Kur-ān, and, commonly, to repeat the first clause of the profession of the faith, "There is no deity but God," three thousand times. The women alone put on mourning attire, by dyeing their veils, shirts, &c., dark blue, with indigo; and they stain their hands, and smear the walls, with the same colour. Everything in the house is also turned upside down. The latter customs are not, however, observed on the death of an old man. At certain periods after the burial, a khatmah, or recitation of the whole of the Kur-ān, is performed, and the tomb is visited by the female relations and friends of the deceased. The women of the Fellākheen (or peasants) of Upper Egypt observe some strange dances, &c., at funerals, which must be regarded as partly relics of ancient Egyptian customs.

For the fullest information on the subjects of the foregoing sketch, the reader is referred to Lane's Modern Egyptians, to its author's translation of the Thousand and One Nights, and, in particular, to the notes appended to that translation; and to the Englishwoman in Egypt, by Mrs Poole.

The native Christians of Egypt, or Copts, are chiefly descended from the ancient Egyptian race; and as they rarely intermarry, they preserve in their countenances a great resemblance to the representations of the tombs and temples. Their dress and customs are very similar to those of the Muslim Egyptians, but their reserve towards persons of another persuasion renders a knowledge of their peculiar observations exceedingly difficult. The causes which produced the separation of their Church will be noticed in the historical portion of this article; and in the same part will be found mention of the chief persecutions which they have suffered. Under Mohammad Alī they were relieved of much oppression, and the immunities then granted to them they still enjoy. The neglected appearance of their houses, and their want of personal cleanliness, is in strong contrast to the opposite habits of the Muslims, and European residents generally prefer the latter as domestic servants.

The Jews of Egypt, of whom there have been great numbers since the captivity of the Ten Tribes, appear to be even more degraded than their fellows in other countries. They are held in the utmost abhorrence by the dominant race, and often are treated with much cruelty and oppression. Many are bankers and money-changers, &c. The quarter of the Jews in Cairo is exceedingly filthy, and would give a stranger the notion that they labour under great poverty. But such is not the case; the fear of the Mahommedans inducing them to adopt this outward show of misery, while the interior of many of their houses is very handsome and luxurious.

SECTION II.

CHRONOLOGY AND HISTORY.

It is not possible, within the limits of the present article, Chronology and History, even to enumerate the various opinions which have prevailed respecting the chronology of ancient Egypt, strictly speaking, and respecting the chronological results deduced from different arrangements of its dynasties. On the former subject it will suffice to mention the divisions of time, particularizing those which are generally received, as to their characteristics, or as to their periods of commencement also; and on the latter, to state the main differences between the views of the learned.

The Egyptians, from very early times, subdivided the Seasons, year which they commonly used into three seasons, each containing four months, called the first, second, third, and fourth months of these seasons. This notation obtained from a very remote period, probably dating as far back as near the commencement of Egyptian history. The three seasons were called "the season of Vegetation," "the season of Manifestation," and "the season of the Waters," or "the Inundation." The interpretation of the names of the first two seasons is doubtful, but that of the third is certain, and enables us to ascertain the characteristics of the year to which these names of the seasons must have originally applied. The fitness of the division is shown by our finding it universally used in Egypt in the present day, though vaguely defined; the three seasons being called "الشتاء" "Winter," "صيف" "Summer," and "النيل" "the Inundation," literally "the Nile," meaning the season at which the Nile is spread over the cultivable parts of Egypt. The season of the waters can be shown to have commenced a month before the autumnal equinox, and to have terminated at the winter solstice, at which period, therefore, the Tropical Year commenced, when all things in Egypt begin anew.

At what time the Tropical Year was instituted has not been ascertained, but it must have been at least as ancient as the nomenclature of the months, which, as above mentioned, was in use in very early times; and when it came to be discarded is likewise uncertain. That the Egyptians possessed a Tropical Year is generally admitted, but its time of commencement has been matter of doubt and difference.

The Egyptians had also, in ancient times, a year consisting of 365 days, apparently older than the Tropical Year, and consecrated by its antiquity. This year is commonly called the "Vague Year," and was subdivided into twelve months of thirty days each, with an addition of five Epagomenae, or intercalary days, after the twelfth month. It was divided into the three seasons of the Tropical Year, and the months were called after those seasons. It was in common use at least as early as the time of the second king of the Eighteenth Dynasty (about B.C. 1500), and was not abandoned until it was made a Julian Year by Augustus, A.D. 24. No diversity of opinion prevails respecting the Vague Year.

Another year was used by the ancient Egyptians, but, apparently, only for astronomical and possibly for religious purposes, for both of which the Vague Year was also employed. It was the Sothic Year, commencing on the 20th of July, the day of the so-called heliacal rising of Sothis. There is a calendar sculptured on the exterior of the great temple of Medinet-Haboo at Thebes, which may be that of a Sothic Year; and if so, this year would have been in use as early as about B.C. 1200; but this cannot be considered certain. It seems most probable that the Sothic Year was only a year of the priests, which originated not long before, or subsequently to, the commencement of the first Sothic Cycle, B.C. 1322, and it does not seem unreasonable to conjecture that it was instituted with the cycle. Its length was 365\(\frac{1}{4}\) days, so that it differed from the Julian alone in the time of its commencement. There is no disagreement among scholars respecting it.

When Egypt had become a province of the Roman empire, Augustus commanded the inhabitants to make use of a Julian Year in their public records. But instead of fixing its commencement to be that of the common Julian year, the Egyptians made the Vague Year Julian by intercalation; consequently the Egyptian Julian Year always began on the 29th, or, in the year next after their leap-year, the 30th, of August, A.D., which was the day on which the Vague Year commenced B.C. 24, when the new reckoning was instituted. The Copts and the Egyptian peasants still make use of this year.

The names by which the Egyptian months were called (excepting in hieroglyphic inscriptions) in the times of the Ptolemies and Caesars—Thoth or Thoth, Paophi, &c.—are never found, as such, in hieroglyphics of any time. They were chiefly or wholly derived from the names of the divinities to which the months were held to be sacred. These names were, in the Memphitic dialect of Coptic, if we adopt the most probable reading assisted by the manner in which they have been written in Greek, as follows: 1, Thoth; 2, Paopi; 3, Athor; 4, Choisak; 5, Tobi; 6, Mechir; 7, Phamenoth; 8, Pharmuthi; 9, Pachon (or rather Pachons, as the name in the Sahidic dialect is Pashons or Pashons, and in Arabic, Bashens, and its etymology supports this correction); 10, Paoni; 11, Epiphi; 12, Mesore. The Arabic names are merely corrupt forms of these.

The day among the ancient Egyptians commenced in the morning six hours before noon, and was equally divided into day and night, each of which contained twelve hours, numbered from one to twelve, as is shown by the astronomical tables in the tombs of the kings at Thebes (about B.C. 1200). The hour is also mentioned in earlier inscriptions. It was subdivided into smaller periods, of which the length has not been ascertained with certainty.

Ancient writers speak of various cycles in use among the Cycles. Egyptians, and the monuments mention great periods of time. It has been argued that the coincidence of the Vague Year and the Tropical was probably the commencement of a cycle; and it is known that a cycle began when Sothis rose heliacally on the first of Thoth, or, if the Sothic Year had been already instituted, when that year coincided with the Vague.

The Tropical Cycle claims the first notice. Such a cycle, Tropical comprehending the period during which the Vague Year Cycle passed through all the seasons of the Tropical, would properly exceed by a few years fifteen centuries of Vague Years, but, if also lunisolar, would consist of exactly fifteen hundred Vague Years; and we may fairly suppose that to have been its length, because the Egyptians could scarcely have arrived at a more accurate determination, and because they are stated to have used periods of five hundred years, a third of that sum. Admitting that such would have been the length of an ancient Egyptian Tropical Cycle, we must inquire, in the next place, when it would have commenced. The most natural period of its commencement would be the coincidence of the Tropical and Vague Years, and of the years in which this coincidence might be considered by the ancient Egyptians to take place, that would be chosen in which there was a new moon on the first day of Thoth. But if we consult the monuments, we find that the vernal equinox was the most important of the tropical points, and the greater ease of its determination would give it a preference above the winter solstice. It is, therefore, not unreasonable to conclude that the beginning of the cycle was marked by the coincidence of the Tropical and Vague Years, and the occurrence of a new moon on the day of the vernal equinox. At a period which the chronology of the dynasties, apart from all astronomical considerations, shows to have been by no means distant from that of the coincidence of the Vague and Tropical Years, we find the record of the commencement of some unknown period, apparently connected with the vernal equinox; and again, fifteen hundred years later, we observe another though less distinct record of the same nature. Hence, if it be admitted that the year with which the Tropical Cycle began was one in which a new moon fell on or very near the day of the vernal equinox, we may compute the commencements of two of these cycles,—as, January 7, B.C. 2005, in the reign of Amenemhets II., the second king of the Twelfth Dynasty, and December 28, B.C. 507, when Egypt was a Persian province, under Darius Hystaspis.

The Sothic Cycle is one respecting which chronologers are agreed. It was a period of 1460 Sothic or Julian, and 1461 Vague Years, and its commencement was marked by a so-called heliacal rising of Sothis, or Sirius, on the first day of the Vague Year, which could only recur at the return of the cycle, according to the Egyptian calculation. One of these cycles commenced July 20, B.C. 1322, most pro-

---

1. *Hornis*, p. 3, &c., &c. 2. *Id.*, pp. 5-7, pl. I., No. 2. 3. *Id.*, p. 9. 4. *Id.*, pp. 31, 32. M. Biot considers this calendar to be of a Vague Year, *Recherches de Quelques Dates Absolute*, &c., 1st Mem., p. 35. 5. *Id.*, p. 134, &c., &c. 6. *Id.*, p. 134, &c., &c. 7. *Id.*, p. 134, &c., &c. 8. *Chronologie der Ägypter*, I., p. 134, &c., &c. 9. *Id.*, p. 134, &c., &c. 10. *Champollion, Monuments de l'Egypte et de la Nubie*, Pl. ccxxxii, &c., &c. 11. *Chronologie der Ägypter*, I., p. 127. 12. *Id.*, p. 28. bably during the reign of Sethos I., the head of the Nineteenth Dynasty; and the next, on the same day A.D. 138, in the reign of Antoninus Pius. The only matter of argument respecting these periods is, whether there were any before that commencing B.C. 1322. There is no distinct evidence to show that such was the case, but, on the contrary, there is presumptive evidence that the period was instituted in that year.

The Phoenix Cycle is a very important period in Egyptian chronology, but one respecting which the statements of ancient writers, as well as the opinions of modern scholars, have presented a remarkable diversity. An examination of the Egyptian monuments, however, indicates the length of the true Phoenix Cycle, and the dates of its commencements. In the celebrated astronomical ceiling of the Ramesseum of El-Kurneh, commonly, but incorrectly, called the Memnonium, we find a representation of a constellation bearing the name Ben-ne Osir, or the Phoenix of Osiris, and having the form of a kind of heron. It is placed under the sixth month, indicating that it rose heliacally, in the Egyptian acceptation of the term, during that month, when Sothis so rose on the first of Thoth, or during that month. As no precise day is fixed as that of the rising of the Phoenix, we cannot determine to what constellation it corresponded, but it most probably represents Cygnus, the "Bird" ("Oryx") of the Greeks, and perhaps it also partly included Aquila, or comprehended part of each of those constellations. Ancient writers speak of the appearance of the Phoenix on various occasions: this must allude to the heliacal rising of the constellation, that is, of its principal, or of its last star; for the ancient Egyptian expression for heliacal rising, meaning thereby the rising of a star about one hour before sunrise, is "manifestation," or "appearance." Reasoning, therefore, from analogy, the Phoenix Cycle would commence when the Phoenix rose about an hour before the sun on the first day of the Vague Year, and consist, like the Sothic Cycle, of 1460 Julian years, and 1461 Vague. Supposing this to have been its duration, the position of the Phoenix in the ceiling of the Ramesseum of El-Kurneh would enable us to fix approximately the commencement of a Phoenix Cycle preceding the date of that sculpture, to some one of the years B.C. 2042 to 2923 inclusive. This view of the Phoenix Cycle is strengthened by a remarkable passage of Tacitus, wherein he says that some assigned a length of 1461 years as the interval between appearances of the Phoenix, and stated that they occurred first in the reign of Sesostrius, then in that of Amasis, and then in that of Ptolemy, "the third Macedonian sovereign." Now, the reign of Amasis falls within the approximate date of the commencement of the Phoenix Cycle following that already calculated from the ceiling of the Ramesseum. The duration of that reign was B.C. 570 to 525 inclusive; whence we may calculate the limits of the commencement of the preceding cycle, supposing the length to be 1460 years, as B.C. 2030 to 1985 inclusive, the approximate date being thus narrowed. But the means of accurately fixing these dates appears to be afforded by the Calendar of the Panegyrics, for it has been argued with much probability, that the Egyptians had great Panegyrical periods, whereof four composed a sum of 1461 Julian years, and that two of these periods commenced respectively Jan. 2 B.C. 1986, which will agree with the reign of the old Sesostrius, Sesertesen III., and Jan. 2 B.C. 525 during that of Amasis.

These, therefore, would be likewise commencements of the Phoenix Cycle, the duration of which would be 1461 Julian Years, and not 1460, which indeed may be the meaning of Tacitus. The appearance of the Phoenix in the time of Ptolemy, the third Macedonian sovereign, by whom Ptolemy Euergetes is intended, is clearly at variance with the statement respecting the length of the interval, if the appearance in the reign of Amasis be accepted, and there is every reason for giving the latter the preference.

On the monuments of ancient Egypt, mention is frequently made of various Panegyrical periods in particular, and of periods of Panegyries in general. Many opinions have prevailed respecting them, and the subject is one of so intricate a nature, that it cannot be investigated in the present article. It is intended rather, in the following observations, to present an outline of the only distinct and complete explanation of these divisions of time, giving references to where the reader will find a full investigation of them.

It is important to distinguish between the system of Panegyrical periods and the Royal Panegyries, of which somewhat will be said subsequently. The former consisted of a year, month, and division of a month. The year, or Great Panegyrical Year, had a mean length of 365\(\frac{1}{4}\) Julian years, having alternately a length of 364\(\frac{1}{4}\) and 365 years. The Great Panegyrical Month, of which there were twelve to the year, contained thirty Julian years, and was divided into twenty Divisions of the Great Panegyrical Month, each having a length of one Julian year and a half. There must also have been an intercalation of four years and a half, or six years, after the twelfth Panegyrical Month. The commencement of the Tropical Cycle being dated as having occurred in the twelfth Division of the twelfth Great Panegyrical Month, enables us to ascertain the beginning of one Great Panegyrical Year, and consequently of the rest. The following are the dates of their commencements:

- First Great Panegyrical Year, B.C. 2717, Era of Menes, the first king of Egypt. Length 364\(\frac{1}{4}\) years. - Second Great Panegyrical Year, B.C. 2352, in the time of Saphis I. and II., kings of the Fourth Dynasty. Length 365 years. - Third Great Panegyrical Year, and commencement of the first Phoenix Cycle, B.C. 1986, in the time of Sesertesen III., the fourth king of the Twelfth Dynasty. Length of the Great Panegyrical Year 364\(\frac{1}{4}\) years. - Fourth Great Panegyrical Year, B.C. 1622. Length 365 years. - Fifth Great Panegyrical Year, B.C. 1256. Length 364\(\frac{1}{4}\) years. - Sixth Great Panegyrical Year, B.C. 891. Length 366 years. - Seventh Great Panegyrical Year, and commencement of the second Phoenix Cycle, B.C. 525, in the reign of Amasis. Length of Great Panegyrical Year, 364\(\frac{1}{4}\) years. - Eighth Great Panegyrical Year, B.C. 161, in the reign of Ptolemy Philometor. Length 366 years. - Ninth Great Panegyrical Year, A.D. 205, in the reign of the Roman Emperor Septimius Severus.

The earliest mention upon the monuments of the Panegyrical periods of this class is found in the inscriptions commemorating the commencement of the Second Great Panegyrical Year, and the latest certain notice is probably of the time of Darius Hystaspis. The following are the dates recorded on the monuments, wherein these periods are used:

- 2352 B.C. Commencement of the Second Great Panegyrical Year, Time of Saphis I. and II., Fourth Dynasty. - 2005 Commencement of the First Tropical Cycle, Time of Amenemha II., Twelfth Dynasty. - Date in fourth year of Skhne, Eighteenth Dynasty.

---

1 Horoz. Egy., p. 33. 2 Horoz. Egy., p. 35. 3 Paullo Fabio L. Vitellio consulibus post longam seculorum ambitum, avis Phoenix in Aegyptum venit; praebuitque materiem doctrinis indigenarum, et Graecorum, multa super eo miraculo disserendi; de quibus congrunt, et plura ambigua, sed cogniti non absurda, promere liber. Sacrum soli id animal, et ore ac distinctu planarium et ceteris avibus diversum, consentaneumque formam quis definire. De numero annorum varia traduntur. Maxime vulgatum, quingentorum spatium. Sunt qui adveant, milie quadrageinta sexaginta annorum interiecti; prioresque altiss Sesertesen tertium, post Amenemha secundum. Sed antiquitas quidem obscura: inter Ptolemaeum ac Tiberium missa diecent quinquaginta anni fuerunt, unde nonnulli falsum hunc Pharaonem, neque Arabum e terris crediderint, nihilique crediderint ex quo quae retin memoriam fiant.—Ann. vi., 28. 4 It is generally agreed that Amasis died in the year B.C. 525; and since the Phoenix Cycle commenced in January of that year, as is subsequently shown, it can hardly be doubted to have fallen in his reign. 5 See Horoz. Egy., p. 39, and pl. ii. It is necessary to mention the Calendar of the Decans, which was connected with that of the Panegyries. The ancient Egyptians distinguished thirty-six stars or asterisms, nearly equidistant, throughout a great circle of the heavens (like the signs of the zodiac), which rose at intervals of about ten days. The two most important of the Decans were Sothis and Smat, which were distant half a year from one another.

Besides the Panegyrical periods above mentioned, were those of the Royal Panegyries. These were thirty-year periods or Triacaontaeterids, as they are called on the Rosetta Stone, and subdivisions, having apparently a length of three years. They were probably counted from the king's accession, and his first Triacaontaeterid festival, celebrated at or about the completion of his thirtieth year. They seem to have been reckoned by Julian years, and celebrated at the first indication of the rise of the Nile. Respecting the duration of the Triacaontaeterids, there is of course, a general agreement, since it rests upon indubitable authority.

Modern writers have generally depended upon an arrangement of the dynasties for the duration of ancient Egyptian history. Some have held those dynasties to have ruled consecutively; but others have maintained that many of them were contemporaneous. Hence have arisen two chronological systems, of which some account must here be given.

Those who hold the dynasties to have been all consecutive, assign to the Egyptian monarchy a duration of upwards of 5000 years. It is, however, generally admitted in the present day, that this is an extravagant period, and that both the writings of ancient historians, and the evidence of the monuments, lead to the conclusion that many of the earlier dynasties were contemporary. But here again there is a wide difference of opinion; some holding, that though the monuments afford general evidence of contemporaneousness—for example, by the progress of art—no distinct evidence has been yet obtained from them of the contemporaneousness of any two kings of different dynasties; while others maintain that the hieroglyphic inscriptions do afford such distinct evidence of contemporaneousness. Chevalier Bunsen and Professor Lepsius are the best scholars who have advanced the former view, and it is necessary therefore to give an outline of their method. They both recognise the absurdity of the opinion that the dynasties were all consecutive; but being unable to obtain monumental evidence as to the order of their contemporaneousness, and the obvious order, to be mentioned subsequently, not occurring to them, they were forced to look to ancient writers for some distinct statement of the duration of the Egyptian kingdoms as a whole. This wished-for sum they found in a passage of the Byzantine Syncellus, who states that, according to Manetho, the duration of the Thirty Dynasties, from Menes the first king, to Nectanabo [II.] the last, was 3555 years. This sum they unhesitatingly accept, and rest their whole chronology upon it, having, for that part of it which is anterior to the sixteenth or seventeenth century B.C., and respecting which alone there are serious differences of opinion, absolutely no other reliable support. It is important, therefore, to examine into the trustworthiness of a vessel which has carried these inquirers so far into the ocean of time.

In the first place, it must be remarked that a solitary number which is found in a single work of a single author is always to be regarded with caution, more especially when that author is as careless as Syncellus. It becomes, therefore, a hazardous matter to build a chronological arrangement upon this number. But the next inquiry should be, whence Syncellus derived the sum, since two persons have the name of Manetho without distinction in his writings—the true Manetho, the native historian of Egypt, and the false Manetho, usually called Pseudo-Manetho, who usurped the historian's name as a passport for his impostures. Besides Syncellus, four other writers, all preceding him in time, Africans, Eusebius, Theophilus of Antioch, and the Jewish historian Josephus, quote from the true Manetho or refer to him. Syncellus does not appear to have had access to his work, and makes no distinction between him and the imposter, calling both Manetho. In every instance in which what he states on Manetho's authority is not found in the works of the four writers above mentioned, excepting that of the passage under consideration, it is admitted by all to have been derived from Pseudo-Manetho. External evidence therefore would induce an unprejudiced inquirer to ascribe the sum of 3555 rather to the false Manetho than to the true. Internal evidence increases this suspicion of the passage. Therein it is stated that the time was that of 113 generations in thirty dynasties. Now the Old Chronicle, an undoubted imposture, treated in like manner of the history of Egypt under thirty dynasties in 113 generations during a great and imaginary cycle. By this Old Chronicle, according to Syncellus's opinion, was Manetho, that is the Pseudo-Manetho, as Bunsen acknowledges, led astray. The agreement in the sum of generations is most striking; that of the number of dynasties affords no argument, thirty being the true number. Hence an additional doubt is thrown upon this statement; and a careful comparison of its sum of years with what we may believe to be derived from the chronology of Pseudo-Manetho or his followers, does not tend to lessen our suspicion, although a positive proof cannot be thus obtained. In the order of the dynasties, Bunsen and Lepsius have admitted some of the earlier to have been contemporary, but in arranging them they have differed considerably. The main point of disagreement is with respect to the Shepherd dynasties, of which Bunsen makes a Middle Empire between the Old Empire and the New, as he terms them, supposing these dynasties to have ruled without any contemporary Egyptian line. This Lepsius opposes, holding the Shepherds never to have governed without contemporary Egyptians, and dividing the dynasties into the Old Empire and the New.

To Mr Lane archaeology is indebted for the discovery of the true order of contemporaneousness of the dynasties. As long ago as the year 1830 he discovered that order from "the evidence given by Manetho and others, that some of the early dynasties were contemporary, and upon a consideration of the ordinal and other appellations (or numbers and names) by which those dynasties are distinguished [by Manetho]; for the interpretation of hieroglyphics was not then certain enough for him to obtain clear monumental evidence." An examination of the hieroglyphic inscriptions has proved Mr Lane's accuracy, and the arrangement has received the high sanction of Sir Gardner Wilkinson. The following table will explain the order of the contemporary dynasties, that is, the first seventeen: under the eighteenth dynasty Egypt was a single kingdom, and, most, if not all, of the subsequent dynasties were successive. The dates of the commencement of each dynasty in the table are more or less approximate, as are also their durations; but the fixed dates show that neither can be far wrong in all the most important instances.

---

1 Horae Æg., pp. 61-68. The date of Thothmes III. is mentioned (p. 72-73) as of Royal Panegyries, but the author has since come to the conclusion that it is that of the commencement of a Great Panegyrical Month. 2 Id., pp. 53, 54, and 55, 57. Chronologie der Ägypter, i., p. 66. 3 Horae Æg., p. 71, et seqq. 4 Chronologie der Ägypter, i., p. 161. 5 Egypt's Place, vol. i., p. 86, et seqq. 6 Horae Æg., p. 79, et seqq. 7 Horae Æg., p. 71, et seqq. 8 Architecture of Ancient Egypt, p. 132. | B.C. | Dynasties | |------|-----------| | 2700 | THINITES. | | | I. (see of Nile.) | | 2600 | MEMPHITES. | | | XII. (see 3000.) | | 2500 | ELEPHANTINITES. | | | IV. (see 3400.) | | | V. (see 3400.) | | 2400 | 3200 (date in reign of Sophian.) | | 2300 | HERACLEOPOLITES. | | | VI. (see 2900.) | | | IX. (see 2900.) | | | XII. (see 2900.) | | 2200 | DIOSPOLITES. | | | XIV. (see 2900.) | | | XV. (see 2900.) | | | XVI. (see 2900.) | | 2100 | XOITES. | | | XIII. (see 2900.) | | 2000 | SHEPHERDS. | | | XVII. (date in reign of Amennophis II.) | | | XVIII. (date in reign of Amennophis III.) | | 1900 | XIII. (see 2900.) | | 1800 | XVII. (see 2900.) | | | XVIII. (see 2900.) | | 1700 | XVII. (see 2900.) | | 1600 | XVIII. (see 2900.) | | 1500 | XVIII. (see 2900.) | Ménés, the head of the First Dynasty, is related to have been the first mortal king of Egypt. Manetho states that the period before his reign was occupied by the rule of the gods, demigods or heroes, and manes, extending through nearly 25,000 years, according to Eusebius. Similar statements are found in the writings of Herodotus and Diodorus.

These divine dynasties, whether cyclical or not, have no place in history, being purely mythical and not traditional. And it should be observed, that whereas in the annals of other ancient nations a time of tradition intervenes between that of myths and that of facts, no such period of transition is found in the Egyptian records, where we find pure fiction immediately followed by accurate history. Hence it seems reasonable to suppose that at the time of Ménés, or not long before, Egypt was colonized from another country, and this is entirely in accordance with the most probable Septuagint date of the Dispersion about half a century before the Era of Ménés, B.C. 2717, which was probably the date of his accession. Whether or not the Mizraite settlers may have found an aboriginal population is a question too large to be discussed in this brief historical notice.

With Ménés, therefore, Egyptian history commences. His dynasty is stated to have been one of Thinite kings, of the city of This, situated near to Abydos in Upper Egypt. Respecting Ménés, Manetho, according to Eusebius, relates that he made a foreign expedition and acquired renown; and, moreover, that he was killed by a hippopotamus, as Africanus also mentions. Diodorus Siculus, who calls him Ménas, states that he first instructed the Egyptians in religion, and so changed their simple manners that Tepanchthus, the father of Bocchoris the Wise, finding from experience the happiness of a frugal life, and the evils of luxury, inscribed a curse against him in the temple of Jupiter (or Amun-ra), at Thebes. Herodotus says that Ménés founded the city of Memphis, after he had diverted the course of the river by raising a dyke. The same historian mentions that he built the temple of Hephaestus (or Ptah) in Memphis. His name, written Mence, has been found in hieroglyphic characters in a sort of list, or procession of small statues of kings, in the Rameseum of El-Kurneh, and in hieratic characters in the Royal Turin Papyrus.

Ménés was succeeded, after a long reign, by Athóthis, his son, respecting whom Manetho tells us that he built the palace at Memphis, and that he was a physician, and left the anatomical books. This, as well as what Herodotus relates of his father having changed the course of the river, however that he understood, shows that the Egyptians were at this remote period a highly civilized people; and the circumstances that, after an interval of less than four centuries from the accession of the first king, we find magnificent pyramids as royal sepulchres, and the tombs of the subjects sculptured and having hieroglyphic inscriptions, confirm this opinion. The Third Dynasty commenced, and Memphis became independent, during, or soon after, the reign of Athóthis; but as the exact time of this change is not determined, it will be best to notice the later Thinite kings before speaking of the Memphite line of sovereigns. Uenephis, the fourth Thinite king, is said by Manetho to have built the pyramids near Kéchomé, a place which has not been identified; and it is added that Egypt was afflicted by a famine in his reign. In the time of Semempsés, the seventh king, there was a very great plague. With his successor the dynasty terminated, having ruled, in all probability, about two centuries and a half.

The few particulars that we know of the history of the Second Dynasty, in which the Thinite line was continued, are related by Manetho alone. He says that in the reign of the first king Boëthos, a chasm of the earth opened at Bubastis, and many perished; that under the second king Kaïchós, the bulls Apis in Memphis, and Mnevis in Heliopolis, and the Mendesian goat, were called gods, as already mentioned; and that under the next king Binóthris, it was Binóthris adjudged that women could hold the sovereign power. During the reign of the seventh king Nephercherés, called Nepher-Nufre-ka-ra in the hieroglyphical list known as the Tablet cheréz of Abydos, Manetho tells us that it was fabled that the Nile flowed mixed with honey for the space of eleven days. His successor, according to the Egyptian historian, was Sesóchris, a man of gigantic stature. Nothing further is Sesóchris, related by Manetho of the occurrences of this dynasty, to which he assigns a duration of about 300 years. From the monuments, however, it appears most probable that it lasted little less than four centuries, and that the Thinite kingdom came to a close with it at the time of the Shepherd invasion.

The Memphite kingdom, as already noticed, commenced Third Dynasty not long after the Thinite, with the Third Dynasty. Manetho relates that during the reign of its first king Necheró-Necheróphês or Necheróchis, the Libyans revolted from the Egyptians, but returned to their allegiance, being terrified by a sudden increase of the moon. The second Memphite sovereign Tosorthros, or Sesorthos, is said by the same author to have been called by the Egyptians Æsculapius, on account of his medical knowledge, and to have invented the art of building with hewn stones, and to have patronized literature. After having lasted about two centuries, this dynasty was succeeded by the Fourth, one of the most famous of the lines which ruled in Egypt; while the Fifth Dynasty of Elephantine kings arose at the same time.

Of Sóris, the head of the Fourth Dynasty, nothing is known; Fourth Dynasty his name, written Shura, occurs in the hieroglyphic inscriptions of tombs near the Pyramids of El-Gezech, and was found by Mr Perring in the quarry-marks of the Northern Pyramid of Aboo-Seer, which was therefore his tomb. In Manetho's list, according to Africanus, he was followed by two kings bearing the name of Sóphis, who may be called Sóphis I. and II. These correspond to the Shufu, or Khufu, Sóphis I., and Num-Shufu, or Num-Khufu of the monuments. Since these names are found together, particularly in the quarry-marks of the Great Pyramid which has two principal chambers, and which all are agreed in assigning to the reign of one king, it is most reasonable to suppose that they ruled together for the greater part of their reigns. Manetho makes Sóphis I. to have ruled for 68 years, and Sóphis II. 66. The latter, therefore, probably reigned for some years after the former. Shufu must be the first of these kings, since he is the Cheops (Khufu) to whom Herodotus ascribes the building of the Great Pyramid, which, according to Manetho, was the work of Sóphis I. This is the period at which we first find undoubted contemporary monuments of which we know the date, the earliest whereof is most probably the Northern Pyramid of Aboo-Seer before mentioned. Under the rule of the two Sphises such monuments are extremely numerous and afford us far better knowledge of the state of Egypt at that time than do the scanty remains of Manetho and the traditional tales of Herodotus and Diodorus. The names of both the Sphises occur among the rock inscriptions of Wâde-el-Maghârâh in the Peninsula of Sinai, where the second of them, or Num-Shufu, is represented slaying a foreigner. The military expeditions of the Egyptians, however, at this period were probably of little importance; and designed to repress the nomad tribes which have at all times infested the eastern and other borders of Egypt, and to maintain the possessions beyond these borders. The Memphite Pharaohs were rather celebrated for the arts of peace and for the care with which they promoted the interests of literature and science. Of Saphis I. Manetho writes that he was arrogant towards the gods, but, repenting, wrote the Sacred Book. This seems to agree well with what Herodotus and Diodorus relate of the impiety and cruelty of the king who built the Great Pyramid; but if we suppose that he was arrogant towards the priests, we find a sufficient cause for the ascription to him of this character, so ill according with the prosperity and peacefulness of his time as shown by the monuments. The power of the king or kings is evidenced by the magnitude of the Great Pyramid, and the costly manner of its construction; the safety of the kingdom, by no soldiers being represented in the sculptures, and the general custom of going unarmed common to the great and the small; the wealth of the subjects, by the scenes portrayed upon the walls of their tombs; and the state of science and art, by the construction of monuments, gigantic in size, of materials many of which were transported from a great distance, and fitted together with an accuracy that has never been excelled, as well as by the astronomical and other knowledge, of which evidence is found in the contemporary inscriptions. After the Sphises ruled Mencherês, called in the hieroglyphic inscriptions "Men-kau-ra," and by Herodotus "Mykerinos." By him the Third Pyramid was raised, in which the late General Howard Vyse found part of his mummy case, bearing his name, now in the British Museum. According to Manetho, Queen Nitôkris, the last sovereign of the Sixth Dynasty, built this pyramid; but it should be observed that Eusebius's version of the lists seems to state this merely on the authority of tradition. It is most probable, from its plan, that the building was enlarged and a new passage and chamber excavated in the rock beneath it after its first completion, whence it seems that the later sovereign, by this additional work, made the tomb of Mencherês her own sepulchre also. Of the subsequent kings of the Fourth Dynasty, who were, according to Africanus's version of the lists of Manetho, four in number, nothing is known. The duration of the dynasty probably somewhat exceeded two hundred years, and it was succeeded by that called the Sixth, in like manner of Memphite sovereigns.

The Fifth Dynasty, of Elephantinmites, commenced about the same time as the Fourth. The names of several of its earlier kings occur in the necropolis of Memphis, and sometimes with those of the contemporary sovereigns of the Fourth Dynasty. The most important of these is Sephrês, the Shaf-ra or Khaf-ra of the monuments, the builder of the Second Pyramid. Herodotus calls him Chephren, and Diodorus Siculus, Kephren. The Elephantinite Dynasty lasted not much less than six hundred years, and appears to have consisted of thirty-one kings, the last of whom, called by Manetho Onnos, and in hieroglyphics Unas, was contemporaneous, as is shown by an ancient inscription, with Assa the Unas, fifth king of the Fifteenth Dynasty of Shepherds, ruling at Memphis.

The Sixth Dynasty, by which the Memphite kingdom was ruled after the close of the Fourth, lasted about a century and a half. The most famous sovereign was the second of the line, Papa or Phiops, who is related to have Phiops, or ruled a hundred years, a statement which the monuments seem to corroborate, although not directly. His sculptured records are numerous throughout Egypt, showing him to have been a powerful king, but not giving us any account of remarkable events during his reign. The second sovereign after him was Queen Nitôkris, called in the Royal Turin Papyrus, Neet-akartee. With her the Dynasty closed, Memphis being taken by the foreign invaders called Shepherds, whose first king made it his capital.

Another royal line, that of the Heracleopolites, arose while the Sixth Dynasty ruled at Memphis. The time of the commencement of the first Heracleopolite Dynasty, the Ninth, is not certain, but it was probably not long after that of the Memphite Dynasty above mentioned. The names of six kings of the Ninth Dynasty have been found in hieroglyphics, and their order is shown by the list of the Chamber of Kings; all these bear the name of Nantef, excepting the fifth, who is called Munt-hotp. The king last mentioned seems to have been the most powerful of the six; his successor in the list of the Chamber of Kings receives a title equivalent to that of "chief," and his name appears not to have been inclosed in a royal ring. Munt-hotp was contemporary with the last king of the Eleventh Dynasty, and it is therefore probable that his successor was deprived of all but titular power by the potent head of the Twelfth Dynasty. After this time the monuments have not been found to afford us any information respecting the Heracleopolite kingdom. Probably the Ninth Dynasty lasted about four hundred years, and the Tenth nearly two hundred, terminating at the time of the great Shepherd war of expulsion, which resulted in the overthrow of all the royal lines except the Diospolite.

With the Eleventh Dynasty commenced the Diospolite or Theban kingdom, which afterwards attained to greater power than any other, and had a longer uninterrupted duration. Its first dynasty was that called the Eleventh, the kings of which, excepting the last, seem to have been of little power, and are probably mentioned in subsequent inscriptions rather because they were the founders of the Diospolite line than as illustrious rulers. The duration of this dynasty is doubtful, and the time of its commencement has not been determined; it may be supposed that it began not long after the Ninth Dynasty. Amenemha I., its last sovereign, was a potent king who succeeded in a time of great disorder in establishing his kingdom as supreme in Upper Egypt. During part of his reign he was co-regent of Sesertesena I., head of the Twelfth Dynasty.

The commencement of the Twelfth Dynasty forms an epoch in Egyptian history. Until then the country seems to have enjoyed a long period of prosperity, and then to have been suddenly surprised and subdued by a foreign force, which succeeded in gaining possession of Lower Egypt. Egypt, and maintained itself for upwards of five centuries, being at length expelled, after a protracted struggle, which did not probably finally terminate until upwards of a century or even more after its power was broken. This period—that of the Shepherd-rule—lasting from the invasion of Egypt until the beginning of the Eighteenth Dynasty, under which the foreigners are generally held to have been ultimately forced to leave the country, was one for the most part of great suffering to the inhabitants; yet it comprehends the rule of many sovereigns, both native and foreign, of strength and wisdom; and there can be no doubt that it brought out those martial qualities which afterwards so greatly distinguished the Egyptian race.

The manner in which Egypt was subdued by the foreigners is not known for certain. Manetho states that they easily gained possession of the country without a battle. This success may have been partly owing to the undisturbed good fortune which preceded the invasion, but must have been also attributable to other causes; and it is not improbable that some one of the Egyptian kings had called in the foreigners as allies, or hired them as mercenaries, both dangerous expedients, more especially the latter, which is generally regarded as a symptom of a decaying state or a tyrannical government. Manetho relates that the Shepherds having subdued the country, burnt the cities, demolished the temples, and treated the people with great barbarity. It is probable that this account of their conduct is somewhat exaggerated, having been coloured by the hatred which the Egyptians bore to the foreigners, and a recollection of the troubles of the great struggle which ended in their expulsion. At all events it is evident that they soon accommodated themselves to the manners of the Egyptians, adopted their religion, and endeavoured in every way to promote the welfare of the subjugated country. The race of the foreigners has been much disputed; the Egyptians called them "Shepherds" and "Hycos," or "Shepherd-kings," according to Manetho, who stated that "Hyk" signified "a king" and "Sôs" "a shepherd" and "shepherds;" but in another place, said that "Hyk" and "Hak" signified "captives." In hieroglyphics "Hak" is one of the names for "king," and "Huk" means a "captive;" but the second word of those composing Hycos, according to Manetho, is not found except in Coptic, in which language occurs the word "shor," "a shepherd." The most reasonable etymology seems to be "captive," that is, "foreign shepherds;" for it should be observed that in the inscriptions foreigners are frequently called captives, and so represented on the monuments, when not actually such. In the inscriptions we find mention of "Shepherd," "Pentu" (or "Phoenicians"), and "enemies" or "foreigners," the last-mentioned appellation being undoubtedly applied to Manetho's Shepherds. The Egyptian historian says that some said they were Arabs, and in his lists the kings of the first Shepherd Dynasty, the Fifteenth, are called Phoenicians. There is reason to suppose the latter statement to be true, and there is also evidence that some of the foreign race were Arabs, and certain of their kings, most probably of the Sixteenth Dynasty, appear to have been Assyrians. Having said thus much respecting the establishment of the Shepherds in Egypt, we must return to the Diospolite kingdom.

The first king of the Twelfth Dynasty was Sesertesen I., of whose long reign many records, but those chiefly of subjects, yet remain. The most interesting of the national monuments is a tablet found by Dr Ricci at Wadie Hâlfch, in Nubia, near the Second Cataract, recording the king's triumph over foreign tribes, probably Ethiopians, and showing that at this early period the Egyptian rule had stretched thus far into Nubia. For part of his reign Sesertesen I. Egypt was co-regent with Amenemha I., the last sovereign of the Eleventh Dynasty, and with Amenemha II., towards the close of his reign. Under the latter king the first Tropical Cycle commenced n.c. 2005. Late in his reign he took as his colleague Sesertesen II. The next king, who probably Sesertesen was for part of his reign co-regent with Sesertesen II., was II. Sesertesen III., the Sesostris of Manetho. This name of Sesertesen Sesostris is applied by ancient historians to several kings. It is probably derived from Sesertesen: other derivations have indeed been proposed, but none of these is equally satisfactory. We can recognise an early Sesostris, that is, Sesertesen III., and a later one, Rameses II., of the Nineteenth Dynasty, and it is not unlikely that Sesertesen I. is also spoken of under this name. If this supposition is correct, we may distinguish the two very ancient kings as Sesostris the conqueror, or Sesertesen I., and Sesostris the lawgiver, or Sesertesen III. In Manetho's lists we find, after a short account of the conquests of Sesostris, which seems inapplicable to this king's reign, that he was considered by the Egyptians as "after," or "the first after," Osiris; which may be explained by concluding that he was regarded by them as the greatest of mortals, and to be honoured next to Osiris, "the youngest of the gods." In ancient sculptures in Nubia we find kings of the Eighteenth Dynasty, of the Thothmes family, worshipping Sesertesen III. as a god, and this is the only case of the kind. We find indeed one solitary instance of another early monarch being thus worshipped in later times, and some examples of several monarchs being worshipped together, and several cases of kings worshipping their fathers or other progenitors, but, as far as has been ascertained, no example of a king of any dynasty being frequently represented as a god, and worshipped, in sculptures of other kings not of the same dynasty. The monuments thus seem to indicate that Sesertesen III. is Manetho's Sesostris. Sesertesen II. was apparently a king of little note, and it is improbable, notwithstanding his name, that anything ascribed to Sesostris by those who confounded different kings under that name applies to him. During the reign of Sesertesen III., the First Phoenix Cycle commenced, n.c. 1986. The next king was Amenemha III., of whom we are told in the lists that he built the Labyrinth in the Aminiope nome as a tomb for himself. His prenomen reads Ra-en-ma or ma-t, or Ma-en-ra or Ma-en-ra, and from it most probably originated the Moris of the Greeks. Moris seems, like Sesostris, to have been a name applied to more than one sovereign; but there can be no doubt that the principal person intended by it was this king, for the Greeks ascribe to him the building or founding of the Labyrinth, and his name has been discovered by Dr Lepsius in the sculptures of the ruins of that structure or its pyramid. After the reigns of two other sovereigns Amenemha IV. and Ra-sebak-nufret, who was, according to Manetho, as preserved by Africanus, a queen, the sister of her predecessor, the dynasty came to a close. It is probable that these two ruled with Amenemha III., as successive co-regents, perhaps towards the close of his reign. This dynasty lasted about 160 years; Africanus assigns to it, in his version of Manetho's list, exactly that duration, and the monuments and Royal Turin Papyrus afford confirmation of this sum. At its termination the power of the Diospolites became greatly diminished, and did not recover until the beginning of the Eighteenth Dynasty.

The Fourteenth Dynasty, or Xois kingdom, seems to have arisen with, or during, the Twelfth Dynasty. It had its seat of government at Xois, a town of Lower Egypt in the northern part of the ancient Delta. Seventy-six kings are assigned to this line, and a duration of either 184 or 484 years. The latter sum is the more probable if the number of kings be correct. Supposing, then, that the Fourteenth Dynasty lasted for nearly five centuries, it probably terminated during the great Shepherd war, and perhaps some years before the beginning of the Eighteenth.

According to Africanus, three dynasties of Shepherd kings ruled in Egypt, the Fifteenth, Sixteenth, and Seventeenth. Eusebius, however, makes but one of these dynasties, the Seventeenth, to have been of the foreign invaders, while he assigns to it kings who are of the Fifteenth in Africanus's list. According to Josephus, the Shepherds ruled 511 years, until the great war commenced which terminated in their expulsion from Egypt. The monuments, as well as internal evidence, are in favour of Africanus's version instead of that of Eusebius, and it is therefore generally preferred. Admitting, then, that there were three Shepherd dynasties, we must next inquire what was the period of their rule. In the list of Africanus the sum of the three is 953 years, which, if correct, would prove that they could not have been successive. That it is correct is most probable, and that the Fifteenth Dynasty was contemporary with the earlier portion of the Sixteenth, and the Seventeenth with the later portion of the same dynasty, the Seventeenth Dynasty being, however, separated from the Fifteenth by a Memphite dynasty or dynasties.

The Shepherd kings of the Fifteenth Dynasty were the greatest of the foreign rulers. The first of these, Salatis or Saïtès, was made king, according to Manetho, after the conquest of the country (cir. B.C. 2080). "He lived at Memphis, making the Upper and Lower Country to pay tribute, and placing garrisons in the most fit situations." Of these the greatest was Avaris, an old city, to the east of the Pelusiac Branch, which he rebuilt and fortified strongly, placing in it an enormous garrison. His object was to defend the frontier against the Assyrians, who, Manetho tells us, he foresaw would have a desire to invade his kingdom. Salatis died after an active reign of nineteen years. In the lists he and his successors are called Phenicians, and it is very probable that they were of that race. His nomen is not found both in the hieroglyphic inscriptions, but his prenomens occurs both on a contemporary monument and in the Royal Turin Papyrus.

The successor of Salatis was Béon, in the hieroglyphics Pi-ankhée, and he was followed by Apachnes, whose nomen is found only in the Royal Turin Papyrus, and is of doubtful reading. The next king was Iannas, called on the monuments A-an, to whom succeeded Assis, whose hieroglyphic name is Assa. There are several tombs of the time of this king in the necropolis of Memphis, from the sculptures and inscriptions of which we obtain great insight into the state of the Shepherd kingdom under his rule. In the sculptures we see the same evidences of the prosperity and wealth of the subjects as in those of the period of the Fourth Dynasty. The foreigners appear to have adopted the Egyptian dress and manners so completely that we do not find a single foreign name. In one tomb the inscriptions show that the Shepherd kings of this dynasty held Leontopolis or the Leontopolite nome in the eastern part of the ancient Delta, which shows that their dominion must have been extensive. Most probably Assa was the Pharaoh of whom Joseph was the prime-minister, the patriarch receiving that appointment towards the close of his reign, and continuing to hold it in the next reign. The reasons for this opinion will be given a little later. Of the last king of the Fifteenth Dynasty, the successor of Assa, the monuments tell us nothing, and it is not even certain that his name has been found in hieroglyphics or hieratic. In Manetho's lists he is called Apôphis or Apôphis. With him the greatest Shepherd Dynasty came to a close, and Memphis was again the seat of native kings. If Dr Brugsch's view be correct, Apôphis reigned just before the Eighteenth Dynasty, no doubt after the Shepherds had lost Memphis.

After the end of the Twelfth Dynasty, about B.C. 1920, Thirteenth the Diospolite kingdom was ruled by the Thirteenth, which Dynasty lasted about 400 years, until the commencement of the Eighteenth Dynasty. The kings seem to have been of little power, for the most part, and probably tributary to the Shepherds. They possessed, however, a considerable tract south of Egypt; and this may be supposed to have been an asylum for them during the troublous period of their rule. All the names of these kings have not been found, and those which are known are chiefly prenomens, and not nomens; many of the latter appear to have been Sebak-hotep and Nufre-hotep. The Fourteenth Dynasty, or Xoite Kingdom, has been already noticed.

The Eighth Dynasty, of Memphites, succeeded the Fifteenth, and ruled, according to Africanus's version of Manetho's List, nearly a century and a half. It is not certain whether the Seventh Dynasty, likewise of Memphites, to Seventh which the same version assigns a duration of only 70 days, Dynasty intervened between the Sixth and Fifteenth Dynasties, or the Fifteenth and Eighth. The native successors of the Shepherds at Memphis seem to have been princes of little power and contracted dominions. The Shepherds of the Sixteenth Dynasty appear to have succeeded to the political position of those of the Fifteenth. It is very remarkable that in the Royal Turin Papyrus among kings who must be assigned to this dynasty or the Seventeenth are certain who appear to be Assyrians, and one of these is probably a Pharaoh who oppressed Israel, the predecessor of him who was drowned in the Red Sea. Indeed there are strong grounds for supposing that this dynasty was composed of kings of a different race or races to those of the Fifteenth, and bitterly opposed to them; and that when the rule of the latter came to a close they seized their possessions in the eastern part of the Delta, and persecuted the Israelites who had been favoured by the earlier sovereigns. Of the Seventeenth Dynasty nothing is known, except that its kings were Shepherds. Africanus's version indeed makes them to have been co-regent Diospolites and Shepherds, but this is generally held to be a mistake.

From the time of Assa to the commencement of the Eighteenth Dynasty, a period of about three centuries and a half, scarcely any monuments have been discovered, and this indicates that Egypt was then in a weak and distracted condition, and agrees with the statement of Manetho, that Shepherd after the Shepherds had ruled Egypt for 511 years, the war kings of the Thebais and of the rest of Egypt made an insurrection against them, and a great and long war raged between them. The kings here meant must have been a Diospolite of the Thirteenth Dynasty, probably with a Heracleopolite of the Tenth, and a Xoite of the Fourteenth. The great war thus commenced had resulted at the beginning of the Eighteenth Dynasty in the restoration to Egyptian rule of nearly all Lower Egypt; and the other lines having then come to an end, the whole power was centred in the Theban monarchy. It was, however, probably more than a century before the foreigners were finally expelled.

Before noticing the history of the Eighteenth Dynasty, it is necessary to mention briefly the connection between the Israelites and the Egyptians, and between the Greeks and the Egyptians. The sojourn and exodus of the Israelites have been variously assigned to the time of the Dynasties preceding the Eighteenth, and to that or the following Dynasty; and this is, therefore, the proper place in which to notice some of the grounds on which these different opinions rest. Certain of the Greek traditions point to the Shepherd-period, if there be any truth in their approximate chronology; and these, therefore, likewise here demand a brief consideration.

A wide difference has prevailed among critics respecting the date of the Exodus, and the length of time for which the Hebrews sojourned in Egypt before that event. Some, rejecting all the numbers mentioned in the Bible by which the time of the Exodus has been usually computed, take the genealogies as their guides, and calculate that event to have occurred about 1300 B.C.; others, following Archbishop Usher, place it B.C. 1491; and others, agreeing with Dr Hales, carry it back to the middle of the seventeenth century. The last view, which is in accordance with the opinions of several of the early Christian chronologers, is supported by evidence not easily shaken, which may be thus stated:—1. The numbers of years occurring in the Book of Judges added together, and St Paul's statement that the Israelites were ruled by judges for "about the space of four hundred and fifty years, until Samuel the prophet," would carry up the date of the Exodus to about B.C. 1650. The mention in Jephtha's message to the king of the Ammonites that Israel had already dwelt 300 years in the trans-Jordanite possessions, is agreeable with this date of the Exodus and with Usher's, but not with that of about B.C. 1300. Against the date of about B.C. 1650 may, however, be urged the statement in the first Book of Kings, that the temple was commenced by Solomon in the 480th year after the Exodus, which is the basis of Usher's computation; but this number is given differently in the Septuagint version as 440 years, and it cannot be reconciled with the period mentioned by St Paul, nor, except by an arbitrary arrangement, with the numbers given in the Book of Judges. 2. A comparison between the Hebrew calendar and the Egyptian leads to the same results as do the data mentioned under the previous head. The ancient Hebrew civil year commenced about the time of the autumnal equinox; and we find that at the approximate date of the Exodus obtained from the numbers given in the Book of Judges, the Egyptian Vague Year commenced at or about that period. This approximate date, therefore, falls about the time at which the Egyptian Vague Year and the civil year of the Hebrews nearly or exactly coincided in their commencements. It may be supposed that the Israelites had made use of the Egyptian Vague Year, which, indeed, is rendered not unlikely by the circumstance that they had for the most part adopted the Egyptian religion, the ceremonies of which were regulated by the months of that year. The ordinances of the Law, however, made it necessary that the Israelites should use a year virtually solar, and such a year was at the time of the Exodus either restored or instituted. But the inquiry may be carried further; for, if the Egyptian and Hebrew months corresponded, the fourteenth day of Abib, on which fell the full moon of the Passover of the Exodus, corresponded to the fourteenth day of Phamenoth. Now, a full moon fell on the fourteenth day of Phamenoth, or Thursday, April the 21st, in the year B.C. 1652. A full moon would not fall on the same day of the Vague Year at a shorter interval than 25 years before or after B.C. 1652; and the triple coincidence of the occurrence of a full moon on a certain day of the Vague Year, with reference to the autumnal equinox, could not recur in less than 1500 Vague Years. 3. There are certain indications which would induce us to place the commencement of the first sabbatical period in the year B.C. 1605, and since the Exodus took place 47 years previously, to date the latter event B.C. 1652. The inquiry which leads to this result is very intricate, and the result cannot be regarded as more than hypothetical; yet it should be remembered that it is founded on evidence totally distinct from that adduced under the preceding heads. 4. To the Israelites in the desert a command was given "that they make them fringes to the borders of their garments throughout their generations, and that they put upon the fringe of the borders a ribband of blue," as a memorial of the covenant. In an Egyptian battle-scene representing, in the great temple of Aboo-Simbel, the capture by Rameses II. of a stronghold in or near Palestine, probably that called in the hieroglyphic Ketesh, which corresponds to the Ashteroth-Karnaim mentioned in the Bible, a peasant is portrayed driving away some cattle. His dress has a blue stripe resembling a ribband near its border, and a blue fringe, and his physiognomy is not unlike that of the Jews. This seems to afford strong evidence that Rameses II. reigned subsequently to the Exodus. The date of the campaign to which this sculpture relates may be placed about B.C. 1300, or not more than a few years later at the utmost. The Exodus, therefore, on this ground, appears to have taken place in or before the year B.C. 1340, and certainly prior to the reign of Rameses II. This result would show that those who hold the latest date of the Exodus—that deduced from the genealogies—are wrong in assigning the event to the reign of Men-ptaah, the successor of Rameses II.; and it is in opposition to their best argument that the city Rameses or Rameses, built or fortified during the oppression, was named after Rameses I., or his grandson Rameses II., since the oppression would probably have ended before the accession of the former king. The weight of evidence, therefore, is in favour of the earliest of the dates mentioned above, that of B.C. 1652. Respecting the duration of the sojourn of the Israelites in Egypt, the sum of 215 years seems, on the whole, preferable to 430; but there is not space here for the discussion of the question. Admitting then that Joseph's government probably began B.C. 1876, that Jacob came into Egypt B.C. 1867, and that the Exodus took place in the year B.C. 1652, these data may be applied to Egyptian history with a view to test their accuracy.

Granting these premises, Joseph became governor of Joseph Egypt towards the close of the reign of Assa or Assis, governor the fifth king of the Fifteenth Dynasty and this Shepherd of Egypt, king would well correspond to the Pharaoh mentioned in the Bible, as the most powerful sovereign not of those of the Lower Country only but of all Egypt. Various passages in the Bible-narrative seem to confirm this view, which is most agreeable with the testimony of the monuments; for an Egyptianized foreigner would be far more ready to favour the strangers than would a native Egyptian. The Fifteenth Dynasty was followed, after perhaps the seventy days' rule of the Seventh, by the Memphite line of the Eighth Dynasty, about the time of Joseph's death. The kings of the Eighth Dynasty seem, however, to have been of little strength, and it appears that the Shepherds of the Sixteenth Dynasty succeeded to much of the power of the rulers of the Fifteenth. We cannot suppose the new Egypt, king, which knew not Joseph, and the other oppressors of the Israelites, to have been of the Eighteenth Dynasty; for this was a line of Memphite kings, and it is said in the Bible, "My people went down aforetime into Egypt to sojourn there; and the Assyrians oppressed them without cause;" from which we must infer that at least one of the Pharaohs of the oppression was an Assyrian. Now, in the list of kings called the Royal Turin Papyrus, among the names of a dynasty of foreigners, which could not have been the Fifteenth, and was therefore either the Sixteenth or Seventeenth, occur those of Assyrian kings. One of these, who bears the name of Uben-ra (a name likewise borne by two other kings of the same period, as well as found on one of the Nimrod ivories in the British Museum, and likewise taken as a foreign title, in the feminine Ubent, by the Semiramis who ruled in Egypt), appears to have reigned forty years (the number is imperfect, but is probably forty), while to his successor is assigned a reign of but one year. And the Bible-narrative seems to indicate that the Pharaoh from whom Moses fled to Midian reigned at least forty years, while it is quite clear that his successor, who was drowned in the Red Sea, must have reigned about a year, somewhat more or less. These circumstances seem to confirm the early date of the Exodus, no less than others. Among the latter may be particularized the subsequent policy of the Egyptians and Assyrians towards the Israelites, and the friendship of the Israelites and the Egyptians in after times, as well as the many difficulties in accepting the later dates which arise from the absence of any mention of the sojourn and Exodus on monuments supposed to be contemporary. The friendship of the native Egyptian and Ethiopian kings, without any known exception, for Shishak and his family were partly, at least, of Assyrian or Babylonian origin, and the constant enmity with which the Israelites were regarded by the Assyrians and Babylonians, are satisfactorily explained by our finding that the Assyrians oppressed both the Israelites and the Egyptians in Egypt. For it is evident that the Shepherd kings of the period which followed the Fifteenth Dynasty, or, at least, those after Assa, were those whose memory was so hateful to the Egyptians. It must also be borne in mind that many of the Shepherds must have been Egyptianized; like Moses, whom the daughters of the priest (or princes) of Midian thought to be an Egyptian; and that they were evidently so mixed up with the Egyptians of Lower Egypt as to be, under Shepherd rule, almost one people; and thus one can understand their being generally, though not always, mentioned as Egyptians, or not as distinct from them, in the Bible. Probably the Egyptians joined with the oppressors of the Israelites sometimes without being forced to do so, for they were included in the same punishment; yet their conduct towards them in after times, and the remarkable command in the law, "Thou shalt not abhor an Egyptian, because thou wast a stranger in his land," to which it is added that their children, like those of Edomites, should enter into the congregation of the Lord in their third generation, whereas Amalekites could never be admitted, both tend to show convincingly that the Egyptians had in many instances treated the Israelites with kindness while they sojourned in their land; and the punishment which partly fell upon them may have been in their case rather for idolatry and vice than for oppression. The inference thus drawn from the passage in the Book of Deuteronomy is strengthened by an examination of what precedes it; for there are three other nations only mentioned, the Moabites, Ammonites, and Edomites, of which the last were admitted to the same privilege as the Egyptians, though the other two were excluded. The reason of their exclusion is alone mentioned: it was their inhospitality to the Israelites when they came out of Egypt, whereas the Edomites, we know, treated them hospitably. In reviewing the subsequent history of Egypt, we cannot fail to be struck with the constant amicable feeling which subsisted between the Israelites and the Egyptians. The capture of Gezer, a Canaanite town, by one of the Pharaohs, without opposition on the part of Solomon, and the giving of that city to his daughter, Solomon's Egyptian queen, and that marriage itself, show what a friendly alliance existed in those days. And in later times, though we may think that the policy of Tirhakah and Apries was dictated by a regard to their own interests, Neco appears to have been unwilling to add the rich kingdom of Judah to his dominions, when Josiah disputed his passage to the Euphrates. The conduct of Shishak was far different, but he was, as already remarked, of a line partly at least of Assyrian or Babylonian origin, and his policy was that of an Assyrian or Babylonian prince. These matters have been dwelt upon in some detail, but their importance, as tending to establish a synchronism between Hebrew and Egyptian history, make it impossible to pass them by without something more than a mere notice.

The traditionary accounts of the civilization of Greece Civilisation by colonists from Egypt are so obscure, and so interwoven with undoubted mythological relations, that some have rejected them as either false or doubtful. Yet it is hard to believe that the traditions of any nation respecting their ancestors are altogether unworthy of reliance; and our wisest plan is to endeavour, by a comparison of the monumental data in Greece and Egypt, first to ascertain whether there is any truth in these traditions, and then to separate that truth from the error which surrounds it. Greek art affords evident traces of Egyptian influence, if not rather of an Egyptian origin; a column resembling the Doric being found in the rock tombs of Benec-Hasan, which were excavated about the time of Abraham. The earliest Greek pottery affords still stronger evidence in bearing patterns and devices of an unmistakable Egyptian origin, and especially one which is imitative of a well-known hieroglyphic group. This shows that the two countries must have been connected at least as early as the time of Homer, and probably as far back as the date to which the taking of Troy is usually assigned. Then, again, we find on an Egyptian monument of about B.C. 1200 a sea-fight represented between Cretans and Carians on the one side and Egyptians on the other, a circumstance which confirms the Greek tradition that the Cretans held the empire of the sea in ancient times, and lost it not long before the siege of Troy, likewise indicating in what manner their maritime power was broken. This case warns us not to disregard even earlier traditions, especially as they also are very consistent with the history of Egypt at the period to which they relate, and were received by the learned Greeks and Egyptians of subsequent times. We may admit that many colonists went from Egypt to Colonization Greece during the Shepherd rule, carrying arts and sciences to the rude inhabitants of Hellas. These emigrations commenced at least as early as the middle of the nineteenth century before our era, and continued as late as the close of the sixteenth, if, as we may suppose, there be any truth in the approximate chronology of the traditions. The kings of the Fifteenth Dynasty are said to have been Phenicians, and many of their people seem to have been of the same race; thus we see wherefore certain of the colonists are made both Phenician and Egyptian, for, as evidently in the Bible, Shepherds are often called Egyptians. Towards the close of the Fifteenth Dynasty many of the Shepherds would seem to have sought a home in Greece; and when the great war had commenced these emigrations appear to have become more frequent, until after the time when the foreigners were finally expelled Egypt, when notice of them ceases.

---

1 Is. iii. 4. 2 Wilkinson's edition. 3 This name occurs on a scarabaeus in the possession of Sir G. Wilkinson. 4 See a review of Lepsius's Letters in the Journal of Sacred Literature, July, 1854. 5 Deut. xxiii. 7, 8. The history of the Shepherds in Egypt, and the traditions of the colonization of Greece, agree so well that the only difficulty to one's mind is to understand how so much truth can have been preserved amidst the myths and exaggerations of the ancient Greeks. Thus much may be safely affirmed, but the details of the traditions must be regarded with great caution, lest by hastily accepting them, as did most critics until lately, the truths with which they are interwoven should appear perplexed and doubtful, and historical scepticism take the place of justifiable circumspection.

With the Eighteenth Dynasty, about B.C. 1525, a new period of Egyptian history commences, new in the abundance of materials for its reconstruction, and in the greatness of the monarchy whose fortunes it relates. The sources of information are no one connected history, but numerous inscriptions, sculptures, and papyri, whence we can gather many of the remarkable events by which this and the succeeding dynasty were distinguished.

The first king of the Eighteenth Dynasty was Aah-mes, whom Manetho called Amos or Amosis. No great monuments of his reign remain, but from various inscriptions we must infer that he was a powerful king, and that in his time the Shepherds had quitted the greater part of Egypt. Two records of especial interest may be particularized. One is a long inscription in the tomb at Ellethas of one Aah-mes, chief of the mariners, who served several of the early kings of the Eighteenth Dynasty, having commenced his career under King Aah-mes. The inscription speaks of war at sea, or on the river, mentions the famous Shepherd-city Avaris, and relates that the king made in his sixth year an expedition by water to Ethiopia to impose tribute. The other record is a tablet at the quarries of El-Ma'sarah, a little above Cairo, on the east bank of the river, opposite Memphis, which relates that in the twenty-second year of his reign Aah-mes cut stone for the temple of Ptah, most probably at Memphis, and for that of Amen at Thebes. These inscriptions show that Aah-mes must have ruled nearly all Egypt, and thus explain why some (as it appears, but it is a disputed point) supposed him to have finally expelled the Shepherds. Amenoph I., the successor of Aah-mes, was at least as potent a king, and the memorials of his reign are more numerous. They are chiefly found in the representations or paintings of the tombs of his subjects; but chambers in the more ancient portion of the great temple of Amen-ra, now called that of El-Karnak, at Thebes, show that he did not neglect public edifices. He was evidently successful in wars against the Ethiopians as well as against Asiatics.

To him succeeded Thothmes I., in whose reign the arms of Egypt were carried into Mesopotamia, for one of his officers has left an inscription recording that he brought booty thence. The same king warred in Ethiopia also. In the great temple at Thebes he made additions, and, in particular, set up there two obelisks of red granite, of which one yet stands. Under the next sovereign, Thothmes II., the prosperity of Egypt continued, and the extent of his kingdom is proved by his name being found as far south as Napata (Gebel Berkel), in Ethiopia. With him was associated in the government a Queen Amen-nunt, who appears to have possessed much greater power than he, if not to have ruled solely while he was but nominally a king. For at least 16 years, that is, for the whole of the reign of Thothmes II., and the first 3 or 4 years of that of Thothmes III., this queen continued to govern, and left many beautiful monuments to attest her magnificence and power, chiefest of which are the lofty obelisks of the temple of Amen-ra at Thebes, one of which is still standing, while the other is fallen and broken in pieces. Queen Amen-nunt is called the daughter of Thothmes I., and the sister of Thothmes III., and therefore of Thothmes II., also; but she appears to have been a foreigner, and if so, only related to the Egyptian royal family by marriage, unless her mother was likewise a foreigner, and a wife of Thothmes I. Several circumstances seem to show that she was a Semiramis, for one cannot say Semiramis simply, since more than one sovereign appears to have been intended by the name, as in the case of Sesostris. The strongest reasons in favour of this opinion are founded on the circumstance that Queen Amen-nunt is constantly represented in the sculptures as wearing male attire, that she receives in one instance what we may almost conclude to be an Assyrian title "Ubent" as her appellation "in the foreign land," and that her name was afterwards effaced from the monuments; particulars which are strikingly in accordance with the statement that the Assyrian Queen Semiramis, who dressed as a man, subdued Egypt. It may be added that the time of Amen-nunt is not far anterior to the approximate date of a Semiramis obtained from the fragments of Berossus. Thothmes III. appears soon to have emancipated himself from the control of Queen Amen-nunt. His reign was marked by many successful expeditions conducted by him in person, in one of which he penetrated as far as Nineveh, though it is not said whether he besieged that city or not. If Manetho be accurate, the most important military event must, however, have been his successful war with the Shepherds, who, according to that historian, were driven by him out of all Egypt excepting the stronghold of Avaris on the frontier. Many monuments, especially at Thebes, remain to prove the greatness of this king and the wealth of his subjects. The tombs of private persons are not the least interesting of these memorials, and afford, in the representations which adorn their walls, very beautiful specimens of ancient Egyptian painting. Indeed, the reign of Thothmes III., with that of Thothmes II., preceding it, and those of Amenoph II., Thothmes IV., and Amenoph III., following it, may be considered as comprising the best period of art, all the earlier time showing a gradual improvement, and all the later a gradual declension. We do not, however, trace a very marked falling away until the power of Egypt had begun to decline, full two centuries later than the end of Thothmes III.'s reign. Of Amenoph II., the Amenoph son and successor of Thothmes III., little is known, and we can scarcely err in supposing his reign to have been short and unmarked by very important events. In the reign of Amenoph's son Thothmes IV., occurred, according to Manetho, the departure of the Shepherds from their last IV. possession in Egypt. The Egyptian historian relates that Departing having unsuccessfully beleaguered Avaris, the stronghold of the foreigners, Thothmes agreed to terms, and the Shepherds were permitted to leave the country unmolested with their families and effects. The monuments have not been found to allude to this event, and they tell us little of this reign, but that little shows that, short as it evidently was, it was marked by prosperity and success.

Thothmes IV. was succeeded by his son Amenoph III., Amenoph one of the most illustrious kings of the best period of Egyptian history. In his time we find a distinct record of the extent of the kingdom, which is stated to have had Nekereena (Mesopotamia) as its northern boundary, and Keruce or Keluce (probably Coloe) as its southern. Although it does not distinctly appear whether these are to be understood as the outermost provinces or as the lands bounding those provinces, and although the southern boundary cannot be positively ascertained, yet we can gain some idea of the power of Egypt from the inscription. Syria, west of Euphrates, obeyed Amenoph III., and a very great part of Ethiopia; and that the latter was the case is proved by monuments and their inscriptions in that country, and records of his successes in the inscriptions of Egypt. It is remarkable that he seems from his physiognomy to have been partly of Ethiopian origin. His long reign of nearly forty years, at the least, was marked by the construction of magnificent temples. Of these the greatest were two at Thebes; one on the west bank, of which scarcely anything remains but the two great colossi which stood on each side of the approach to it, and one of which is famous as the Vocal Memnon. On the opposite bank he likewise built the great temple now called that of El-Uksur, which Rameses II. afterwards greatly increased in size. It is almost needless to remark that the identification of this king with Memnon by the Greeks, apart from the circumstance that other Pharaohs were so called by them, is of no historical value. The tomb of Amenoph III. yet remains at Thebes in the Western Valley near that of the tombs of the kings.

After the reign of Amenoph III., the tranquillity of Egypt was disturbed by the rule of the chiefs of stranger settlers, foreign princes, who were allied to the Egyptian royal family. Whatever may have been their title, it is evident that the Egyptians regarded them as usurpers, and that they were unable to maintain themselves but by a rigorous military despotism. Their monuments have been found in all parts of Egypt, but much defaced or entirely ruined by the enmity of the Egyptians. We learn, however, that they abandoned the Egyptian religion, and set up in its place sun-worship; that they built a city in Middle Egypt, near the modern village of Tel-el-Amarna; and raised temples at Thebes and elsewhere. Manetho appears to have noticed their rule, for Eusebius, in the second part of his chronicle, mentions that during the reign of Amenophis (Amenoph III.), "the Ethiopians, migrating from the river Indus, came and dwelt near to Egypt;" and in the catalogue of kings of Egypt by an anonymous author, given by Syncellus, we find the following passage immediately before the mention of Oros, Amenoph's son and legitimate successor:—"The Ethiopians, coming from the river Indus, settled near to Egypt." It is highly probable that this statement was originally derived from Manetho, though evidently altered by misapprehension. Our finding that Egypt and Ethiopia were under the power of foreign chiefs at about the time indicated does not permit us to doubt that the statement was founded on fact. These sun-worshippers appear therefore to have belonged to the race which may be called that of the Eastern Ethiopians, a people who, in the time of the Greek geographers, dwelt between Persia and the Indus, and whom Herodotus describes as lank-haired to distinguish them from the Ethiopians of Africa." Bunsen and Lepsius suppose their rulers to have been heretical Egyptian princes, but it is plain that both chiefs and people were of a race far different from that of the Egyptians, although their chiefs were allied with the Egyptian royal family. Sir Gardner Wilkinson, not without strong reason, assigns Amenoph III. to this foreign race; but if he be right in this opinion we may notwithstanding date the commencement of their rule from the end of his reign, as then began that change of the state religion which was the great peculiarity of the foreign domination. Several kings of this race ruled after Amenoph III., of whom the most important was Amenoph IV., or Bekh-en-atenra. They have not as yet been classed in order, although much has been done towards effecting this desirable object by Sir Gardner Wilkinson and also by M. Prisse. The duration of their power probably did not much exceed thirty years. The religion of these foreigners is a matter of great interest, as it presents their religion with a very ancient example of pure sun-worship. The god sun is represented as adored by them under the form of a disk whence issue numerous rays, each terminating in a human hand, one of which presents to the worshipper the symbol of life. It appears that they adored one god, whom they supposed to be resident in the sun, and operating through its rays; and that they worshipped this god through the medium of the sun and its rays. These particulars may be compared with the "Chaldean Oracles of Zoroaster," as given by Cory in his Ancient Fragments. Although many of these "Oracles" must be of late origin, and others must have suffered by translation into Greek, they certainly contain many principles of the old religion of Zoroaster, and it is not therefore surprising that we should find in them remarkable agreements with the records of the sun-worshippers. The following couplet reads like a description of the representation of the sun worshipped by the foreigners as described above:

"It becomes thee to hasten to the light and rays of the Father, From whence was sent to thee a soul, ended with much mind."

Precisely how and when the sun-worshippers were expelled from Egypt or destroyed, does not appear; though it can scarcely be doubted that Oros, the Har-em-heb of Har-em-heb the monuments, who succeeded them, was the prince by whom they were overthrown. Har-em-heb was a son of Amenoph III., and with him was continued the legitimate line of Diospolites sovereigns. The records of his reign are comparatively unimportant; and if Manetho be right in assigning to him a rule of between 36 and 37 years, as the best readings inform us, it must be supposed that for the greater part of this period he did not rule, or governed but a portion of the country, but that, counting from the close of his father's reign, he included the time that the sun-worshippers held the supreme or chief power during his own nominal or contemporaneous reign. The sculptures of a rock temple at Salsis, Gebel-es-Silsileh, commemorate a successful expedition against the negroes.

Oros was succeeded by Rameses I., of whose very short Rameses I. reign no important details have reached us. After him his Nineteenth son, Sethe I., one of the greatest of the Pharaohs, ascended dynasty, the throne. The exact duration of his reign, which must have been long, is uncertain, and probably for part of it he ruled jointly with his son Rameses II. His accession may be placed about n.e. 1340, which is therefore the approximate date of the commencement of the Nineteenth Dynasty; for Manetho makes him head of that line, a position which should rather, one would think, have been assigned to his father Rameses I. The most important architectural work of his reign yet remaining is the magnificent hypostyle hall in the great temple of El-Karnak, on the outside of the north wall of which is a highly interesting series of sculptures representing the great achievements of his arms. His tomb, which is generally known as "Belzoni's," from its discoverer, is the most beautiful of those in the valley of the tombs of the kings; and its size shows that his reign must have been a long one, for it is well known that the sepulchre of an Egyptian king was usually commenced at or not long after his accession, and thus indicated the duration of his reign. The most important of the military exploits of Sethe I. appears to have been the conquest of the Khetra or Hittites, and the capture of their great stronghold Ketesh, or Ashteroth-Karnaim. It should also be noticed

---

1 Herod. vii., 70. 2 Ancient Fragments, p. 230, et seqq. 3 Id., p. 272. 4 For the history and religion of the sun-worshippers, see Sir Gardner Wilkinson's Modern Egypt and Thebes, ii., 71, &c.; Ancient Egyptians, pl. 39; Lepsius, Denkmüller, abth. iii., bl. 31, et seqq. 5 Rosellini, Monumenti Storici, No. xliiv. bis, et seqq. 6 Id., No. xlvii., et seqq. that he expelled certain foreigners of the race of the "Shasu" from the City of the Lion, or Leontopolis, near the eastern frontier of Lower Egypt.

Rameses II. Rameses II., who succeeded his father, Sethee I., probably after having ruled jointly with him for some time, was the most illustrious of the ancient kings of Egypt. It is he who is generally intended by the Sesostris of the Greek and Roman writers. His reign lasted, according to Manetho, if we follow what seem the best readings, a little above sixty-six years, and was marked by great success in war and by the construction of magnificent edifices. Among the latter may be mentioned at Thebes the great temple, commonly called the Memnonium, but more appropriately the Ramesseum of El-Kurneh, on the western bank, one of the most beautiful of Egyptian monuments, and a great part of the temple of El-Uksur on the opposite bank, as well as additions to that of El-Karnak. Throughout Egypt and Nubia are similar memorials of the power of Rameses II., one of the most remarkable of which is the great rock temple of Aboo Simbel, not far north of the Second Cataract. The temple of Ptah at Memphis was also adorned and enlarged by this Pharaoh, and its site is chiefly marked by a very beautiful colossal statue of him, fallen on its face, and partly mutilated. The numerous monuments of Rameses II. and a hieratic papyrus commemorate the successful wars in which he was engaged. The most important of these was waged against the Hittites, called by the Egyptians the Kheta, and their allies, and was decided late in the fifth year of the king's reign. A powerful confederacy had been formed by the Hittites, the Khilibu, or people of Aleppo, the people of Karkamish, or Carechemish, and other tribes, some of which had been tributary to the crown of Egypt, and a great army collected to support their avowal of independence. The strongest of the confederates were the Kheta led by several chiefs. The king of Egypt marched against them, and the contending armies met in the plain of Ketesh, or Ashteroth-Karnaim, a strong city which formed the basis of the confederates' operations. The generals of the latter had made a skilful disposition of their forces. Having drawn up their infantry in a large and deep phalanx before Ashteroth-Karnaim, and behind the moat which surrounded that city, they posted their chariots on the other side of the moat. The chariot force had an open plain in which to manoeuvre, while the infantry, placed on rising and wooded country, and protected by the moat, was ready to support the retreat of the rest of the army, or follow up its advance. The Egyptian chariots, led by the king and four of his sons, met and broke the charge of the Hittites; and notwithstanding that their infantry, having crossed the fosse by a bridge, endeavoured to maintain the day, they were put to the rout, and many of those who escaped the arrows of the chariot force and the swords of the infantry were drowned in attempting to recross the moat. Negotiations were in consequence commenced, which resulted in a treaty favourable to the king of Egypt. The war appears to have broken out again some years afterwards, for we find in an inscription of the temple of El-Karnak the record of peace having been concluded with certain chiefs of the Kheta, in the twenty-first year of the reign of Rameses II. The foreigners were compelled to pay tribute by this treaty, whence they must be supposed to have been previously worsted. Many other nations were subdued by Rameses II., but his chief exploit was the overthrow of the confederates. His great expeditions seem almost all to have been conducted in the earlier part of his reign, and its later portion appears to have been chiefly spent in advancing the welfare of the country by a promotion of the arts of peace.

Menptah, the thirteenth legitimate son of Rameses II., reigned in his father's stead. Of his rule the records are few and of little importance; and a story is told by Manetho, who does not vouch for its accuracy, that then great troubles befell Egypt. He relates that, according to this account, the foreigners and unclean people who were in the country, having been sent to work in the quarries by order of the king, revolted, and, in alliance with a force of Shepherds of the race of those who had been previously expelled, called in by them from Palestine, effected the subjugation of Egypt, which they held for thirteen years, while the king was a fugitive in Ethiopia; and that at the end of that time he returned with Sethos his son, and drove them out with great slaughter. The leader of the rebels is said to have been Moses, and the people the Jews, but neither the time nor the circumstances are favourable to this view, which, nevertheless, is that of some eminent modern scholars. The monuments cannot be denied to afford corroboration to the story, by indicating that about this time there was intestine trouble in Egypt, and that at least one king ruled who was not afterwards regarded as legitimate by the Egyptians. The usurper was Siptah, who married Queen Ta-seser, a daughter of Rameses II.; and Amenmeses, whose place is not certainly known, probably succeeded him, being in that case likewise a usurper.

The head of the Twentieth Dynasty was Sethee II., who was probably the son of Menptah. His accession, therefore, the commencement of the dynasty, may be placed about B.C. 1220. The next date to this which may be regarded as certain is that of the beginning of the Twenty-second Dynasty, B.C. 1008 or 1009. The chronology of the intervening period is obscure, for Manetho assigns to the Twentieth Dynasty a duration of either 135 years, if we follow Africanus, or 178 or 172, if we take the authority of Eusebius. To the Twenty-first Dynasty, which was of Tanite kings, a duration of 130 years is assigned by both the chronologers above mentioned as that stated by Manetho. If these sums be at all near the truth, the two Dynasties must have ruled contemporaneously for upwards of forty or eighty years. That such was the case is rendered probable by our finding at El-Karnak the names of only three of the latest kings, the fifth, sixth, and seventh, or last of the Twenty-first Dynasty, by whom a temple commenced under the Twentieth was continued.

The monuments tell us nothing important respecting the reigns of Sethee II., and of his successor Merer-ra; of the latter it can only be said that he evidently ruled but a short time, leaving the kingdom to his son Rameses III. With that sovereign the glories of the Theban line revived, and a series of great victories by land and sea raised Egypt to the place which it held under Rameses II., to whom alone he may be considered second as a warlike prince. In a stately temple, now called that of Medeenet-Haboo, which he raised on the western bank at Thebes, are sculptures and inscriptions commemorating the exploits of his reign, which are not, for the most part, elsewhere recorded. A small edifice, which was evidently a royal residence, and has been called his pavilion, and an extensive tomb in the Valley of the Tombs of the Kings, are the only other striking monuments of a reign which seems to have been much occupied in the prosecution of foreign wars. Of these, one of the most important, if not perhaps the most important, was that which he waged against "the Khairesana of the Sea," and the "Tokkaree," whom his fleet defeated in a sea-fight, which he held from the shore like Xerxes at Salamis. This sea-fight is the subject of one of the most remarkable battle-scenes which adorn the great temple of Medeenet-Haboo; and it

---

1 Both these events are recorded in the sculptures and inscriptions of the north wall of El-Karnak. Rosellini, Monumenti Storici, loc. cit. 2 Select Papyri, pl. xxiv., et seqq. 3 See his monuments in Rosellini, Monumenti Storici, No. liii., et seqq.; and Lepelus, Denkmäler, abth. iii., M. 142, et seqq. 4 Id., text, tom. i., Nome e titoli dei Re d'Egitto, &c., xlii., 13. 5 Id., Nos. cxxxi. Egypt, is interesting to endeavour to ascertain who were the defeated peoples. The Shairetana, or Kharetana, are seen among the forces of Rameses II., as auxiliaries or mercenaries, distinguished for bravery, wearing crested helmets, and having short swords. Their name is identical, if we make allowance for the difference of the languages, with that of the Philistine tribe of "Cherethim," which furnished faithful mercenaries to King David. The same Kharetana we see in the army of Rameses III., in the expedition in which he overcame the Kharetana of the Sea and the Tokkaree. The Khiretana of the Sea would thus correspond to the Cretans, who are allowed to be of the same origin as the Cherethim, the former being the inhabitants of Crete, and perhaps of other islands, and the latter settled on the coast of Palestine. The identification of the Tokkaree does not seem so easy; yet it must be considered that the Carian are the only maritime nation having a name resembling that of the Tokkaree, who could, with any probability, have been associated with the Cretans, and that Herodotus relates, on the authority of the Cretans, that in the old days of the maritime power of Crete, the Carians inhabited the islands, and served in the ships of Minos, being "by far the most famous of all nations in those times," and, moreover, bore another name, being called, he says, Leleges. This war of Rameses III., as before remarked, is very agreeable with the Greek traditionary account, which tells of the great kings of Crete who held the empire of the sea until not long before the siege of Troy, that is, about the time of Rameses III., whom we may hence conclude to have been the cause of the overthrow of their maritime supremacy. Among the other nations whom Rameses III. conquered, were the Pelesu, or Philistines, who have the same physiognomy and costume as the Tokkaree, thus indicating a common origin, the Rebu, a powerful people, and other uncertain races. Nine kings, all bearing the name of Rameses, succeeded Rameses III., but their rule was not (as far as we know) marked by great events, and scarcely any monuments but their tombs remain to commemorate it. Rameses IV., V., VI., and VII., were all sons of Rameses III.; and it is most probable that they supplanted one another, and thus weakened the country by their dissensions. At the close of the reign of Rameses XII., the supreme power fell into the hands of a ruler of the Twenty-first Dynasty, three kings of which have left records at Thebes. The first of these was Amense Pahor, whom Manetho calls Osochor, and makes the fifth king of the Dynasty; the second, Piankh, who is, according to Manetho, Psinachos, the sixth king of the same line; and the third Pisham, Pausennes, the seventh and last. Pahor and Pisham are represented as priests, though receiving the titles of kings, a custom which was continued, but not so exclusively, under the next dynasty.

Manetho calls the Twenty-second Dynasty, which next occupied the Egyptian throne, of Bubastite kings; and this statement receives some support from the circumstance, that the name of one of them has been found among the sculptured remains of the temples of Bubastis. These sovereigns cannot, however, have been of unmixed Egyptian origin, for Mr Birch has shown, from their names and those of princes of their family, that they must have been partly at least of Assyrian or Babylonian race. Their policy, also, was rather that of those peoples than of the Egyptians, if we may judge from Sheshonk's war with Rehoboam; for Sheshonk I. is the Shishak mentioned in the Bible. From this we are enabled to fix, with great probability, both the date of his accession, and the commencement of the dynasty of which he was the first king, as well as to establish a synchronism in the chronology of the kingdom of Egypt and that of Judah. The accession of Sheshonk I. may therefore be placed in the year n.c. 1008 or 1009, and his march against Jerusalem in that n.c. 988, his 21st or 22d year. War with Among the sculptures of the great temple of El-Kartak is Rehoboam, a list of nations and towns conquered by Sheshonk I., among which Champollion discovered the name of the kingdom of Judah, and of various cities, of which some appear to have been in the territories of Jeroboam I., to whom the king of Egypt seems therefore to have acted faithlessly. Osorkon Osorkon I., the next king, is supposed to have been the Zerah whom Asa king of Judah defeated in the year n.c. 962, or somewhat later; but if Manetho's numbers have been rightly preserved, this king could not have been Zerah, though by that name might be intended a later Osorkon. Of the other kings of this dynasty, the monuments tell us scarcely more than the names. After having ruled 120 years, according to Africanus's version of Manetho's lists, it was succeeded by the Twenty-third Dynasty of Tanite kings, Twenty-about n.c. 889. From this period until the accession of the Twenty-fifth Dynasty, the chronology and history is obscure. Of the Twenty-third Dynasty we know nothing of importance, and we cannot determine its duration. It is probable that the hieroglyphic names of some of its sovereigns occur on the monuments, but this is not certain. With the end of the Twenty-second Dynasty, the fortune of the brightest period of Egyptian history deserted the Pharaohs; and except under the vigorous rule of the Ethiopians, and then of certain of the kings of the Twenty-sixth Dynasty, never returned. When Egypt had been united under a single head at the commencement of the Eighteenth Dynasty, those great expeditions soon began which made the Egyptian name famous in after ages. The countries lying to the east of Egypt, as far as the Euphrates, were overrun by the forces of the Pharaohs, and their inhabitants compelled to render allegiance, and make tributary presents, to those sovereigns. But no attempt seems to have been made to bring the strangers under Egyptian government, although alliances were entered into with some, in order to bind them in friendship with the conquering power. Notwithstanding their aversion to foreigners, there is abundant evidence that the Egyptians treated such allies with respect, unlike the Assyrians and Babylonians, who enslaved and transplanted the nations which they subdued. Constantly, however, the tributaries rose in revolt against the Egyptians, and caused many long and fierce struggles before they were reduced to their former condition; and they seem to have been supported in these contests by some great power seated on the Tigris or Euphrates. Ethiopia was, at least nearly as far as the junction of the White and Blue Niles, a province of Egypt, having the same religion and laws, and governed by a prince, called "the Prince of Kush." From the accession of Aah-mes, the head of the Eighteenth Dynasty, until the time of Rameses II., the power of Egypt gradually increased; under the latter king it attained its greatest height, and having apparently waned somewhat after his reign, it rose again through the vigour of Rameses III. Under the kings that followed him, the kingdom of Egypt fell into an insignificant condition; and in Solomon's time seems scarcely to have possessed anything in Syria. Sheshonk I., however, taking advantage of the divisions which followed the reign of Solomon, rendered the kingdom of Judah, and doubtless that of Israel also, tributary to him. But not long after his time, probably in consequence of the power of the Assyrian empire, Egypt again declined, and did not rise until the rule of the Ethiopians.

The Twenty-fourth Dynasty consisted of a single king, Twenty. Bochoris the Wise, a Saite, the period of whose rule was fourth Dynasty, 6 years, according to Africanus's version of Manetho, but nasty. Egypt.

44 according to that of Eusebius. He was celebrated as a lawgiver. His reign was brought to a disastrous termination by Sabaco the Ethiopian, who, having taken him captive, burned him alive. Thus was established the Twenty-fifth Dynasty of Ethiopian kings, which can scarcely be considered a foreign line, since Ethiopia was so thoroughly Egyptian at that time; and the transfer of supreme power cannot, therefore, though effected by armed force, be regarded as very different from the earlier changes of one native dynasty for another.

The accession of Sabaco may be assigned to about the year B.C. 749. His hieroglyphic name, Shebek (I.), is found on some monuments of his reign, to which we may assign, with Eusebius, a duration of twelve years. Sebichus, his son, succeeded him, and ruled, on the authority of Africanus, fourteen years. He likewise bears the name of Shebek (II.) Treaty with the monuments. The most important event that we know of his reign is the treaty which he concluded (cir. B.C. 725) with Hoshea, the last king of Israel; who, nevertheless, was overpowered by Shalmaneser, the potent king of Assyria, soon afterwards. In the Bible he is called So or Sewa, after the manner in which Egyptian names are often abbreviated in Hebrew. The last king of this dynasty—called by Manetho Tarcus or Tarucus, in the Bible Tirhakah, and in the hieroglyphic inscriptions Tebrak—was one of the greatest sovereigns who ruled Egypt, insomuch that Megasthenes mentions him with Seostris as having carried his arms as far as Europe. Monuments in Egypt and Ethiopia, particularly at Gebel-Berkel, the ancient Napata, commemorate his piety and his success in war. He came to the throne cir. B.C. 723, and ruled twenty years, according to Eusebius' version of Manetho's Lists. In the year cir. B.C. 710 he advanced against Sennacherib to support Hezekiah, king of Judah. It does not appear whether he met the Assyrian army, but it seems probable that its miraculous destruction occurred before any engagement had been fought between the rival forces. Perhaps we may conclude that Tirhakah availed himself of this opportunity to restore the supremacy of Egypt west of the Euphrates. With the reign of Tirhakah the Twenty-fifth Dynasty closed; but, according to Eusebius, an Ethiopian, Amneres, commenced the next line, the Twenty-sixth Dynasty of Saite kings. The earlier part of that dynasty presents many difficulties, and it is not until the reign of Psammitichus, or Psammetik I., that the history and chronology become clear. This king was, according to Manetho, either the fourth or fifth king of the dynasty, having succeeded Necho II. Herodotus tells us that before his reign the country was ruled by a dodecarchy of which he was a member; and that, by the help of Ionian, Carian, and Phoenician mercenaries, he overthrew his colleagues, and rendered himself sole king of Egypt. Psammitichus came to the throne in this manner, B.C. 664, and reigned for fifty-four years. He was generally successful, and under him the arts began to show a marked revival. The sculptures of his time, and that of his successors in the same dynasty, are often not much inferior to those of the Nineteenth Dynasty, and far superior to those of the Twenty-second and Twenty-fifth. He did not forget the services of his mercenaries, especially the Greeks, and in addition encouraged their fellow-countrymen to trade with Egypt, and caused his subjects to be instructed in their language. In this manner, and by showing a preference to the Greek troops above the native Egyptian soldiers, he offended the latter, of whom a great force (said by Herodotus to have comprised 240,000 men) rebelled, and, notwithstanding the king's remonstrances, left their country, and established themselves in Ethiopia, far south of Egypt.

Even if the number stated by Herodotus be much exaggerated, this defection must have contributed to weaken Egypt, no less than the establishment of a mercenary force, which alienated the affections of the Egyptians, particularly the soldiery. Psammitichus carried on a successful war in Palestine, and took Ashdod or Azotus, after a twenty-nine years' siege, or twenty-nine years after his army had first sat down before it. Probably the town was held by an Assyrian garrison, for Tartan, the Assyrian general, had taken it from the Egyptians in the preceding century. Towards the close of his reign Psammitichus averted an invasion of Egypt by the Scythians, who had gained possession of the kingdoms of the Medes and the dominion of Asia. They advanced to Palestine on their way to Egypt, but Psammitichus, having met them, stayed their progress with presents and prayers. His son—called in the inscriptions Neko, by Manetho Necho II., and in the Bible Pharaoh-Neko, Necho—succeeded him in the year B.C. 610. His reign was marked by great events. In his first year he advanced into Palestine, marching along the sea-coast on his way to Carchemish on the Euphrates, and was met by Josiah, king of Judah, who, although he remonstrated, opposed his passage. Their armies joined battle at Megiddo, called Battle by Herodotus Magdolos, and Josiah was slain and his forces put to the rout. It is probable that Neko was successful in the object of his enterprise, and that he speedily returned to Egypt in triumph, having on his way back deposed Jehoahaz, Josiah's son, and set up Jehoiakim, his elder brother, in his stead. The expedition was apparently intended to strike a blow at the failing power of the Assyrians, whose capital soon after fell a prey to the combined forces of the Babylonians and Medes. The army, however, which was stationed on the Euphrates by Neko, met with a signal disaster three years subsequently, being routed by Nebuchadnezzar at Carchemish. The warlike king of Babylon pushed his success, and we read in the Bible, after the mention of Jehoiakim's death, that "the king of Egypt came not again any more out of his land; for the king of Babylon had taken from the river of Egypt unto the river Euphrates all that pertained to the king of Egypt." But although warlike affairs occupied so much of his reign, Neko was not inattentive to the welfare of commerce, for he either commenced the canal from the Nile to the Red Sea, or attempted to clear the course of one previously dug; but in either case, the work was not completed. He likewise maintained a fleet both in the Mediterranean and in the Red Sea; and Phoenicians, by his command, attempted and accomplished the circumnavigation of Africa. He was an enlightened and wise prince, who encouraged foreigners without incurring the jealousy of the Egyptians, and whose dealings with neighbouring nations evince both moderation and policy.

Psammetik II., called by Herodotus Psamnitis, who succeeded his father B.C. 595, does not seem in his short reign of 6 years to have done anything worthy of record. Egypt, however, prospered under his rule, for the splendid tombs of his subjects, and those of his successors, show the wealth of the country from this time to its subjugation by Cambyses. The next sovereign was Uahprah, called Pharaoh-Hophra in the Bible, and by Herodotus Apries. He began or Apries to reign B.C. 589, and at first was eminently successful, for he entered Palestine and Phoenicia, taking Gaza and Sidon, Wars in and defeated the king of Tyre in a sea-fight. He also Pharaoh worsted the Cypriots. Having thus restored the influence and power of Egypt, he succoured Zedekiah, the king of Judah, in his time of rebellion against Nebuchadnezzar, and when Jerusalem was besieged by the Chaldeans the advance of his army compelled them to raise the siege. The city nevertheless fell, and the power of Egypt in Palestine was crushed by the campaigns of Nebuchadnezzar. The fugitive Jews were kindly received by Pharaoh-Hophra, and seem henceforward to have formed an important part of the population. At the fall of the kingdom of Israel many Hebrews had taken refuge in Egypt, and this was not the only occasion on which their numbers were increased by other emigrants. Greater calamities than the loss of his influence to the east of Egypt befell Apries at a later time, for an army which he sent against the Greeks of Cyrene was cut to pieces, and a consequent military revolt placed the crown on the head of Amasis. Apries was deserted by all except the Ionian and Carian troops (50,000 in number), and a few Egyptians, but nevertheless he marched to meet the rebel. At Memonphis, near the lake Mareotis, a decisive battle was fought, and Apries was made prisoner by Amasis. At first the new king treated his captive with consideration, but afterwards yielding to the importunities of the people, who hated him, he gave him up to them, by whom he was strangled. Nevertheless he buried him royally. Thus was fulfilled the prophecy spoken by Jeremiah: "I will give Pharaoh-Hophra, king of Egypt, into the hand of his enemies, and into the hand of them that seek his life." There seems little doubt that at the time of this rebellion, and perhaps in conjunction with the advance of Amasis, Egypt was invaded and desolated by Nebuchadnezzar. It should be observed, however, that the remarkable prophecies of Ezekiel may refer for the most part to the invasion by Cambyses.

Amasis or Aah-mes came to the throne in the year B.C. 570, and ruled with great credit for nearly half a century. He endeavoured rather to consolidate the power of Egypt than to make extensive conquests, and thus he strengthened the country against its dangerous neighbours on the east. He was not regardless of the welfare of commerce, and the efficiency of his navies is shown by his having subjugated Cyprus and made it tributary. The Babylonian kingdom became so weak in his days, that he joined Nabonidus its king, and Croesus the sovereign of Lydia, in an alliance to oppose Cyrus. Nevertheless Babylon fell, and with it the remains of the great empire founded by Nebuchadnezzar, and the defeat of Croesus followed the fall of his ally. Xenophon says that Croesus was aided by a strong force of Egyptians, 120,000 in number, who in a great battle near Thymbra maintained themselves unbroken until Cyrus granted them honourable terms, and that he settled them in the cities of Larissa and Cyllene, on the coast of Asia Minor. From the manner in which this is narrated, and particularly from the evident appeal to the truth of the narrative on account of the cities being called those of the Egyptians, this seems to be, notwithstanding that it occurs in the Cyropaedia, a genuine fragment of history. If so, we could well understand why Egypt was unable to offer a vigorous resistance to the Persian invader a few years later, since it would have thus been deprived of a great part of the army. Monuments were raised by Amasis throughout Egypt, of which some remains are yet to be seen, but his works were probably chiefly in Lower Egypt and at Sais, and hence there are no very remarkable ruins of his time, since the temples of Upper Egypt are the best preserved. Towards the close of his long reign Amasis found himself obliged to make great preparations to resist the threatened invasion of Cambyses, and at length died a little before that calamity befell his country. His son, Psammetichus, most probably the Psammetik III. of the monuments, ascended the throne B.C. 525, and prepared to meet the advancing enemy. The king of Egypt, at the head of a native and Greek army, awaited the invader at Pelusium, which was long regarded as the key of the country, and is therefore called in the Bible "Sin, the strength of Egypt." After an obstinate battle the Persians gained the day, and Cambyses advanced against Memphis. Thither he despatched a herald in a Mitylenean vessel; but the Egyptians, exasperated against the unjust invader, destroyed all on board. Cambyses then laid siege to the city, whose ancient Memphis fort, the White Wall, offered a protracted resistance, but taken at length fell into the hands of the invader, with Psammetichus, menitus the king. Thereupon Cambyses signalized his victory by characteristic acts of cruelty, rendered more notorious by being partly enacted under a show of justice, seventh and insulted the conquered king by the humiliation of his Dynasty, daughter to the rank of a poor slave, and the execution of his son as a low malefactor. Moved by shame rather than pity, he ordered the king's son to be spared when it was too late, but afterwards he was not able to refrain from the meanness of dragging forth and burning the mummy of Amasis and that of his queen. This queen was called Ankhi-nes, her sarcophagus is now in the British Museum. Near it was discovered her burnt mummy. One cannot but regret that a desire to put a historical subject in a new light, which has worked so much mischief of late, should have raised up an apologist for a despot of whom no one good act stands recorded. The unhappy Psammetichus, having been led captive to Susa, was after a time put to death by drinking bull's blood, for having plotted against Cambyses. It is believed that Cambyses did not at first insult the Egyptian religion; indeed, there is evidence that he began by showing reverence, or a pretence of reverence, towards their gods; but having failed in his disastrous expeditions to Ethiopia and the Oasis of Jupiter Ammon, he became exasperated against the unfortunate Egyptians, and destroyed their temples and statues, and even wounded the bull Apis. After four years spent in Egypt, he left the country to quell the rebellion which had placed the Magi at the head of affairs, and shortly after perished from the effects of an accidental hurt.

Darius, the son of Hystaspes, having overthrown Smertis, Darius the Magus, early applied himself to the improvement of his Hystaspes' great empire, and, whether from policy or goodness, strove to conciliate the various nations that composed it. During his visit to Egypt he gained the favour of the inhabitants, and hieroglyphic inscriptions show that he caused the temples to be adorned with additional sculptures. Notwithstanding, the Egyptians, unwilling to continue in servitude to a foreign power, revolted in the last year but one of his reign (B.C. 486), but were reduced by Xerxes, his successor, in his second year (B.C. 484). Xerxes made his brother Achaimenes satrap of Egypt, and the province remained quiet until his death, shortly after which Egypt again rose against the foreign rulers. Inaros, the son of Psammetichus, who was sovereign of some of the Libyans, and Amyrteus, the Saite, headed the insurrection. The Persians were driven out; and the insurgent leaders prepared to resist their return, by raising a native and mercenary force, and securing the assistance of the Athenians. Artaxerxes, as soon as he was firmly established on the throne, took measures towards regaining the lost province. An enormous army, said to have consisted of 400,000 men, and a fleet, were despatched under the command of Achaimenes, the late satrap. Inaros and Amyrteus, instead of awaiting the advance of the Persians at the eastern frontier, wisely stationed their army in the western part of the Delta, where, if defeated, they could retire into Libya; and, if successful, they could place their enemies in

---

1 Jer. xxxvii., 5, 7, 11. 2 Is. xliii., 7, &c. 3 Comp. Hosea viii., 13; ix., 3, 6. 4 Herod. ii., 161, et seqq.; Diod. i., 88. 5 Jer. xlv., 30. 6 Ezek. xxix., xxx., xxxi., xxxii. 7 Herod. i., 77. 8 Comp. Herod. ii., 175, 176. 9 Ezek. xxx., 15. 10 Herod. iii., 16. 11 A burnt mummy was found with this queen's sarcophagus. 12 Diod. i., 95. 13 Ancient Egyptians, vol. I., p. 199. 14 Herod. vii., 1. 15 Id. vii., 7, 8. a most dangerous position. They joined battle near Papremis, the city of the Egyptian Mars, and the Persians were disastrously routed. The Athenians rendered great services, but the fortune of the day was decided by the valour of Inaros, who mortally wounded Achaemenes in single combat. The Athenians pursued the fugitive Persians by water, and blockaded them in the castle of Memphis. Artaxerxes then despatched a second expedition, under Megabyzus, the son of Zopyrus and Artabazus, which, with the remains of the army of Achaemenes, appears to have exceeded in magnitude that unfortunate force. The Egyptians and Greeks advanced from Memphis, where they were still engaged in the siege of the castle, and were routed by the Persians in a battle, in which Inaros was wounded by Megabyzus. Having retreated to the island Prosopitis, the defeated forces maintained themselves for more than a year, until the Persians, having partly at least, cut off the water which formed their best defence, forced them to capitulate. Inaros surrendered, on condition that his life should be spared—an engagement that was broken after he had been five years a captive, and he was crucified to gratify the revenge of Amytis, the mother of Achaemenes. Amyrtaeus, more fortunate than his colleague, escaped to the fens, where, in the island of Elbo, he defied all attempts of the Persians to reduce him. The warlike inhabitants of that part of Egypt warmly supported his cause, and their maritime position ensured them the succour of the Athenians. Artaxerxes Longimanus granted some privileges to the conquered; and, in particular, made Thannyris, the son of Inaros and Panisiris, the son of Amyrtaeus, governors; thus in a manner causing them to succeed their fathers. Early in the reign of Darius Nothus, after a long interval of rest, Egypt became again disturbed, and in his tenth year (B.C. 414) successfully asserted its independence. The details of the struggle are not known to us; all that can be said with certainty is that Amyrtaeus, the Saite, was proclaimed king, and was the first of a short series of Egyptian monarchs. Some maintain that this could not have been the same as he who fled to the marshes, and that such was the case cannot indeed be proved; yet there is nothing improbable in the supposition that he had never been subdued, especially as we hear of him as late as B.C. 450, and sixty-four years of active life cannot be regarded as unparalleled in history.

The rule of Amyrtaeus, the sole king of the Twenty-eighth Dynasty, does not seem to have been marked by events of importance. After having governed six years, he was succeeded by the first king of the Twenty-ninth Dynasty. From this period until the final extinction of the Egyptian kingdom considerable difficulties beset our inquiries from the conflicting statements of historians. There will not be space in the present article to do more than indicate the most probable view of these questions, which do not affect the few great events of the period. The first of the Mendesians (B.C. 408), Neferites or Nephebus, ruled tranquilly for six years, unmolested by the Persians, whom he opposed by aiding their enemies the Greeks. His name, written Nefaurat, is found in hieroglyphics. Achoris or Aekoris, the Hakori of the monuments (B.C. 402), governed for 13 years or more prosperously. He made great efforts to repel the advance of the Persians, and raised a force of mercenaries, of which he gave the command to the Athenian general, Chabrias. Many sculptures attest the happiness of Egypt during this time of peace. Two kings, of whom nothing is known, followed Achoris, ruling for a year and four months; and with the second of them the dynasty came to a close, unless Eusebius be right in adding a third king, with a rule of one year.

A new line, the Thirty-first Dynasty, of Schemynte kings, succeeded to the supreme power. The first of this dynasty, Nectanebes I., called in the hieroglyphic inscriptions Nekht Nebti. His accession may be probably placed in the year B.C. 380, and he at once began to take vigorous measures to defend the kingdom against the Persians, who, under the powerful satrap Pharnabazus, were making formidable preparations to reduce it. The Athenians, with characteristic baseness, deserted his cause; and having sent for Chabrias from Egypt, despatched another eminent general, Iphicrates, to command the Greeks who served under the Persians. The king of Egypt, unaided by foreign troops, made the best disposition of his forces, and strengthened all assailable points. In the year B.C. 373, the Persians entered Egypt, led by Pharnabazus and Iphicrates, and finding Pelusium too strong for them, landed a force at the Mendesian mouth of the Nile, and captured the fort which defended it. But this success did not endure. The generals differed as to the plan of campaign, and Nectanebes worsted the enemy in several skirmishes and also in a battle. The difficulties of their position were increased by the overflow of the Nile. Iphicrates fled secretly thence by sea, and Pharnabazus was compelled to make a disgraceful retreat. This expedition is of no little importance, as it shows that the Egyptians, without foreign aid, on at least one occasion, both outmanoeuvred and defeated a powerful Greek force, acting with a great Persian army; and serves to warn us against believing what the Greek historians, with the inordinate vanity of their nation, tell us on so many occasions, that the preservation of the Egyptian kingdom was owing to the bravery of their mercenary troops. During the rest of the reign of Nectanebes Egypt remained unmolested, and the king repaired or beautified the temples.

Tachos, or Teos, succeeded Nectanebes I., in about the year B.C. 361. His first care was to take advantage of the distracted state of the Persian empire, and to raise an army and fleet by which to recover the influence of Egypt in Syria. The command of the fleet he gave to Chabrias, the Athenian, and that of the Greek mercenaries he intrusted to the celebrated Agesilaus, king of Sparta, while he himself was general-in-chief. Agesilaus was displeased that such a subordinate command had been bestowed upon him, and his enmity had no little share in the subsequent misfortunes of Tachos, which were as much owing to the friendly counsels of Chabrias. In order to raise money for the prosecution of the war, it became necessary to tax the inhabitants of Egypt heavily; and this, combined with the obnoxious character of the taxes, and the unfair extortion practised towards the priests, aroused the national discontent. When the king was already in Phoenicia, his brother Nectanebes, whom he had left to govern Egypt, plotted against him; and persuaded his own son, of the same name as himself, who was at the head of some forces in Syria, to try for the supreme power. Agesilaus was gained over by the usurper, and Chabrias was probably recalled by the Athenians, while the Egyptian forces deserted their king. Tachos could only flee, but his true character is shown by his immediately repairing to Artaxerxes Mnemon. The king of Persia, following the national policy, both received the fugitive well, and projected an expedition against Egypt under his command; but neither lived to see this design carried out, and Tachos is said to have died a victim to the consequences of the luxury of the Persian court.

In the meantime Nectanebes II. (B.C. 359) established Nectanebes II. himself on the throne by the aid of Agesilaus. A Mende- sian leader, whom Tachos had chosen for his successor, had raised a large though unwarlike force and proclaimed him- self king; but after a sanguinary contest, the king of Sparta and Nectanebes put him to the rout, and Egypt was thus tranquilized. These intestine struggles, however, had greatly contributed to the fall of Egypt, and may be partly, at least, ascribed to the turbulent mercenaries whose policy must be condemned, even if we judge, as alone we can, from the partial accounts of their countrymen, the Greek historians, and those who drew their information from them. Had it not been for this civil war, although the expedition into Syria might have been unsuccessful, Egypt would have retained strength enough to withstand the Persians for the few years of weakness that preceded the fall of their empire.

The early part of the reign of Nectanebes II was prosperous, and he resisted with success the efforts which Artaxerxes, or Darius, Ochus, made to reconquer the country, and aided the Sidonians and other Phoenicians in throwing off the Persian yoke. The indolent king of Persia, roused by these disasters, collected a great army and fleet, took Sidon, subdued all Phoenicia, and reduced Cyprus. Mentor, the Rhodian, a leader of Greek mercenaries in the service of Nectanebes, who had been sent by him to aid the Phoenicians in their revolt, deserted to Ochus, and the route to Egypt lay open to the victorious army. Nectanebes prepared to make a vigorous resistance, by strengthening every defensible posi- tion and collecting an army of Egyptians, Libyans, and Greeks. Pelusium was successfully defended by a Greek garrison against the Thebans in the service of Ochus, un- til Nicostratus, the leader of his Argive mercenaries, having learnt by treachery a means of getting to the rear of the main Egyptian force under Nectanebes which was encamped near by, not only executed the manoeuvre but maintained himself by defeating the Greek garrison of a fortress which sallied forth to oppose him. Then the king of Egypt, menaced by a superior army, partly in front of his position and partly in its rear, retreated with his whole field force to Memphis. The Greek garrison of Pelusium surrendered on terms to their fellow-countrymen, and the garrisons of the other strong places of Lower Egypt followed their ex- ample. Nectanebes, believing that he could not effectually oppose the invader, fled to Ethiopia by the river. Thus Egypt again fell into the power of Persia in about the year B.C. 350, according to the best authorities. From that time until our own days, a period of twenty-two centuries, no native ruler has sat on the throne of Egypt, in striking fulfilment of the prophecy, "there shall be no more a prince of the land of Egypt."

At this memorable point we must pause a moment to review the causes which led to the decline and ultimate fall of the native rulers of Egypt, after their power had been maintained, with little interruption, for more than 2300 years. The apparent chief cause of their ruin was the hostility of the three empires which successively governed the East. Un- der Rameses II. Egypt had attained its highest glory, un- der Rameses III. its position was maintained, but shortly after him its power suddenly failed. This is about the time at which Herodotus places the beginning of the Assyrian Empire. The kingdom of Egypt again acquired impor- tance under Sheshouk I., a prince, partly at least, of Assy- rian or Babylonian origin. His successors do not seem, for the most part, to have retained what he had acquired, and the country again lost its importance until the accession of the Ethiopian Dynasty. The princes of that line bringing with them a large and powerful territory, and being warlike and vigorous rulers, were enabled to check the advance of the Assyrians, and the third of them, Tirhakah, lived to the time of the first of those disasters which ruined the enemy, the mira- culous destruction of Sennacherib's army. Had not a period of anarchy followed the Ethiopian rule, the ascendancy of Egypt might perhaps have been recovered. The establish- ment of Psammitichus was the beginning of an active line of native princes, who regained much of the former power of their crown, until Nebuchadnezzar, the head of the Ba- bylonian empire, overthrew the army of Egypt, and de- stroyed its influence in Asia. Weakened by this contest, Egypt could not oppose a successful resistance to the push- ing force of Persia, and fell almost at once into the hands of Cambyses. For nearly two centuries the history is but a record of the unequal struggle of the patriotic Egyptians against the overwhelming power of despotic Persia, and of the establishment of native princes, who latterly succeeded in maintaining the kingdom for almost seventy years against all the forces which could be brought against their entrenched country. While such were the apparent causes of the down- fall of this ancient power, others may be traced which, though less manifest to a superficial reader of history, seem mainly to have occasioned the success of Egypt's enemies. Until the time of Psammitichus the Egyptian soldiers had held the post of honour, but that king not only introduced Greek mercenaries into the army but treated them with especial favour, so that many of the native soldiers revolted and all became discontented. This course of conduct, which was mainly pursued by his successors, destroyed the old mili- tary system without substituting anything stable in its stead, and placed the defence of the kingdom in the hands of untrustworthy though brave men. The adoption of Greek manners by the great separated them from the sym- pathies and support of the lower classes, and at a time when unity alone could render the country strong enough to re- sist the aggressions of Persia, disunion everywhere prevailed.

Ochus, having gained possession of Egypt, signaled his success by outrages which it is needless here to re- late. He did all in his power to insult the religious feel- ings of the unhappy Egyptians, and seems to have gone beyond Cambyses in his furious acts of barbarity. After a few years of Persian rule which are a blank in the history of Egypt, that country passed into the hands of Alexander the Great in the course of his conquest of the empire where- of it was a province.

From the time of Alexander commences a brighter pe- riod of Egyptian history, although its annals are those of kings, Greek sovereigns and it witnessed the decay of Egyptian nationality. As the enemy and vanquisher of the Persians, Alexander was received in Egypt (B.C. 332) as a deliverer. The Persian governor had not forces sufficient to oppose him, and the cities opened their gates to him without even a show of resistance. Alexander visited Memphis, founded Alexandria, and went on pilgrimage to the oracle of Jupiter Ammon, manifesting on every occasion the greatest respect for the Egyptian religion. He then organized the govern-

---

1 Plut., Ages. 38. 2 Diod. xvi. 40, et seqq. 3 Ezek. xxx., 13. 4 Ancient Egyptians, vol. i., pp. 212, 213. 5 The chief ancient authorities for the history of Egypt under the Greek rule, from the conquest by Alexander, are the following: Allian, Agatharchides, Ammianus Marcellinus, Appian, Arrian, Athenaeus, Cesar, and Histrio, Cicero, Diophorus Platonis, Diogenes Laertius, Dion Cassius, Josephus, Justin, Livy, the first and second books of Maccabees, Pausanias, Philo, Plutarch, Polybius, Ptolemy, Quintus Curtius, Strabo, and Velleius. Scattered notices occur in the works of many other writers; and there are some historical inscriptions both in hieroglyphics and in Greek. The dates of accession of all the Ptolemies except the first, have been taken from Ideler's Memoir Uber de Redaktion des griechischen Datums aus den Zeiten der Ptolemäer (Königl. Akad. der Wissenschaften, Berlin, 1834). It should be remembered that it is meant that the accession fell within the Vague Year, commencing in the Julian Year specified; thus Ptolemy Philadelphus came to the throne in the year Nov. 285, Nov. 284, which was his first year. Reference has been also made for chronology to Lepsius's Memoir Uber einige Ergebnisse der ägyptischen Denkmäler für die Rentensteuer der Ptolemäergeschichte (Königl. Akad. der Wissenschaften, Berlin, 1852), and to Fynes Clinton's Fasti Hellenici, &c. ment of the country, and departed to complete his subjugation of the Persian empire. For the remainder of his short reign, Egypt continued undisturbed, and though not well governed in his absence, enjoyed greater happiness and security than it had for a long antecedent period.

On the division of Alexander's empire, the government of Egypt fell to the share of Ptolemy, the son of Lagus, afterwards surnamed Soter, one of his favourite generals (n.c. 323). He was content for the present to govern in the name of Philip Arrhidaeus or Ariadus, the feeble successor of Alexander, but did not neglect to get together an efficient army by which to maintain his position. Not long after he reached Egypt, the intestine troubles of Cyrene enabled him to annex it to his government, and about the same time he made another stroke of policy. The regent Perdiccas having despatched the body of Alexander from Babylon in order that it should be buried in Macedonia, Ptolemy met the important charge in Syria, and having gained to his side the general who escorted it, carried it to Memphis, until a tomb should be fit for its reception at Alexandria. Perdiccas, irritated at Ptolemy's having thus gained possession of Alexander's body, which was in this manner a source of war after it had ceased to contain the ambitious soul, marched against Egypt to punish the governor. After an encounter near Pelusium, in which Ptolemy had the advantage, Perdiccas outmanoeuvred him by a night march towards Memphis, but was afterwards worsted in endeavouring to cross the Nile near that city. Many of the officers and men of the invading force now deserted to Ptolemy, and Perdiccas was assassinated by his officers. On this the army, with which were not only Philip Arrhidaeus, but Alexander Ægus, the heir-presumptive to the throne, submitted to Ptolemy, who allowed it to depart to Macedonia, having appointed two guardians for the king and prince. The governor of Egypt pursuing his advantage, sent an army which (n.c. 320) reduced Phoenicia and Coele-Syria; and probably it was at this time that he subdued Palestine. After a period of prosperity which was spent in adorning the new city of Alexandria with magnificent buildings, and settling the details of government with a view to the benefit of the country, Ptolemy was called upon to defend Egypt against the threatened invasion of Antigonus. Syria and Phoenicia were subjugated by the King of Asia (n.c. 315-314), but in the next year Ptolemy quelled an insurrection in Cyrene, and reduced Cyprus, in which he had before established a footing (n.c. 315). Having sailed from Cyprus he made a hasty incursion in which he inflicted some loss on Antigonus by taking cities on the coasts of northern Syria and Cilicia, and returned by sea to Alexandria. In the following year (n.c. 312) he advanced into Palestine and routed the forces of Demetrius, the son of Antigonus, at Gaza. Ptolemy thus regained Phoenicia; and Seleucus, who had been forced to flee to him, was restored to his government of Babylonia. Antigonus now marched against Ptolemy from Asia Minor, but the latter retired into Egypt, leaving his opponent the dangerous task of invading that country. After having failed in two attacks on Petra, Antigonus retreated, and a peace was concluded, by which Ptolemy resigned Palestine to him (n.c. 311). The death of Alexander Ægus in the same year rendered Ptolemy altogether independent, although he did not assume the title of king, except on the Egyptian monuments, until n.c. 306. All his earlier sculptures bear the names of Philip Arrhidaeus and Alexander Ægus, and the rest his own as king, none having been found with an inferior title; and it is therefore reasonable to conclude that he assumed in the hieroglyphic inscriptions the regal style immediately on the death of Alexander Ægus. Ptolemy soon after that event led an army against the territory of Antigonus, from whom he took many places in Syria and Caria, as well as the island of Cos; but he soon met with a signal reverse, for Demetrius engaging his fleet with an inferior force, off Salamis of Cyprus, almost annihilated it; Ptolemy himself escaping, though his son Leonatus, as well as his brother Menelaus, thus fell into the enemy's hands. By this victory Cyprus came into the possession of Demetrius (n.c. 306). Elated by this success, Antigonus marched against Egypt with a large army, but was repulsed, and retired as before without having effected anything. Ptolemy then assumed the offensive, regained Coele-Syria, and having united his forces with those of Lysimachus, Cassander, and Seleucus, joined battle at Ipsus with the forces of Antigonus and Pyrrhus. The latter were routed, and Antigonus, the most formidable opponent of Ptolemy, fell in the battle (n.c. 301). Having ruled in comparative peace for several years after this decisive victory, Ptolemy abdicated in favour of his son Philadelphus. His character was that of a prudent prince, generally merciful, of moderate ambition, and rarely guilty of political injustice. He warmly patronized literature, the sciences, and the fine arts, and showed an enlightened disposition by granting the Jews privileges which induced them to settle in great numbers at Alexandria.

Ptolemy, surnamed Philadelphus (n.c. 285), inherited Ptolemy a kingdom that comprised not Egypt alone, but the south II., Phocaean coast of Asia Minor, much of Syria, Palestine, and Cyprus, delphus, which had been recovered in n.c. 295. But after his father's death, which occurred n.c. 283, the first of those internecine struggles that disgrace the history of the Ptolemies broke out. The king's half-brother Magas, governor of Cyrene, revolted, War with and a war commenced, which after some years' continuance, Magas was concluded by a treaty by which the daughter of Magas was to marry the son of Philadelphus, and to receive as a dowry the reversion of the possessions of her father, to whom she was sole heir. The death of Magas soon followed, and Cyrene was after a time restored to Egypt. Two other brothers of Philadelphus were subsequently put to death on different occasions by him on the ground of treason, of which one of them was certainly guilty. In the eleventh year of Philadelphus (n.c. 274) he sent an embassy to Rome to congratulate the republic on having repelled Pyrrhus, and to make a treaty; and an embassy from the People visited Egypt in return. Except the struggle with Magas, the rule of Philadelphus was almost unmarked by war. A contest with Antiochus II., king of Syria, ended in a treaty by which he took to wife Berenice the daughter of Philadelphus, who acquired no military renown. His long reign was rather distinguished by the erection or completion of magnificent buildings, and the advance of trade by the formation or repair of ports and stations, and the completion of the celebrated Pharos of Alexandria. He followed his father's example in patronizing men of letters, painters, sculptors, and the professors of science, and continued to favour the Jews. Nevertheless his private character cannot claim our admiration. Without being warlike, he was cruel, as towards his unfortunate brothers, and in the destruction of his Gaulish mercenaries, which, however politic, was most barbarous. He was luxurious and licentious in his manners, and seems to have owed his reputation of a great king rather to circumstances than to character. In no sense did he ever show himself heroic, and had his dominions been seriously endangered he would probably have left us little cause to respect him as a warrior or a statesman. Having ruled thirty-eight years he left his kingdom to his eldest son Ptolemy, surnamed Euergetes.

Ptolemy Euergetes was at the beginning of his reign Ptolemy (n.c. 247) called to take an active part by the trouble that III., Euergetes his sister Berenice, the wife of Antiochus II., king of Syria. That sovereign having repudiated her, and taken back his first wife Laodice, was murdered by the latter, whose eldest son, Seleucus II., assumed the reins of power. By his, or rather his mother's, orders Berenice and her son were slain, before Euergetes could afford them succour. Euergetes, however, avenged his sister in a brilliant expedition, by which he secured much of Syria and Asia Minor. Afterwards Seleucus attacked Ptolemy, but was routed by his forces and those of his rebellious brother Antiochus Hierax.

The latter, however, when fortune deserted him, sought refuge with Ptolemy, by whom he was kept in custody until he made his escape, and perished in his flight. The king of Egypt next conducted an expedition into Ethiopia, where he made extensive conquests. But notwithstanding these warlike actions, Ptolemy continued the generous patronage which his predecessors had extended to literature and science, and was especially attentive in improving the great temples of Egypt, or adding others to them. These, like all the edifices of the country, excepting those of Alexandria, were in the native style of architecture, which, although it had undergone some changes, was still that of the time of the Pharaohs. His temples and those of the other Ptolemies and Caesars, excel many of the more ancient in size, though far inferior to them both in architectural beauty and in the execution of their sculptures. But they were not wholly raised by royal munificence, for large contributions from various cities, and even from foreign countries, aided in their construction. This circumstance, however, affords a strong evidence of the wealth of the subjects, and the freedom which they enjoyed.

The reign of Ptolemy Philopator (B.C. 222), the eldest son and successor of Euergetes, commenced with an act of infamy, in the murder of his mother Berenice, his brother Magas, and his uncle Lysimachus. Antiochus (III.) the Great soon attempted to break the power of Egypt in Syria, and reduced, by treachery and by force, the chief possessions of Ptolemy in that country, Phoenicia, and Palestine. Philopator having collected his forces, marched with 75,000 men against the enemy who now threatened Egypt. A battle, before which the soldiers of Ptolemy had been encouraged by the exhortations of Arsinoë the queen, was fought at Raphia, on the boundary, and the army of Antiochus was signally defeated (B.C. 217). A treaty was soon concluded, by which the king of Syria resigned his newly acquired territories. At Jerusalem, and after his return to Egypt, Ptolemy treated the Jews in a cruel manner, but afterwards staved the persecution. Towards the close of his reign, he murdered Arsinoë, his sister and queen, and died, worn out by his vices, and unregretted by his subjects. With no good quality but a respect for letters and science, Philopator's character was marked by cruelty of the basest description, and by the greatest debauchery, and with him began the decline of the Greek kingdom of Egypt.

Ptolemy Epiphanes, the son of Philopator, was yet a child when he succeeded his father (B.C. 205). His reign was ushered in by a serious riot, in which the guilty minister and favourites of the late king fell victims to the vengeance of the people. This disturbance was followed by a graver danger, for Antiochus the Great, the king of Syria, and Philip IV. of Macedonia, formed an alliance in order to strip the young king of his possessions. Antiochus defeated the forces of Ptolemy, and speedily acquired Coele-Syria and Phoenicia, as well as Judea, being supported by the Jews, who had hitherto been governed by the kings of Egypt. In this juncture those who ruled Egypt for the young king requested the Roman people to become his guardians, now that the very existence of the kingdom was threatened by such formidable enemies. The senate of Rome did not hesitate to accept a trust which promised so greatly to forward their ambitious views, and having recently overthrown Hannibal and crushed the power of Carthage, they felt able to support their client against the kings of Syria and Macedonia. Accordingly, they despatched messages to those sovereigns commanding them to abstain from attacking Ptolemy's dominions, and Marcus Lepidus, one of their ambassadors, became Ptolemy's guardian (tutor regis). Antiochus did not, however, desist from his enterprise; but being at length intimidated by a second warning of the displeasure of Rome, he entered into a treaty with Egypt, promising his daughter to the young king with the conquered territory as a marriage portion (B.C. 199). Before Epiphanes had attained his majority, the native Egyptians revolted, and were not reduced without a severe contest. They stood a siege in the town of Lycopolis, in the Delta, but the place was at length captured and the rebels subdued. In the year B.C. 196, the king was declared to be of age, and was crowned at Memphis. To commemorate this event, as well as the privileges which had been granted by the king to the people, and particularly to the priesthood, the priests issued a decree, of which copies, carved on stone, were placed in the temples. One of these copies was fortunately discovered during the French occupation; and, bearing an inscription in Greek as well as in hieroglyphic and ephoral, it furnished European scholars with the means of interpreting the ancient characters of Egypt. This tablet, which is now in the British Museum, Rosetta bears the name of the "Rosetta Stone." Three years after Stone's coronation, Cleopatra, the daughter of Antiochus was married to Ptolemy, in fulfilment of the treaty previously concluded; but her promised marriage-portion of Judæa, Coele-Syria, and Phoenicia, was never given up by the king of Syria, who appears to have warred against Ptolemy as soon as he became his son-in-law. The king of Egypt made scarcely an exertion to recover his provinces, and at length fell a victim to poison, having reigned 24 years with indolence, incapacity, and cruelty.

Ptolemy Philometor came to the throne of his father Ptolemy while yet a child (B.C. 181), and Egypt had again a minor VI., Philometor for its sovereign. His mother Cleopatra, who was worthy of her father Antiochus the Great, governed the country for the young king, and maintained peace with her brothers Seleucus IV., and Antiochus (IV.) Epiphanes, kings of Syria. Philometor, after a few years, had the misfortune to lose his mother (B.C. 173), and then, through the headstrong policy of his ministers, to become involved in a war with the king of Syria. Antiochus soon marched against Egypt, routed the army of Ptolemy near Pelusium, took Memphis, and gained possession of the person of the king. His younger brother assumed the sovereignty at Alexandria, taking the name of Euergetes (II.), although he was usually known afterwards as Physcon, an appellation which he received on account of the bloated appearance which his intemperate habits had given him. Antiochus besieged the new king in Alexandria, but ambassadors from Rome having arrived during the siege compelled him to withdraw, retaining nothing but Pelusium, which he garrisoned with a strong force. He took away great spoil, so that the expedition cannot be regarded as having been wholly fruitless. On the departure of the invader, Ptolemy Philometor and Euergetes made peace with one another, VI., Philometor determining to rule jointly, and Cleopatra their sister, who had taken part with Euergetes, became the queen of Philometor (B.C. 169). In the following year (B.C. 168) the restless Antiochus again invaded the kingdom of his nephews, while his fleet subjugated Cyprus, but after penetrating into the heart of Egypt, was forced to retreat as before by the Roman ambassadors. Not long after this, strife again arose between the brothers, and Physcon having expelled Philometor, the latter carried his case before the Roman senate (B.C. 164). That council decided to restore Philometor to all his dominions excepting Cyrene, which Ptolemy assigned to Physcon. In the ensuing year, however, VI., Philometor went to Rome to request the senate to reconsider their decision, and grant him Cyprus which was now in his brother's hands, and to this petition they assented. Philometor, however, would not obey this order, and the Romans ultimately renounced their alliance with him, and commanded his ambassadors to leave the city in five days. In the meantime Cyrene had risen against Physcon, and when he had subdued the people with difficulty, he again visited Rome to prosecute his cause (B.C. 154). Strengthened by a fresh decision of the senate, and otherwise aided by that body, Physcon, having raised an army, attempted to subdue Cyprus. His brother opposed him in person, leading the Egyptian forces, and having defeated him, forced him to surrender. Philometor most generously restored Cyrene to Physcon, and granted him other territories in the place of Cyprus; thus showing extraordinary clemency to which the history of the times scarcely affords a parallel, not less remarkable than the courage with which he refused to obey an unjust decision of the Roman senate.

Philometer was next involved in war with Demetrius (I.) Soter, the king of Syria, and lent his support to Alexander (I.) Balas, who slew his adversary in battle. Having, however, discovered that Alexander was engaged in plotting against him, Philometer aided Demetrius (II.) Nicator in overthrowing his father's enemy. In a decisive battle Ptolemy fell, having been carried by his horse into the midst of the enemy's forces, and thus terminated his long and chequered reign. If not a great king, he was certainly a good one, brave without cruelty, and merciful without weakness. Literature and science flourished under his protection, and magnificent temples were raised, or partly built, during his rule. Not the least remarkable proof of his enlightenment was the favour he showed the Jews, one event in whose history must not be passed by without notice. When Judea passed from the hands of the Ptolemies into those of the Seleucids, certain of the Jews continued to hold with the former, not forgetting the favours they had received from some of the kings of Egypt. Onias the high priest, and many others, having been expelled Jerusalem for this partiality, took refuge with the king of Egypt, who granted them land near Heliopolis, and permitted them to raise there a temple for their own worship. This contributed greatly to strengthen the Egyptian Jews as a party, and their importance did not cease until the temple was closed, not long after the destruction of that of Jerusalem.

The reign of Physcon (B.C. 146) presents a dark contrast to that of his predecessor. He immediately took the crown from his brother's son and rightful successor, who had been proclaimed king by his mother Cleopatra. Having married her, Physcon put her son to death on the very day of the nuptials; and the greatest barbarity was shown towards his subjects. He next repudiated his wife, to marry his niece and stepdaughter, her younger daughter, Cleopatra Cocco. At length, the people, indignant at his cruelty and oppression, rose and forced the tyrant to take refuge in Cyprus. His repudiated queen, Cleopatra, was set up in his stead, and he revenged himself by murdering the son he had by her. The queen and the Egyptians sent an army to oppose one which Physcon had despatched against them, but their force was defeated on the eastern border of Egypt. Cleopatra sought aid of Demetrius II., king of Syria, who had married her eldest daughter; but that prince was unable effectually to assist her, being recalled after he had marched to Egypt by a revolt at Antioch. The queen had no resource but to flee to Syria, and Physcon recovered his throne (B.C. 127). He soon found occasion to punish Demetrius, by setting up an impostor, Alexander (II.) Zebina, who defeated and put to death the king of Syria. Ptolemy then made peace with Cleopatra, who came again to Egypt, and was honourably treated as the sovereign's sister and former queen. He then supported Antiochus Grypus in regaining his father's kingdom by the overthrow of Alexander. At last his long reign came to a close, to the great joy of his subjects; and Egypt was relieved from one who was perhaps the worst sovereign who ever ruled that unhappy country. He was ambitious, extremely cruel, intemperate, and debauched; and, though not an enemy to literature, could not pardon the political offences of its professors.

Ptolemy Lathyrus succeeded his father (B.C. 117), ruling jointly with his mother, the ambitious and cruel Cleopatra VIII., La- Cocco. The kingdom of Cyrene had been already given by Lathyrus and Physcon, at his death, to his natural son Ptolemy Apion; Cleopatra, the younger brother of Lathyrus, who afterwards made it a monarchy. Cleopatra next expelled Lathyrus, because he would not be governed by her, and he took possession of the kingdom of Cyprus, while Alexander gained the throne of Egypt (B.C. 107). Lathyrus was soon invited to support IX., Alex- cities on the coast of Palestine against Alexander Jannaeus, and Cleo- the king of Judaea, and he conducted a successful campaign, tra Cocco, in which he defeated the army of Jannaeus in a sanguinary conflict. His mother Cleopatra, however, having taken vigorous measures, and accompanied one of her armies into Palestine, checked the successes of Lathyrus, and ultimately both sovereigns retired to their own dominions. The armies of Cleopatra were led by two Jewish generals, Chelcias and Ananias. Ptolemy Alexander, finding that he possessed nothing but the shadow of sovereignty, fled from Egypt. Cleopatra endeavoured to persuade him to return, while she laid a plot for his life, which he met with a counter-plot, and, as he arrived in Egypt, his mother was murdered (B.C. 90). After a brief rule the parricide was driven out by the Alex- andrians, and at length slain in a combat with the fleet of Charless, an admiral of Lathyrus. Little need be said of the character of Cleopatra Cocco, and that of her younger son Alexander I., but that the former was as strong in character as the latter was weak, while both excelled in wickedness. The history, indeed, of the later Ptolemies and Se- leucids presents an appalling picture of cruelty and vice, to which we can scarcely find a parallel.

Ptolemy Lathyrus was recalled from Cyprus to fill the throne left vacant at his brother's flight (B.C. 89). The most memorable event of this part of his reign was the revolt of stored Upper Egypt. The misrule of the preceding sovereigns had aroused the natives to make a fresh effort for their independence. Ptolemy marched against them, defeated them in battle, and laid siege to the ancient city of Thebes, their stronghold. The insurgents offered a desperate resistance, and for three years was the city beleaguered in vain. At last it was taken, and the bravery of its defenders punished by its being sacked and destroyed. Even the temples were not spared; and while we deplore the damage that they sustained during the siege and at the razing of the town, we are not displeased to find such records of a noble resistance in structures commemorating the ancient glories of the race. Nothing else worthy of notice marked the later years of Lathyrus, who left the reputation of an able and warlike, but cruel king.

The daughter of Lathyrus, and widow of his brother Cleopatra Alexander, Cleopatra or Berenice, succeeded her father (B.C. or B.C. 82); but her rule was of very short duration, for her step-son, Ptolemy Alexander II., was sent from Rome by Sylla Ptolemy to assume the crown and marry Cleopatra. On the day of the nuptials he murdered the unhappy queen, after she had governed about half-a-year. This crime aroused the indignation of the king's guards, who deservedly punished it with death. It is most probable that this was the Ptolemy who left his kingdom to the Roman people, whose patronage he had enjoyed, by his will; but motives of policy prevented their grasping at once at the prize. Ptolemy Neus Dionysus, commonly known by the surname XL, Au- was given him of Auletes, or the Flute-player, next ascended the throne (B.C. 81). The first part of his rule was passed in tranquillity, but he earned the dislike of his subjects by a vicious and disorderly life, until, in the twenty fourth year of his reign, he found himself obliged to flee from Egypt (B.C. 58). The immediate cause was perhaps the seizure of Cyprus by the Romans, who dispossessed his brother Ptolemy, king of that island, and made his dominions a Roman province. The Egyptians, incensed at this exercise of grasping ambition, pressed Auletes to demand the island, which had been ruled by the preceding kings of Egypt or a prince of the family, and, in the event of a denial, to declare war against the Romans. On the king's refusal to adopt this line of policy, a revolt was excited, and he fled to Rome from Alexandria. Immediately that the king had left, his wife and daughter, Cleopatra Tryphaena and Berenice, were chosen to succeed him as joint sovereigns. After having ruled for a year, Cleopatra died, and Berenice married Seleucus, surnamed Cybiosactes, or the Scullion, the son of Antiochus Grypus. He was soon murdered, by his wife's orders; and she took a second husband, Archelaus, who pretended to be a son of Mithradates I the Great, king of Pontus. Having reigned two years more, she lost her power and her life on her father's restoration, which thus happened: Auletes had previously learned by experience that the great Roman aristocrats were not insensible to the effects of bribery, and on reaching Rome he occupied himself in securing by this means the interest of the chief senators. Although he was thus far successful, various difficulties arose which prevented his gaining the assistance of a Roman army until his exile had lasted for three years, which he spent at Rome and Ephesus. He then went to Syria, being strongly recommended by Pompey to the proconsul Gabinius, and supported his proposals with an enormous bribe of ten thousand talents. Gabinius, taking the king with him, marched against Egypt, defeated the army which opposed his passage, subjugated the country, and restored Auletes (B.C. 55), who at once put his daughter to death. In this expedition, Mark Antony served as an officer of Gabinius, and thus visited the country which was to witness his future greatness and fall. From this time Ptolemy Auletes ruled without opposition until his death, which occurred in the year B.C. 51. He left his kingdom to the joint government of his eldest children, Cleopatra and Ptolemy, whose rights he trusted to the protection of the Roman people. Pothinus, the governor of Egypt, did not, however, scruple to set aside Cleopatra, and make Ptolemy sole sovereign under his tutelage. Cleopatra, although but about twenty years of age, acted at once with a vigour that was worthy of the better times of the Ptolemies; and having fled into Syria, succeeded in bringing together an army, with which she advanced to Egypt in the second or third year after her father's death. Ptolemy's army was sent to Pelusium to oppose her entrance, and, at this important juncture, Pompey, fleeing from the fatal field of Pharsalus, landed on the Egyptian shore, and put himself in the hands of Ptolemy's ministers. Forgetful of the benefits which Auletes had received from the great Roman in his exile, and in defiance of their plighted words, they murdered the guest—affording by this crime one of the many instances of the utterly corrupt state of the ruling class at that period. Caesar had lost no time in pursuing his vanquished rival; and not long after, disembarked with a small but efficient force of four thousand men at Alexandria. Being now rid of his fears of Pompey, he set himself to arrange the affairs of Egypt. The army led by Achillas, which had been sent against Cleopatra, returned to Alexandria, and closely invested that part of the city which was held by Caesar's force. A sanguinary contest ensued, in the course of which the famous Library perished by fire, and thus the learning which had formed the chief ornament of the capital received a fatal blow. Notwithstanding the smallness of his army, Caesar was able to maintain his position, and was strengthened by the arrival of Cleopatra, who reached Alexandria in disguise, leaving her army near Pelusium. The attractions of the young queen had at once engaged Caesar in her favour, and he had determined to make her sole ruler, to the prejudice of her brother. Ptolemy, feeling himself to be unjustly used, determined to regain the throne by arms; and a war ensued, which lasted for several months, until, on the arrival of reinforcements to Caesar's army, the young king was vanquished, and perished by drowning in an engagement, probably near the sea-coast (B.C. 48 or 47). Not long after this, Caesar left Egypt, having established the power of Cleopatra, with whom he associated in the government Cleopatra's young brother Ptolemy, who was then betrothed to her at a tender age. Egypt was so thoroughly reduced to order by these measures that Cleopatra did not fear to leave the country, and reside for a time at Rome with Caesar, whence she returned subsequently to his murder. Shortly afterwards, it is believed—but this is not certain—she put young Ptolemy, her brother and nominal husband, to death, fearing that he would become too powerful for her. Cleopatra did not take any decided part in the struggle for power which followed the murder of Julius XIII. Caesar, and on the fall of Brutus and Cassius, Antony summoned her to Tarsus, to explain this ambiguous course (B.C. 41). Mark Antony was as easily vanquished as Caesar had been by the captivating queen of Egypt. Thenceforward Antony and Cleopatra ruled together, and the rule of events of this period belong rather to Roman history than to Egyptian. The chief part of this time, in which a great empire might have been consolidated, was spent by Antony in pleasure and vice; and by degrees he lost his influence over his fellow-countrymen, which passed into the hands of the politic Octavianus. Defeated in the one naval fight at Actium (B.C. 31), Antony was forsaken by his former courage, and fled with Cleopatra to Egypt. When Octavianus invaded the country, they offered no adequate resistance; and both, in despair, perished by their own hands—Antony, partly because Cleopatra had given out that she was dead, Cleopatra, partly because Antony had perished; but both, also, to escape that treatment which they knew they would receive at the hands of their heartless conqueror. So ended the great Dynasty of the Lagidæ, after having endured for nearly three hundred years. Cleopatra was not unworthy to be the last of that great line, whose virtues and faults she combined in a high degree. In person she does not seem to have been very beautiful, but rather excelling in grace of manner and every winning art. Busts and coins would lead us to the former supposition, and the latter would naturally follow. Her knowledge was extensive, and she was acquainted with many languages. Literature and science met with her encouragement; and she endeavoured to restore the Library of Alexandria, by having transported thither the rival collection of the kings of Pergamus. Ambition was her ruling passion, and to it she sacrificed her maidenly honour and the ties of relationship. Although she was famous for the luxury of her court, it is most probable that she maintained that manner of life rather to govern those who governed the world, and to display her magnificence, than for pleasure's sake. The princess who ruled, not alone the affections, but the fierce wills of Julius Caesar and Mark Antony; who upheld a tottering monarchy, and made those who subdued it raise it to an empire; who fell at last through the strange weakness of Antony, and the treachery of his followers, and feared not to die by her own hand, must take rank among the greatest of historical characters.

---

1 It is much to be regretted that the carelessness of ancient historians, or their copyists, should have introduced a false orthography of this name, which is now almost always written Mithradates. The inscriptions of ancient coins, for example, of the silver tetradrachms of Mithradates the Great, some of which bear a wonderfully fine portrait of this king, as well as the etymology of the name, warrant the adoption of Mithradates as the true form. mans, who are ever ungenerous to their enemies, paint her character in dark colours, hating her because she governed their fairest provinces and their most renowned generals. But if we remember in what court she was trained, and consider the manners of that time and country; if we extend to her faults that indulgence that many have granted to those of Caesar and Antony; if we recollect her love of learning, and have paced the stately temples which she raised, we shall acknowledge her one of the greatest sovereigns of the ancient world, not inferior to Catherine of Russia, who, in a Christian country and an enlightened age, committed the same crimes, but met not with the same condemnation. Her death itself, praiseworthy according to the religion of those days, was well done, and fitting for a princess descended of so many royal kings.

When Egypt thus fell into the power of Augustus (B.C.30), its condition may be likened to what it was when Alexander acquired possession of the country. The intestine wars and misrule of the later Ptolemies had gradually lessened the good which their predecessors of the same line had effected. Taxation had increased, commerce had dwindled; and in one particular the future of Egypt was yet darker, for the three centuries of Greek rule had tended to weaken Egyptian nationality, by making the natives either Greeks or slaves. If Greeks, they scarcely looked to Egypt as their country; if slaves, they had no higher hopes than for a mild ruler. The system of government which Augustus introduced was not one tending to better the province and its inhabitants. It seems to have been framed so as to crush national feeling among either the Egyptians or the Greeks settled in Egypt, and to prevent the Roman prefect who governed the country from making use of its resources to render himself independent; and, at the same time, so as to carry out these objects without, as far as possible, diminishing the productivity of the province. The prefecture and the most important of the inferior offices were given to Romans alone, the rest were held by Greeks or Egyptians. The country was garrisoned and protected by two legions, part of which was stationed beyond the frontiers, and by a small force of German horse. The new rulers at first imitated their predecessors, in causing temples to be built, or in adding to those which were already raised; but after the second century of Roman government, these and other public edifices were comparatively neglected.

Aelius Gallus, a prefect of Egypt under Augustus, made an unfruitful expedition against Arabia Felix, but was afterwards more fortunate in punishing an incursion of the Ethiopians. Gallus not only defeated the invaders, but in his pursuit penetrated to Napata, the capital of Candace, their queen, and captured that city. From this time no events of interest mark the history of the province until the reign of Vespasian. Under him the Jews of Egypt met with several persecutions. They had previously been embroiled with the Greeks at Alexandria, and had been on one occasion cruelly treated for refusing to worship the statue of Caligula. But in the reign of Vespasian their temple, which Onias had founded, was closed, and they did not escape some share of the treatment which their fellow-countrymen in Judea received at the hands of the Romans. In Trajan's reign they revolted (A.D.115-117), and were not subdued until much blood had been shed. Hitherto they had held equal privileges with the Greek inhabitants, but at this period they forfeited these advantages, and were afterwards considered to be no better than the native Egyptians. In the next reign the Emperor Hadrian, during his inspection of the provinces, visited Egypt (A.D.130), as well as on a subsequent occasion (A.D.134). He endeavoured to benefit the Hadrian people by (as he himself says) renewing their old privileges and granting new ones. In the reign of Antoninus Pius a Sothic Cycle commenced in the year A.D.138, an Antonine event which is commemorated on the coins of Alexandria. Pius the preceding great period had commenced B.C.1322, a Sothic cycle again began its course, how changed was Egypt! The country was a province ruled by a race whose traditional history ascends only to a time after Egypt had already declined, the people were enslaved, the religion was on its wane, the priestly learning well nigh gone, the arts and sciences forgotten by them who had taught them to the western world. The few who knew of the earlier cycle must have watched with a melancholy interest the birth of the present one, fearing that it would live to witness the ruin of all they revered, and the fulfillment of that prediction which has come down to us under the name of Hermes Trismegistus, describing the state of Egypt for many centuries past with a painful truthfulness. Another Sothic cycle began A.D.1598, not long after the independence of Egypt had received its last blow, and that crushing despotism of Turkey had commenced which was to destroy not only the memory of the past and the happiness of the present, but the hope for the future.

After various troubles, principally occasioned by the turbulence of the Alexandrians and the inroads of barbarous tribes, a serious rebellion distinguished the reign of Marcus Aurelius. The prefect of Egypt, Avidius Cassius, having in reign suppressed a serious revolt, assumed the purple (A.D.176), Marcus and was acknowledged as emperor by the armies of Syria Aurelius and Egypt. On the approach of Marcus Aurelius, the usurper was slain by his adherents, and his party at once gave way, and were treated by the emperor with the utmost clemency. Not many years afterwards, Pesennius Niger, Pesennius who commanded the forces in Egypt, was proclaimed emperor in the place of the murdered Pertinax (A.D.193); but, after a short rule, was overthrown by his rival Severus, Septimius. The new emperor, perhaps because Niger was chosen by Severus, the Roman army rather than by the Egyptian people, did not use severity towards the province; on the contrary, when he visited it he bestowed great privileges upon the Alexandrians. Nevertheless, his reign was marked by the first persecution of the Christians of Egypt, the prelude to many others. Although we cannot be sure when Christianity was introduced into Egypt, it early obtained a numerous body of followers there, and by this period included among their number many of the learned and the powerful. The schools of Alexandria had gradually declined from the days of the earlier Ptolemies, until they had become the homes of sophistry and magic arts; but now the doctrines of the new religion raised a fresh class of learned men, and the very pagans gained knowledge by endeavouring to oppose them. In the next reign a great calamity befell the Alexandrians, for Caracalla, in revenge for an affront which Caracalla they had offered him, signalized his visit by a wholesale massacre of the unfortunate citizens, and by other acts of tyranny. Another persecution of the Christians occurred in the reign of Trajanus Decius (A.D.250); and about the Decius same period commenced those theological disputes which henceforward form the most remarkable subjects of the history of Egypt until the Muslim conquest. During

---

1 Antony and Cleopatra, act 5, scene 2. 2 The materials for the history of Egypt under the Romans are principally found in the works of the following writers: Abu'l Faraj (or Abu'l Faraj), Ammianus Marcellinus, St Athanasius, Cassiodorus, Epiphanius, Dion Cassius, Eusebius, Eutychius, Herodian, St Jerome, Josephus, Lactantius, Lucian, Nicephorus, Philo Judaeus, Pliny, Plutarch, Porphyry, Procopius, Ptolemy, Rufinus, Seneca, Socrates the ecclesiastical historian, Sorbon, Spartanus, Strabo, Suetonius, Tacitus, Tertullian, Theodoret, Theophanes, Flavius Vopiscus, and Zosimus, and in the Chronicon Alexandrinum. the troublous reign of Gallienus, Emilianus was proclaimed emperor by the troops at Alexandria; but after governing a short time with decision and activity, he was defeated and taken prisoner by the general of the forces of Gallienus. At the close of his reign, Zenobia, the ambitious queen of Palmyra, attempted to wrest Egypt from the Romans; but, although successful in a battle with the emperor's forces, her army was unable to gain possession of the country. Two years subsequently, Zenobia reduced Egypt to her rule, a little before her overthrow by Aurelian. Not long afterwards Egypt rose against Aurelian, and Firmus, who seems to have been elevated to the dangerous dignity by the native population, was proclaimed emperor (A.D. 272). In order to subdue this powerful rival, Aurelian led an army against him; and succeeded in accomplishing his overthrow. Probus, who had governed Egypt for Aurelian and Tacitus, was chosen by the troops in Egypt, at the death of the latter sovereign, as his successor, and speedily acquired the rest of the empire.

The reign of Diocletian ushered in a more prosperous period of Roman history, when stern military despots knew how to curb the turbulent soldiery, who had been so long used to make and unmake kings; but to Egypt the time of his rule was one of great misfortunes, marked by a serious rebellion and a terrible persecution. Early in his reign (A.D. 288) Egypt revolted, and Achilles was raised to the purple. A long struggle ensued, which was only terminated by the arrival of Diocletian, who took the strongholds of the rebels, and reduced the country, or at least the greater part of it, to obedience (A.D. 292). The chief of the insurgents, however, was not taken, and having again raised his standard after the emperor's departure, he gained possession of Alexandria. The revolt was of so important a character, that Diocletian returned to Egypt to quell it. Achilles having shut himself up in Alexandria, made a determined resistance; but at length the city was taken, and with his life he paid the penalty of his daring (A.D. 297).

Several years after this, the cruel emperor published that famous edict against the Christians (A.D. 303), which caused one of the hottest of the persecutions that tried the faith and awakened the zeal of the early church. The events of that time of suffering belong to ecclesiastical history, but it should be mentioned here that from the commencement of this reign (A.D. 284), which they call the Era of the Martyrs, the Copts reckon their chronology, looking back to this as the heroic period of the church in Egypt. Their traditions and history alike are full of narratives of the constancy of the holy men and women, of the monks and virgins, who suffered at this time, and of whom the world was not worthy. Would that the Coptic church—which has seldom fallen short of the early days of Christianity in steadfast adherence to its profession amidst many persecutions—had not lost the spiritual character of the primitive church. With the accession of the politic Constantine (A.D. 323) the persecution, which had continued until then with greater or less virulence, came to a close, and the Christians recovered their liberty, and were able even to hold themselves above the pagans. Then commenced the great Arian controversy, which was the means of bringing forward the zeal and abilities of St Athanasius, the greatest archbishop of Alexandria. Arius, who was a presbyter of the church of Alexandria, having first broached those doctrines which have since been known by his name, a controversy arose, which was referred to Constantine. The emperor wrote such a letter as one would write who adopted Christianity as a matter of expediency, and desired to use the church as a political weapon. He desired the disputants to cease from those questions, as though men of strong will or firm belief could thus keep their convictions to themselves, and refrain from propagating their opinions or defending their faith. The contest continued, and it became necessary to call a general council at Nicaea (A.D. 325), where Arius and his party were condemned. Subsequently, however, Arius appealed to Constantine, who commanded St Athanasius (now archbishop of Alexandria) to re-admit him into the church. St Athanasius refused, and after some years was, by the emperor's influence, driven from his see and from Egypt. He returned after the death of Constantine (A.D. 338), being supported by Constantine II., but was afterwards again deposed by a council held by Constantius II. (A.D. 341). The feelings of the orthodox and the remonstrances of Constans induced Constantius to restore St Athanasius to the archiepiscopate (A.D. 349); but when that emperor had become monarch of all his father's dominions he determined to remove the obnoxious churchman, and forced him, after a manly resistance, to escape from a post where he could no longer continue without the prospect of being dragged thence by the soldiery. An Arian, George, was after a while forcibly installed in the vacant chair, and the orthodox experienced a cruel persecution. On the accession of Julian the Apostate, George fell a victim to the fury of a Julian the pagan mob, and St Athanasius returned to his see; but by an apostate order of the emperor he was again banished. During the reign of Julian, the Christians of Egypt, although not actually persecuted, were treated with contempt, and all was done that could tend to weaken them and strengthen the pagan party. By Jovian St Athanasius was again recalled (A.D. 363), but in the following reign (that of Valens) he was once more deposed; but the emperor, probably yielding to the strong feeling of the people, who would have taken arms to restore him, soon recalled him. At length Death and he died in peace among his flock, and his memory is yet reverenced throughout Christendom, as that of one of the stoutest upholders of the faith in a time of great troubles. His firmness in refusing to obey the emperors against his conscience, his moderation in abstaining from maintaining himself by raising the people, his care for his flock whether among them or absent, and his patience when persecuted, all claim our admiration, and show us how it was that the Egyptians supported him with such an entire devotion. The emperor Valens appointed an Arian, Lucius, in his stead, and the orthodox again suffered a persecution at the hands of their opponents, supported by the authority of the state.

By Theodosius I. orthodoxy was not only restored, but paganism was abolished. The enforcement of the latter part of his celebrated edict caused disturbances at Alexandria, and the Christians seem to have exercised their power with somewhat of cruelty; but before we condemn them, we should remember what abominations had been practised under the name of religion by the Greco-Egyptians. At this time, however, it is very clear that much had already been done to corrupt the simplicity of the church in Egypt, and in particular monasticism had been carried to an extraordinary extreme. This is not the place to inquire into the causes of that institution, but it may be asserted, without fear of controversy, that when a large proportion of the population of a country take the monastic vows, and, fleeing from active life, establish themselves not as solitaries, but in settlements whether in the desert or in tracts otherwise uninhabited, we may fairly question the healthy condition of the church, and apprehend the injury to the state which has arisen from such practices in Tartary and China as well as other countries. During the weak reign of Arcadius, Egypt was agitated by religious strife, between those who held anthropomorphite doctrines, and the smaller party which maintained the opinions of Origen. In the next reign, that of Theodosius II., the archbishop Cyril and his adherents disgraced themselves by persecutions of the Cyril Jews and pagans. The former were expelled from Alexandria, and the latter maltreated, especially Hypatia the daughter of Theon, distinguished for her beauty as well as for her learning, whom the clergy inhumanly murdered, with it. Egypt. is said, Cyril's connivance or approval. To such lengths was intolerance carried by ascetic zeal.

Under the Emperor Marcian, the serious religious dispute which caused the separation of the Coptic church attained its height. Dioscurus, the archbishop of Alexandria, supported a priest of the name of Eutyches, who had been excommunicated for asserting the Monophysite doctrine of the Egyptians. Indignant at this interference, the Greek bishops called an ecumenical council at Chalcedon, and not only condemned the Monophysites, but put Dioscurus and those who held the same opinions beyond the pale of the church (A.D. 451). A new archbishop of Alexandria, Proterius, was installed by force of arms and not without a vigorous resistance, but after the emperor's death he was murdered by the people of Alexandria. The Monophysites were, however, again put down, and for a time the orthodox party remained in undisturbed possession of the supreme authority. The Emperor Basiliscus, himself a Monophysite, restored the Egyptian party to power, but on his death, two years afterwards, troubles recommenced; after a time, however, the Alexandrians triumphed, and Zeno granted them the right of choosing their own patriarch.

The commencement of the Byzantine empire, which is rather a chronological epoch than a turning-point in history, caused no changes in the condition of Egypt. The first Anastasius, sovereign, Anastasius, did not disturb the ecclesiastical system which he found in force, and the Egyptian or Jacobite party were unmolested during his reign. Although thus exempt from ecclesiastical troubles of any magnitude, Egypt was a prey to the forces of an invader. The Persians (A.D. 501) ravaged the country and menaced Alexandria, but being manfully opposed, retired at length, leaving cruel traces of their pillage. In the reign of Justin I., troubles in the church again arose, the emperor desiring to establish an orthodox archbishop, and the strife thus kindled continued through his reign. Justinian I., although he showed himself in many respects an able sovereign, had not the wisdom to see that a tyrannical policy in religious matters could only tend to estrange his Egyptian subjects. Accordingly he appointed an orthodox or Melchite bishop, who was followed by another; but the latter was expelled by the Alexandrians. Upon this the emperor sent Apollinaris as patriarch and prefect, with an armed force by which to establish himself. By opposing violence to violence he succeeded in putting down his opponents, but his conduct would not have been justifiable in a governor and was atrocious in a churchman. The reign of Justinian I. is further marked by the final closing of the philosophic schools throughout the empire, and the departure of the last of that long line of learned men to whose industry we owe so much.

The first event of great importance after this was the invasion and subjugation of Egypt by the forces of Chosroes, or Khusroo Parvez, in the reign of Heraclius. In the course of those brilliant campaigns by which the king of Persia stripped Heraclius of all his eastern provinces as far as the Bosphorus itself, one of his armies entered Egypt, and reduced the country without opposition (A.D. 616). This success was owing no less to the enmity of the Jacobites for the Melchites than to the weakness of the empire, as was the subsequent Muslim conquest. The Persians had the good sense to perceive that their rule would be strengthened by favouring the native party, and, accordingly they raised a Jacobite, Benjamin, to the patriarchate, from the office of bishop of the Alexandrian Monophysites.

After a few years of peaceful government, reverses overtook the Persians, and Egypt again fell under the dominion of Heraclius, who restored the orthodox party, but before the close of his reign the country was conquered by the Arabs, and was never again a province of the Byzantine empire.

A review of the history of Egypt under the Romans presents a melancholy prospect of rapid decline, with Egypt scarcely a single time of prosperity to enlighten its dreariness. The main cause of this must have been the national and causes character of the Romans, who, although they conquered it debravely, held firmly, and governed wisely, cared alone for the outward welfare of the provinces. They sought not to inquire into the early history and former greatness of a state they ruled, except to draw out its physical resources and increase its commercial activity. Thus they did nothing to raise the character of the native Egyptians, whose affections were still occupied with the story of their former power and the remains of their ancient religion. While the Romans thus neglected the Egyptians, policy made them treat the Greeks but little better, except that they allowed them somewhat greater privileges, probably to make their influence balance that of the far more numerous Egyptians, and thus aid in maintaining a divided interest in the country. In addition to this, Egypt was weakened by the exactions of the governors and other officials. Internal causes, moreover, had no little share in producing the decline of the country. The people of Alexandria, uniting the discontent of the inhabitants of a degraded capital, with the ambition of men of letters, and the restlessness of an active commercial population, were constantly involved in dissensions among themselves and with their rulers, which became graver with the decline of the empire; while the native Egyptians, more and more oppressed and subject to the incursions of nomad tribes, relapsed into barbarism, but regained somewhat of their ancient courage. Hence arose revolts which were quelled with difficulty, and which had they been directed by military genius, and supported by an undivided people, would have restored the independence of Egypt. When Christianity acquired the ascendancy, religious contests took the place of political strife, until they became intimately connected with politics in the resistance of the Egyptians to the doctrines of the orthodox. Then national spirit was aroused, and the Greek and Roman parties, now formed into one, had to oppose the feeling of the whole country. The emperors generally acted with a short-sighted policy, and supported the foreign minority by employing force. It was found necessary to intrust the protection of the country to Greek or Roman soldiers alone, and thus when first the army of Khusroo and then that of 'Omar invaded Egypt, hatred for the Greeks, and the inability to defend themselves, rendered its subjugation comparatively easy.

In the year 639 of our era, the eighteenth of the Flight, Conquest Egypt was invaded by the Muslims under the celebrated by the 'Amr Ibn-El-'A's (or, as some of the Arabian historians write, Arabs, it, El-'A'see). Entering the country from Syria, at the head of only 4000 men, he besieged Pelusium, and took it after thirty days. This town was still considered the key of Egypt on the Syrian frontier, and its capture was therefore an important advantage which opened the country southwards to the Arab general. He marched thence to 'Eyn-Shems, the ancient Heliopolis, where he found the Greeks collected Battle at in force, and commanded by John Mukowkis, or rather Heliopolis, John the Mukowkis, or Gureyyg the Mukowkis, the governor

---

1 The years of the Muslim era are generally used in this portion of the history, as they are more convenient to oriental scholars, and are often impossible to convert with exactitude into the corresponding years of our era, when the month in which an event took place is not specified. The principal dates are, however, given according to both methods of computation.

2 According to the Kâma, "the Mukowkis is a certain bird having a ring of black upon white, like the dove or pigeon; also, Gureyyg (in some copies of the text) the son of Meeku (in the printed edition "Meenee"), el-Khâdeo (i.e., the Cop), the governor of Misr and Alexandria, and the surname of every one who held dominion over these two cities." Thus a kind of ring-dove seems to have been the symbol of the governor of Egypt under the Greeks, like as the hawk was the symbol of the Pharaohs. Gureyyg may be written Jureyyj; and it is necessary to remark here that as the Arabic letter corresponding to the English g and j is pronounced hard in Egypt, it has been so written in this article, except when occurring in foreign names. of Memphis, a native Egyptian. They offered a vigorous defence, but were put to the rout, and 'Amr advanced to the banks of the Nile and laid siege to Egyptian Babylon, a fortress of great strength, and garrisoned by a Roman legion. Here he received a reinforcement of 4000 Muslims, and after a protracted siege of seven months, he took the place by assault. In an enemy's country, and far from all supplies, the small army of the Arabs was still in a critical position, and unable to push on against the capital, Alexandria, when the enmity of rival Christians and the perfidy of Mukowkis decided the balance in their favour. The persecutions which the Copts had suffered had greatly embittered them against the Greeks; and, as Gibbon observes, had "converted a sect into a nation, and alienated Egypt from their religion and government." Mukowkis, who governed Memphis, was in heart a Monophysite, and had also withheld the tribute due at Constantinople; and both he and his Coptic brethren, after the first resistance, hailed the new invaders as their deliverers from the Greek yoke. On the fall of Babylon they entered into a treaty with the Arabs, engaging to pay to them a poll-tax of two dirhams on every adult male, and agreeing to furnish them with supplies and assistance while completing the subjugation of the country. Having concluded this treaty, and founded the city of El-Fustat, on the site of his first encampment on the banks of the Nile, with the mosque known by his name, 'Amr marched against Alexandria; and after overcoming many obstacles, and disputing the whole way with the Greeks, who conducted their retreat, in the face of a victorious army, with great ability, in twenty-two days he appeared before it. Fresh warriors continued to arrive from Syria to strengthen the besieging force; but the defence was as obstinate as the attacks of the Muslims were brilliant, and was protracted for fourteen months. At length, on the 22d December 640, the metropolis of Egypt, the first city of the East, capitulated; but it is said that this conquest was only achieved with the sacrifice of 23,000 Muslims. Abu-l-Farag relates that 'Amr, wishing, at the earnest request of John the Grammarian, to spare the famous Library, wrote to the Khaleefeh 'Omar, asking his instructions respecting it; and that he answered: "As to the books you have mentioned, if they contain what is agreeable with the book of God, in the book of God is sufficient without them; and if they contain what is contrary to the book of God, there is no need of them; so give orders for their destruction." The historian adds, that they were burnt in the public baths of the city, and in the space of six months were consumed. The conquest of the rest of Egypt was soon effected, and the various strongholds successively fell into the hands of the conquerors. Bahnesé (Oxyrhynchus), a town of Middle Egypt, is stated to have withstood 16,000 Arabs for several months, and to have cost them 5000 of their number.

'Amr governed the country with much wisdom for four years, but was dismissed by 'Othman, who appointed in his place Abd-Allah Ibn-Abee-Sarh. The latter reduced Alexandria, which had been retaken by the Emperor Constans II., and pushed his conquests beyond Africa Propria.

1 Abu-l-Fida, Annales Musulmici, ed. Reiske. El-Mekoon (Elmacia Historia Saracenica). 2 El-Mekeen. Eutychius, Annales. 3 This tradition is, we believe, only mentioned fully by Abu-l-Farag, but he was a Christian, and Muslim writers would consider it an occurrence of no importance. Abd-el-Lateef merely says, "here was the library which 'Amr Ibn-El-'A's burned by permission of 'Omar;" and El-Makrezees, speaking of Pompey's Pillar, says, "it is said that this pillar is one of those which stood in the portico of Aristotle, who taught philosophy, and that his academy contained a library which 'Amr Ibn-El-'A's burned by direction of 'Omar." See the Encyclopaedia in Egypt, vol. i., p. 473, et seqq. 4 See also El-Mukhammad El-Makkaree, MS. in the possession of Sir Gardner Wilkinson, cited in his Modern Egypt and Thebes, vol. ii., p. 473. 5 El-Iz-hakes, MS. 6 El-Makrezee in his Kudib el-Mouad'dah wa-Jatibar for Dhihr el-Khatat wa-d'Achir, MS. 7 For an account of his coinage, and that of his successors, as well as of the Ikhaideedeeyeh, see a paper in the Numismatic Chronicle, vol. xvii., No. lxv., p. 116, et seqq., July 1854; and plate in No. lxvi. volted and entered into a league with El-Muwaffik. It was apparently in an expedition against this rebel that Ahmad died, at Antioch, in the year 270.

Khumáraweyh, on the death of his father, was appointed his successor by the army, he being then twenty years old, in the days of El-Moatemed bi-lsh, and he inherited a kingdom extending from the Euphrates to Nubia. He fought a battle with the forces of the Khaleefeh, commanded by a son of El-Muwaffik (afterwards the Khaleefeh El-Moatedid), between Damascus and Ramleh; in which his army gained the victory, although, if we may believe Abu-l-Fida, he himself fled the scene of action in a panic, and his troops continued the fight without him. Ibn-Khallikán says that, when El-Moatemed died and El-Moatedid succeeded him, Khumáraweyh hastened to him with presents and asked him to marry his daughter, Katr-en-Nedj, whose name was also Asmi, to El-Muktefe bi-lsh, son and appointed successor of El-Moatedid; but that El-Moatedid said, "Nay, but I will marry her to myself;" and, the biographer adds, this, they say, he did to impoverish Khumáraweyh, in which he succeeded. In 281 he made an incursion into the Greek territory, and died in the following year. It is said that he was fearful of assassination; to avoid which he had trained a lion to guard him when asleep. His fears were justified; for he was put to death by his women, or, according to some, by his eunuchs, at Damascus.

His son, Geysh Abu-l-Askár, succeeded him. This prince was killed in about eight months; his youth, which rendered him unfit to govern, occasioned his fall; for he had discarded from his society those who were in favour with his father, and associated with none but worthless men. He was succeeded by his brother, Hároon, the principal events of the period of whose rule were a great tempest and earthquake in Egypt in 286, and a treaty which he concluded with the Khaleefeh, by which the provinces of Awásim and Kinnasreen were ceded to him. He reigned upwards of eight years, but gave himself up to pleasure, and was put to death by his uncles Sheybán and 'Adec, sons of the founder of the dynasty, the former of whom usurped the government. In the meantime, at the instigation of the generals of Hároon, Mohammad Ibn-Suleyman, a scribe of Lulu, advanced against him with a numerous and heavily-equipped army. Sheybán went forth to meet him with all the forces he could muster, but numbers of his troops deserted to the invader, and he was soon overthrown. Mohammad Ibn-Suleyman burned El-Katibé and sacked El-Fustát, reducing the women to slavery, committing many atrocities, and exiling the family of Ahmad Ibn-Tooloon, with all their adherents (A.M. 292.)

Having thus completed his conquest, and restored the province of Egypt to the House of Abbás, Ibn-Suleyman yielded the government to 'Eesá Ibn-En-Nasharé, appointed by El-Muktefe. He died in 297, and was followed by Tekeen El-Gezereé, under whose rule Egypt was invaded by the forces of Abd-Allah El-Mahdee, first prince of the Dynasty of the Fatimées (or Fawâtím, that being the plural of Fátimée), which had succeeded the Bencee-Aghlab in the dominion of Northern Africa. His general, Hubáschéh, having taken El-Barkah, advanced with an army of 100,000 men to Alexandria, where Tekeen, reinforced with troops from El-Irak, gave him battle, and defeated him in a sanguinary conflict. In the following year he was succeeded by Abu-l-Hasan Zékee El-Aawar El-Roomee, in whose time El-Mahdee again attempted the conquest of Egypt with an army under the command of his son, Abu-l-Kásim Mohammad; Alexandria fell into his hands in 307; its inhabitants fled to Misr, and the governor entrenched himself in El-Gezereé, on the opposite or western bank of the Nile, and shortly afterwards died. In this emergency Tekeen was re-instated in his office. He immediately strengthened El-Gezereé with a second moat, and intercepted the forces of El-Mahdee by the river; and being reinforced by 3000 men from Baghdad, under Moonas the Eunuch, he gave battle to Abu-l-Kásim in the Feiyoom and at Alexandria, and drove him back to El-Barkah. After rendering this important service, Tekeen was again recalled, and Hillá Ibn-Bédri appointed governor; but the troops revolting, and much sedition and rapine ensuing, he was once more despatched to Egypt, where he remained until his death in the year 321.

He was followed by Mohammad El-Ikhshed Ibn-Taghag Abu-Bekr El-Farghaneé, afterwards the founder of the Dynasty of the Ikhshedeens, who was almost immediately superseded by another governor; and for one year more Egypt continued to be a province of the Khaleefehs of Bagdad. In the year 323 El-Ikhshed again succeeded to the government. About this time little remained to the Khaleefeh the Ikhshedeens of his once broad empire beyond the province of Bagdad, and even there his power was but nominal, for Er-Rák Mohammad there, as well as in Wasit and El-Basrah, held the entire sheed authority. Khoozistán, Persia, Kermán, Rei, Isphán, El-Mossil, and the provinces of Mesopotamia, were either in a state of revolt, or nearly or wholly lost to him. Spain was governed by the Dynasty of Umeiyeh, and Africa by that of El-Mahdee; and we have seen the distracted state of Egypt since the fall of the Bencee-Tooloon. El-Ikhshed availed himself of these circumstances to throw off his allegiance, and possess himself of Egypt and Syria; continuing, however, to acknowledge the spiritual supremacy of the Khaleefeh. Shortly after he delated the forces of El-Mahdee, who had again made an inroad into the country; and in 327 he was confirmed in his government by Er-Ráké. In the following year Er-Ráké subdued a great part of Syria, and, having taken Damascus, advanced to the frontier of Egypt, where, after a very severe engagement, he was utterly routed, and pursued by the troops of El-Ikhshed as far as Damascus. There, however, the fortune of war turned against El-Ikhshed, and for a time he was deprived of the province of Syria, though he subsequently regained possession of it. During his reign, the Khaleefehs of Bagdad were daily losing power, and, in the year 333, El-Muktefe wrote to him lamenting his miserable state; whereupon El-Ikhshed immediately repaired to him at Rakkah with valuable presents, and offered him assistance, and an asylum in Egypt. About this time, also, he conducted a war with various success against Seyf-ed-Dowleh of Hamadán, who had attacked Syria. He died at Damascus in 334, in the 66th year of his age, and was buried, as were

---

1 Ibn-Khallikán, Kitáb Wafáyet el-Aynún wa-Anbá Alád er-Zemáa, sous Khumáraweyh; ed. De Slane, Paris. 2 El-Ishákéh. 3 El-Muktefe, Abu-l-Fida. 4 El-Ishákéh, Abu-l-Fida. 5 According to Abu-l-Fida, Sheybán only assumed the command of the army when Hároon fell in the battle endeavouring to rally his troops. 6 El-Ishákéh, El-Makrezeé's Khátib. 7 El-Ishákéh. Of this expedition, Abu-l-Fida relates (in the events of the year 301) that it was commanded by Abu-l-Kásim, who took Alexandria and the Feiyoom, but was repulsed by Moonas the Eunuch, whom El-Muktefe had despatched against him; and, in the events of the year 302, he says that El-Mahdee sent another expedition to Egypt by sea, that Alexandria was taken, and that he was again defeated by Moonas, and driven back with great loss. 8 Abu-l-Fida says that this expedition was commanded by El-Káim, who, having proceeded to El-Gezereé, passed on to El-Ashmooneya and subdued a great part of Upper Egypt, and being well supplied by sea, kept up the war with vigour; but that reinforcements having reached Egypt of twenty-five sail from Tarsus, Moonas gave him battle by sea and land on the same day, and completely routed his forces. 9 El-Ishákéh. 10 Ibid. 11 Abu-l-Fida. all the princes of his dynasty after him, in the mosque of 'Omar at Jerusalem.

Of El-Ikhshed's two sons and successors, Abu-l-Kasim and Abu-l-Hasan 'Ale', little is known; their weezier Kâfoor, a black eunuch, being the actual ruler. In the reign of the former, in the year 343, a great fire occurred in El-Fustat, which destroyed 1700 houses and much merchandise. Kâfoor succeeded to the throne in 355, and was acknowledged throughout Egypt, Syria, and the Hijaz. He ruled with great ability, and was a patron of literature; his name is celebrated by the poet El-Mutanabbi, who was his boon companion, and whom, as well as other learned men, he rewarded with magnificent presents. On his death internal dissensions respecting the succession of Abu-l-Fowâris, a son of 'Ale', presented a favourable opportunity to the Fatîmee Khaleefeh to renew the often-repeated invasions of Egypt.

Hitherto, with few exceptions, the most notable of which are the reigns of Ibn-Tooleon, Khumârzwîy, El-Ikhshed, and Kâfoor, the Muslim rulers of Egypt had not much benefited the country, or rescued it from the anarchy and troubles in which it had become involved under the Lower Empire. But the incidents of the time are so little known as to have been deemed worthy of more mention in this article than perhaps their importance would otherwise warrant. From the period at which we have now arrived, however, the annals of Egypt contain much important matter, and are so closely interwoven with the events of the Crusades as to render them deeply interesting to the student of European history. The rise of the schismatic Khaleefehs of Africa is a remarkable episode in the early days of El-Islâm, and most of the princes of that dynasty were not unworthy of their successors, the renowned Salâh-ed-Deen and his family, or of the Mamluk Sultans.

In the year 358 El-Mo'izz li-deeni-lîh, the fourth Fatîmee Khaleefeh, equipped a large and well-armed force, with a formidable body of cavalry, the whole under the command of Abu-l-Hoseyn Gohar el-Kaid, a native of Greece, and a slave of his father El-Mansoor. This general, on his arrival near Alexandria, received a deputation from the inhabitants of El-Fustat, charged to negotiate a treaty. Their overtures were favourably entertained, and the conquest of the country seemed probable without bloodshed. But, while the conditions were being ratified, the Ikhshedeecs prevailed on the people to revoke their offer, and the ambassadors on their return were themselves compelled to seek safety in flight. Gohar lost no time in pushing forward. Before El-Geczech a partial combat took place; several days were passed in skirmishes, and at length he forced the passage of the Nile a few miles south of that town, at the head of his troops. Here the Ikhshedeecs offered a brave resistance; the greater part were left dead on the field, and the remainder, taking what valuables they could carry off, fled from El-Fustat. The former mediators were now brought to intercede for the inhabitants and the women of the fallen dynasty, and, to the honour of the African general, it is related that they were pardoned, and the city was peaceably occupied. The submission of the rest of Egypt was secured by this victory; and all the Hijaz, including the holy cities, and El-Yemen, speedily acknowledged the authority and supremacy of the Fatîmee El-Mo'izz. In the year 359 Syria was also added to his dominions, but shortly after was overrun by the Karmatees; the troops of El-Mo'izz met with several reverses, Damascus was taken, and those lawless freebooters, joined by the Ikhshedeecs, advanced to 'Eyn-Shems. In the meanwhile Gohar had fortified El-Kahireh (the new capital which he had founded immediately north of El-Fustat), and taken every precaution to repel the invaders; a bloody battle was fought on Friday, the 1st of Rabeca el-Oswal, in the year 361, before the city walls, without any decisive result. On the following Sunday, however, Gohar obtained a great victory over the enemy, who experienced a reverse more complete than any he had before suffered, and the camp and baggage fell into the hands of the conqueror.

At the earnest solicitations of his lieutenant, who had ruled Egypt both ably and justly, with almost absolute authority, El-Mo'izz at length determined to remove his court to his new kingdom. In Ramadan 362, he entered El-Kahireh, bringing with him the bodies of his three predecessors, and vast treasure. El-Mo'izz reigned about two years in Egypt, dying in the year 365. He is described as a warlike and ambitious prince, but, notwithstanding, he was especially distinguished for justice, and was fond of learning. He showed great favour to the Christians, especially to Severus, Bishop of El-Ashmooneyn, and the Patriarch Ephrem; and under his orders, and with his assistance, the church of the Mu'allakah, in Old Misr, was rebuilt. He executed many useful works (among others rendering navigable the Tanitic branch of the Nile, which is still called the canal of El-Mo'izz), and occupied himself in embellishing El-Kahireh. Gohar, when he founded that city, built the great mosque named El-Azhar, the university of Egypt, which to this day is crowded by students from all parts of the Muslim world. The principal event of his reign in Egypt was the second irruption of Hasan the Karmatee. The vassal enemy, as on the former occasion, reached 'Eyn-Shems; but now he gained more advantage over the African troops. Although twice defeated in different parts of Egypt, and constantly harassed in his advance, the capital was closely besieged by him, and its defenders were driven across the fosse. Thus straitened, El-Mo'izz had recourse to stratagem, and succeeded in bribing Hasan Ibn-El-Garrâh (who, with a body of the tribe of Tei, fought with the Karmatees) to desert them in the heat of the next battle. The result of this plan was successful, and again Hasan was defeated and compelled to flee. This event, which occurred in the year 363, relieved Egypt of another invader, an ally of Hasan, by name Abd-Allah Ibn-'Obeyd-Allah (formerly governor of Syria under Kâfoor), and obtained for the arms of El-Mo'izz various successes in Syria.

El-'Azeez Abou-Mausoor Nizâr, on his coming to the throne of his father, immediately despatched an expedition against the Turkish chief El-Etkeken, who had taken Damascus a short time previously. Gohar again commanded Syria, the army, and pressed the siege of that city so vigorously that the enemy called to their aid the Karmatees. Before this united army he retired by little and little to Ascalon, where he prepared to stand a siege; but, being reduced to great straits, he purchased his liberty with a large sum of money. On his return from this disastrous campaign, El-'Azeez took the command in person, and, meeting the enemy at Ramleh, was victorious after a bloody battle, while El-Etkeken, being betrayed into his hands, was with Arab magnanimity received with honour and confidence, and ended his days in Egypt in affluence. El-'Azeez followed

---

1 El-Ishâkî. 2 Modern Cairo. It was originally called El-Mansoorieyneh; El-Mo'izz, however, changed its name to that of El-Kahireh, by reason of an omen at its foundation. The Khâlid contains a long account of the foundation of El-Kahireh, and of the three successive walls with which it was at different times encompassed. For details respecting this and the other capitals of Egypt under the Muslims, see the sketch in the Égypte moderne in Egypt, vol. I., p. 124, et seq., in which the author has availed herself of the valuable MS. notes of Mr Lane. 3 El-Ishâkî. 4 For a detailed account of the reign of El-Mo'izz, see Vie du Khâlid Fatîmîe Moazzîl-din-Allah, par Quatremère, Paris, imp. roy., 1837. 5 Abu-l-Fida. In 372 El-'Azeez again sent an army to Syria, and quelled a serious rebellion excited by El-Mufrig-Id. his father's example of liberality. It is even said that he appointed a Jew his wezir in Syria, and a Christian to the same post in Egypt. These acts, however, nearly cost him his life, and popular tumult obliged him to disgrace both these officers. After a reign of twenty-one years, of great internal prosperity, he died (A.H. 386) in a bath at Bilbeys, while preparing an expedition against the Greeks, who were ravaging his possessions in Syria.

Though El-Azzer was distinguished for moderation and mildness, his son and successor rendered himself notorious by very opposite qualities. El-Hakim bi-amri-lillah Abou-'Alee Mansoor began his reign, according to Muslim historians, with much wisdom, but afterwards acquired a character for impiety, cruelty, and unrestrained extravagance, by which he has been rendered odious to posterity. He is described as possessing at once "courage and boldness, and cowardice and timorousness, a love for learning and vindictiveness towards the learned, an inclination to righteousness, and a disposition to slay the righteous;" and this character is fully borne out by his many extravagances. Of his cruelty numerous anecdotes are told us, especially in the discharge of his functions as Mohteelb, or "regulator of the markets and of the weights and measures," an office which he assumed, and in which he became the terror of the inhabitants. But his cruelty was surpassed by his impiety. He arrogated to himself divinity, commanded his subjects to rise at the mention of his name in the congregational prayers (an edict which was obeyed even in the holy cities Mekkeh and El-Medeneh), and altered his name, which signifies "governing by the command of God," to El-Hakim bi-amru, or "governing by his own command." He is most famous in connection with the Druses, a sect which he founded, and which still holds him in veneration, and believes in his future return to the earth. He had thus made himself obnoxious to all classes of his subjects, when, in the year 397, he nearly lost his throne by foreign invasion. Hisam, surnamed Abou-Rakwak, a descendant of the house of Umeiyeh in Spain, took the province of El-Barkah, with a considerable force, and subdued Upper Egypt. The Khaleefeh, aware of his danger, immediately collected his troops from every quarter of the kingdom, and marched against the invader, whom, after severe fighting, he defeated and put to flight. Hisam himself was taken prisoner, paraded in El-Kahireh, with every aggravation of cruelty, and put to death. El-Hakim having by vigorous measures thus averted this danger, Egypt continued to groan under his tyranny until the year 411, when he fell by domestic treachery. His sister, Seyyidet-el-Mulook, had, in common with the rest of his subjects, incurred his displeasure; and, being fearful for her life, she secretly and by night concerted measures with the Emee Seyf-ed-Dowleh, chief of the guard, who very readily agreed to her plans. Ten slaves, bribed by 500 deenars each, having received their instructions, went forth on the appointed day to the desert tract south-east of El-Kahireh, where El-Hakim, unattended, was in the habit of riding, and waylaid him near the village of Hulwan, where they put him to death.

He was succeeded by his son, Edh-Dhakir (commonly pronounced Ez-Zahir) bi-lillah Abu-l-Hasan 'Alee, who ruled with justice and moderation for nearly sixteen years. In 414 Aleppo was taken by Salih son of Maradah; and although he was defeated and slain by an Egyptian force sent against him, a son, Shibli-ed-Dowleh Abou-Kamil Nasr, yet retained possession of that city. At this time also Hasan, of the tribe of Teli before mentioned, had made himself master of Ramleh; and indeed from this Khaleefeh's reign we may date the decline of the Fatimee power, especially in Syria.

In the year 427, El-Mustansir bi-lillah Abou-Temeem Ma'add came to the throne at the age of seven years. His reign occupied a long period, rendered memorable by the El-Mustansir's unparalleled troubles which befell Egypt. It commenced prosperously with the defeat and death of Shibli-ed-Dowleh, Aleppo was taken, the submission of the rest of Syria followed; and the general who had conducted the expedition against that province assumed its government. On his death, Moizz-ed-Dowleh, a brother of Shibli-ed-Dowleh, retook Aleppo; but the various fortunes of this prince and his nephew Mahmood, from this time, and during the calamities of Egypt, are too complicated and subordinate to claim a place here. In the western provinces, the rebel El-Moizz (the third successor of Yousuf Ibn-Zeyre, who was appointed governor on the conquest of Egypt), was punished by an irruption of wild Arab tribes in the pay of El-Mustansir.

In the year 430, the Fatimee Khaleefeh was publicly War be-prayed for in Baghdad; a remarkable event, of which the immediate cause was briefly as follows: Abou-l-Harith Ars-El-Bessaceere, a powerful Turkish chief exercising unbounded authority in that city, had fallen into disgrace, and received supplies of men and money from the Khaleefeh of Egypt; and while Togral-Beg espoused the cause of the Abbassee Khaleefeh, his brother Ibrahim Eynal revolted, joined El-Bessaceere, and defeated Togral-Beg. El-Bessaceere entered Baghdad, in which the combat continued to rage; and the unfortunate city was devastated by massacre and pillage. El-Mustansir was solemnly declared Prince of the Faithful, and the insignia of the legitimate Khaleefeh were sent to Cairo. The success of El-Bessaceere, however, was but transient: Togral-Beg had, in the meantime, defeated and killed his brother Ibrahim; he then entered Baghdad in Dhubel-Kaalah 451; and having despatched a force against El-Bessaceere, the latter fell in a battle near El-Koofeh.

A persecution of the Christians of Alexandria occurred about this time; and in 454 commenced a desolating struggle between the Blacks and the Turks, both of whom had become numerous in Egypt. The former were succoured by the mother of El-Mustansir, herself a negress, while the command of the latter was taken by Nasir-ed-Dowleh Ibn Hamdan, a general of El-Mustansir, more than once governor of Damascus, and at this period governor of Lower Egypt. To this man's unscrupulous ambition was due much of the trouble which ensued. After many battles the Turks succeeded in destroying the power of their adversaries, and their leader assumed almost absolute authority, while they not only extorted from the Khaleefeh immense sums of money and treasure, but even rifled the tombs of his predecessors for the valuables which they contained. At the same time the bulk of the valuable library of the Fatimees was dispersed by these brigands. But the very power of Nasir-ed-Dowleh threatened his overthrow. His sense of security in his position rendered him regardless of the support of the Turks; and when at length his schemes for the deposition of El-Mustansir brought matters to a crisis, a large portion of the army declared against him. Defeated and driven from the metropolis, he succeeded in possessing himself of Lower Egypt, and a terrible civil war raged between the contending parties. But an even heavier famine of calamity afflicted Egypt. For seven successive years the El-Mustansir's inundation of the Nile failed, and with it almost the entire subsistence of the country, while the rebels intercepted supplies of grain from the north. El-Makreezee informs us that El-Assar and El-Katfe were depopulated, and that half the inhabitants of El-Fustat perished, while in El-Kahireh itself... the people were reduced to the direst straits. Bread was sold for 14 dirhems the lb. loaf; and all provision being exhausted, the worst horrors of famine followed. The wretched people resorted to cannibalism, and organised bands kidnapped the unwary passenger in the desolate streets, principally by means of ropes furnished with hooks, and let down from the latticed windows. In the year 462, the famine reached its height. It was followed by a pestilence; and in the midst of these horrors, Nasir-ed-Dowleh advanced on Cairo at the head of an enormous army: he was induced to withdraw by the promise of large concessions, only to repeat the attack, and finally to make himself master of the city, after having inflicted a signal defeat on the Khaleefeh, who became only the nominal ruler of Egypt; a condition which lasted until the assassination of this powerful rebel in the year 465.

While these events were occurring in Egypt, Syria was in a continual state of anarchy and war. A distinguished general, the Emee el-Guyooosh Bedr-ed-Deen El-Gemalée, held the government of Damascus during these times; and now El-Mustansir wrote, recalling him to assume the office of Wezeer of Egypt. On the condition of being allowed to bring with him a veteran force, he, happily for the country, obeyed the summons, and to his talents was owing the restoration of order, and even prosperity which followed. By a massacre of Emcers at a grand banquet shortly after his arrival, and by numerous executions, he subdued all opposition in the capital; and in a series of brilliant victories annihilated the savage hordes who infested the country throughout its whole extent, having either been called to the aid of the contending parties, or voluntarily taken advantage of the universal anarchy to commit their lawless ravages.

In concluding this necessarily extended notice of the reign of El-Mustansir, the invasion of Atseez with an army of Turkmans, Kurds, and Arabs, in the year 469, must be just mentioned. Spreading devastation around them, they encamped near Cairo; and in the first engagement defeated the forces of El-Gemalée; but fortune favouring him in a second battle, the enemy was totally routed with immense carnage.

El-Mustansir reigned 60 years, and died in the year 487. He was a weak prince, solely given up to pleasure. El-Gemalée had governed with almost absolute authority and great ability, for a period of 20 years, dying only a few days before the Khaleefeh. While admiring El-Gemalée's talents, we cannot but condemn his severity. He built the mosque which gives its name to the mountain immediately S.E. of the citadel of Cairo (Gebel-El-Guyooshee), and the second wall of El-Kahireh, with its three principal gates, Báb-Zuweyleh, Báb-en-Nasr, and Bab-el-Futooh. These gates, which are very fine specimens of architecture, are said to be the work of three Greek brothers.

El-Mustaalee bi-lilah Abu-l-Kasim 'Eesa Ibn-'Alee succeeded his father; but a son of El-Gemalée, El-Afdal, had the principal management of the affairs of the kingdom. This Khaleefeh's reign is memorable for the First Crusade. El-Afdal had taken Jerusalem from the Turks in the year 1098; and a few months later it yielded to the Crusaders, after a siege of 40 days. El-Afdal arrived shortly after its fall with a reinforcement of 20,000 men, but he was defeated in the battle of Ascalon. Later, an Egyptian army, commanded by Saad-ed-Dowleh, was worsted by Baldwin, Count of Edessa, and the general was killed in the action. From this period, with the exception of some efforts made in the next reign, to the time of Salâh-ed-Deen (the Saladin of the Crusades), Egypt was too much occupied with intestine troubles to equip expeditions against the various parties who now struggled for the possession of Syria. El-Mustaa-

---

1 Quatremère, Memoires Geographiques et Historiques sur l'Egypte (Vie du Khalife Mostanser-billah), tom. ii., p. 296. 2 El-Makreesez's Khîset. Egypt.

Shawir invokes the aid of Noor-ed-Deen.

He quarrels with Noor-ed-Deen, and forms an alliance with Amaury.

Invasion by Noor-ed-Deen.

Egypt invaded by Amaury.

Alliance between the Khaleefeh and Noor-ed-Deen.

Of the short period which elapsed before Salih-ed-Deen's assumption of the title of Sultan, a few words will suffice. One of his first acts was to put to death the chief of the Salih-ed-Deen Eunuchs, and a revolt of the Blacks resulted; a combat took place in El-Kahireh, in the street called Beyn-el-Kasreyn (ladin) and the malcontents being worsted, the disturbances were quelled. Bahi-ed-Deen Karakosh, a white eunuch, who afterwards played a prominent part in the reign of Salih-ed-Deen, was appointed to the vacant post. This gave the Wezeer great influence in the palace, of which he judiciously availed himself. In 586 we hear of Amaury with Greek allies unsuccessfully besieging Damietta; and in the following year, Salih-ed-Deen conducted an expedition against the Franks to Ascalon and Ramleh; after which, a campaign year later, he took Eyleh. In 587, by order of Noor-ed-Deen, he suppressed the name of El-Aid did in the congregational prayers, and substituted that of the Abbassie Khaleefeh; a masterly stroke of policy to secure the adhesion of the orthodox Muslims. The last of the Fatimées was lying dangerously ill, and his relations concealed from him his degradation. He died without the knowledge of it, and with him perished an illustrious but unfortunate dynasty.

Salih-ed-Deen was thus relieved of the most serious obstacle on his way to the throne; yet he dared not throw off his allegiance to the Sultan of Damascus, but prudently waited for a favourable opportunity. Noor-ed-Deen's suspicions were already aroused, and he died while secretly preparing to proceed in person to Egypt. Salih-ed-Deen almost immediately proclaimed himself Sultan of Egypt, and inaugurated his reign with a series of brilliant successes. With the conquest of El-Mo'izz, Egypt again took an important place among the nations; and by the wars of Salih-ed-Deen it became the nucleus of a great empire. But military glory was not the sole aim of that prince and his successors; and the patronage they continued to extend to letters and the arts had the most beneficial effect upon the civilization of the country.

Salih-ed-Deen, whose full appellation was El-Melik En-Nasir, Salih-ed-Deen Yoosuf Ibn Eiyoub acquired his greatest renown by his campaigns against the Crusaders in Syria. As these belong, however, more properly to the history of those wars than to that of Egypt, they will be more briefly noticed in this place than would otherwise be necessary. The youth of El-Melik Es-Salih Isma'il, the son and successor of Noor-ed-Deen, and the consequent confusion which prevailed in his dominions, gave Salih-ed-Deen a fair pretext to occupy Damascus, as the guardian of the young prince, and enabled him to wrest from him his kingdom. He thus considerably enlarged his territory, made himself master of a great portion of Syria, and continued to consolidate his power in those parts until the year 573 (A.D. 1178), when Philip, Count of Flanders, laid siege to Antioch, and Salih-ed-Deen entered Palestine. The latter having encamped before Ascalon, his troops ravaged the neighbouring country, and set fire to Joppa, until at length Baldwin (surnamed the Lepre), king of Jerusalem, issued from Ascalon and gave him battle. The result was disastrous to Salih-ed-Deen; his army was totally routed, and he himself fled alone on a dromedary. After this, however, he gained some partial advantages over the Christians; and a terrible famine induced him, two years later, to conclude a truce with the King of Jerusalem, and retire to Egypt.

In the year 576 he again entered Syria and made war on Kilij Arslan, the Seljuk Sultan of Anatolia, and on Leon, King of Armenia—the Cilicio-Armenian kingdom,—both

---

1 El-Makreezee's Khitat. 2 Abu-l-Fida. Michaud, Hist. des Croiseurs, Liv. VII. The invasion of Amaury is related by Ibn-Shihab in nearly the same words as by Abu-l-Fida. of whom he forced to make terms of peace. Not long after his return, Salâh-ed-Deen departed from Egypt (A.D. 578) to prosecute a war with the Crusaders in which neither side desired peace. Their hostility was aggravated by the following circumstances; a vessel bearing 1500 pilgrims had been wrecked near Damietta, and its passengers captured; and to the remonstrances of the King of Jerusalem, the Sultan replied by complaining of the constant raids made by Renaud de Châtillon. At this time, the latter turbulent chief undertook an expedition against Eyche, and for this purpose constructed boats at Karak, and conveyed them on canals to the sea; but his flotilla was repulsed, and the siege raised by a fleet sent thither by El-'Adil, the brother of Salâh-ed-Deen, and then his viceroy; and a second attempt was still more unfortunate—the Christian captives on that occasion were sacrificed in the valley of Minâ. Having threatened Karak, Salâh-ed-Deen encamped at Tiberias, and ravaged the territory of the Franks; he then besieged Beyroot, but in vain; and thence turned his arms against Mesopotamia, and subdued that country, but the city of El-Moâl successfully resisted him. In the meanwhile, the Crusaders contented themselves with miserable forays across the enemy's borders, and made no serious preparations for the return of their redoubtable antagonist. The latter having been almost everywhere successful in Mesopotamia, took Tell-Khalîd, and 'Eyn-Tâb, in Syria, and obtained possession of Aleppo; he again besieged Karak, ravaged the territory of Samaria, and later received the fealty of the lord of El-Moâl, but not the keys of the city.

In the year 1186 of our era, war again broke out between Salâh-ed-Deen and the Crusaders. The Sultan had respected a truce into which he had entered with Baldwin the Leper, and Renaud, before named, was the first to break it. The capture, by the latter, of a rich caravan, enraged Salâh-ed-Deen, who despatched orders to all his lieutenants and vassals, summoning them to assist in the "Holy War;" and he marched (A.D. 1187) from Damascus to Karak, and there laid close siege to Renaud; at the same time a large body of cavalry under the command of his son, El-'Adil, advanced on Nazareth; and here a body of 130 knights hospitaliers and templars, seconded by a few hundred foot-soldiers, and encouraged by the heroic Jacques de Maille, marshal of the Temple, by their devotion, immortalized their memory. Only the grand master of the Temple and two of his knights escaped from the unequal struggle. Soon after, Salâh-ed-Deen approached in person, at or the head of an army of 80,000 men; and the Christians with their whole force encountered him on the shore of the lake of Tiberias. The result of the battle which ensued was the heaviest blow which had yet fallen on the Crusaders. Weakened by thirst, shaken by the flight of a part of their troops on the second day of combat, and overwhelmed by numbers, the knights fought with desperate courage, but at length were forced to the hills of Hittéem. A multitude fell in this bloody fight, and among the prisoners were Guy de Lusignan (the King of Jerusalem and successor of Baldwin), with his brother and Renaud de Châtillon. The number of prisoners is almost incredible; and the massacre of many of them is an indelible stain on the glory of the generally merciful Salâh-ed-Deen. Tiberias, Ptolemais (Acre), Nâbulus, Jericho, Ramleh, Caesarea, Arsoor, Joppa, Beyroot, and many other places, successively fell into the hands of the conqueror. Tyre resisted his attacks; but Ascalon surrendered on favourable terms, and the fall of Jerusalem crowned these victories. The great clemency of Salâh-ed-Deen on this occasion is chronicled by Christian historians, though it is but slightly mentioned by the Muslims, who took offence at the favour shown to the enemies of their faith.

After these events Tyre was again besieged; and when about to capitulate, was fortunately relieved by the arrival of Conrad, son of the Marquis of Montferrat, and the valiant defence of the town wearied Salâh-ed-Deen, who turned his arms against Tripoli; but here he met with no better success. Bohemond, Prince of Antioch, and at that time possessor of Tripoli also, was, however, glad to obtain a truce of eight months; and some strongholds (among others Karak) were taken. But now the fortune of war turned against the Sultan. The ever-memorable siege of Acre, maintained with siege of constancy by both Christians and Muslims, lasted up wards of two years, and attracted the attention of the whole Western World. At length the immense reinforcements received by the besiegers, and the presence of Richard Cœur de Lion of England, and of Philip II. of France, enabled them to overcome all resistance, and the standards of the Cross floated on the ramparts of the city. A horrible act of barbarity was here perpetrated, 2700 Muslim captives were massacred in cold blood, in consequence of Salâh-ed-Deen's having failed to fulfill the terms of the capitulation; and the palliative plea of the heat of an assault cannot be urged in extenuation of this enormity. Richard has been accused of being its author; but Michaud believes with reason that it was decided on in a council of the chiefs of the Crusade. On another occasion, however, that king was certainly guilty of similar cruelty.

After a period of repose and debauchery, the army of the Crusaders, commanded by Richard, directed its march towards Jerusalem. Salâh-ed-Deen harassed his advance on every point, rendered the cities and strongholds defenceless, and ravaged the country. Richard, nevertheless, was ever victorious; his presence struck terror into the Muslims, and he gained a signal victory over the Sultan in the battle of Arsoor. But dissensions among the chiefs of his army, and the uncertain temper of the commander himself, deprived the Crusaders from the attainment of their great object, the deliverance of the holy city; and when all the coast from Joppa to Tyre was in the hands of the Christians, and the army of Salâh-ed-Deen was threatened with disorganization, a treaty was concluded, and Richard set sail on his return to England. The glory acquired by Salâh-ed-Deen, and the famous campaigns of Cœur de Lion, have rendered the Third Crusade the most memorable in history, and shed a lustre on the arms of both Muslims and Christians greater than they ever attained in these wars, either before or afterwards.

Salâh-ed-Deen died about a year after the conclusion of this peace (A.D. 589, or 1193 of our era) at Damascus, at the age of fifty-seven years. Ambition and religious zeal appear to have been his ruling passions; he was courageous, magnanimous, and merciful; possessed of remarkable military talents, and great control over himself. His generosity, on almost every occasion, to the vanquished, combined with his faithful observance of his passed word, are lauded by the historians of the Crusades; the former brought on him much obloquy among his own fierce soldiers, and is a trait in his character which is worthy of note in the annals of a time when this virtue was extremely rare. While engaged in the conduct of his continual wars, he was not unmindful of the welfare of Egypt, and during his reign many public works were executed. Of these we may mention especially the citadel of Cairo, with the magnificent buildings which, until very recently, it contained; the third wall of the city; and the repair of the great canal called the Bahr Yoosuf, a very important and useful work. From the year 578, until the period of his death, he had not entered Egypt; but his brother El-'A'dil, and other princes of his family, successively governed that country, and the Eunuch Karâkoush, who also defended Acre, held a large share of authority.

The principal narratives of the life of Salâh-ed-Deen are, Bohadin: Vita et Res Gestae Sultani Saladini; Arab. et Lat., ed. Schultens, Vol. VIII. On the death of Salâh-ed-Deen, his extensive dominions were divided chiefly among his sons, and Egypt fell to the lot of one of them, El-Melik El-'Azeez Imâd-ed-Deen Abu-l-Fet-h'Othman. The grandees supported his claim to the throne, and he proved himself worthy of their choice. In conjunction with El-'Adil, we find him warring against the leaders of the Fourth Crusade. He reigned five years and ten days, and was succeeded by his son El-Mansoor Mohammad; his uncle El-Adil being compelled to relinquish the government of Damascus and assume the regency of Egypt. Disagreement among the sons of Salâh-ed-Deen had occurred soon after that monarch's death, and now hastened the rise of El-'Adil, who, by his military talents and other remarkable qualities, had excited the fears of even his brother. With the view of checking his growing ascendancy, El-'Adil formed an alliance against him with Edî-Dshîr, the Lord of Aleppo, and besieged him in Damascus; but coming to strife, they raised the siege early in 596. This attempt proved fatal to the power of El-Adil. He was pursued to Egypt, in his turn besieged in El-Kahireh, forced to flee, and El-'Adil was proclaimed Sultan. Having dethroned El-Mansoor, he speedily recovered Damascus from the hands of the confederate brothers, and Syria with Egypt acknowledged his supremacy. El-'Adil is especially known by his opposition to the Fourth and Sixth Crusades, the former of which took place before his accession to the throne. He repulsed the Christians near Nablus, captured Joppa, and encountered the enemy between Tyre and Sidon. He was there defeated with heavy loss, and Sidon, Laodicea, Giblêh, and Beyrouth were taken. But the Crusaders wasted their strength before the fortress of Thoron. El-'Adil raised the siege of that place, and although afterwards he met with a reverse near Joppa, his adversaries bought a dear victory; and, having come to terms of peace, they returned to Europe. In the year 600 (A.D. 1204) he departed to Syria with the object of securing Jerusalem against threatened attacks, and concluded a truce which he offered to renew when about to expire; and to prove his good faith, strengthened that offer by promising to cede ten castles to the Christians. These overtures were refused, and the Muslim army drove the newly arrived king of Jerusalem, Jean de Brienne, back to Europe. Those who remained then professed their willingness to accede to conditions of peace, and we do not again hear of El-'Adil in Palestine until 614 (A.D. 1218), when he was once more called thither to oppose the Crusades; but a serious invasion of Egypt by these troublesome adventurers hastily recalled its king, and he died of grief, it is said, on hearing of the advantages gained by them.

El-Kamil immediately came to the throne, and took the most energetic measures for the protection of his kingdom. In the meantime, the Franks' besieged Damietta both by sea and land; and notwithstanding every effort for the relief of the place, its garrison was forced to capitulate. El-Kamil summoned to his aid the princes of his family, and with every available man watched the enemy's movements. Finished with success, Jean de Brienne commenced his march on the capital; and with the characteristic carelessness of the Crusaders, he took no measures to secure supplies. His advance was stopped at the junction of the canal of Ashmoon with the Nile, where he found El-Kamil in a very strong position. Encamped on the opposite shore, the invaders depended for supplies on Damietta and its immediate district; but the inundation of the Nile gradually obstructed land-carryage, and El-Kamil skilfully availed himself of this natural ally, caused boats to be carried overland to the enemy's rear, and, thus cut off by land and water, they were compelled to attempt a retreat. At Beiramoon, however, all further progress was found to be impossible—the inundation had covered the level country, and the Sultan's boats blockaded the Nile. They surrendered, and evacuated Damietta, but not before Egypt had suffered severely from the ravages they committed. The city of El-Mansoorah was founded on the site of El-Kamil's camp, and commemorates his energy and sagacity. The Seventh Crusade was invited by the same Sultan who had thus suffered by an invasion of the Franks. In A.D. 1228, El-Alia Kamil invoked the aid of Frederick II., against his brother El-Muaddidah, Lord of Damascus, and, in consequence of this alliance, Jerusalem, with Bethlehem and the places between it and Joppa and Acre, Nazareth and the territory of Theron and Sidon, with its dependencies, was ceded to Frederick on the 20th of Feb. 1229. Between these two monarchs existed the most friendly relations, presenting a curious spectacle in the midst of the intrigues and hatred of their subjects for each other, and endangering their popularity and even their lives. After various expeditions against his brother and his successors, El-Kamil gained possession of Damascus, and died there in the year 638 (A.D. 1238). He was distinguished by military talents, and rare moderation, and was also a learned man, a patron of the arts, and a good king.

His son El-Melik El-'Adil the Younger, was declared Sultan of Egypt and Syria, with the consent of the nobles, and he speedily banished those ministers whose counsels he feared, and appointed creatures of his own. Oppressed by his tyranny, and impoverished by his extravagance, the people called his brother Es-Sâlih Nasîr-ed-Deen Eiyooib Es-Sâlih to the throne; and he deposed and imprisoned El-'Adil in the year 637, and, to replenish his exhausted treasury, ordered all who had received presents from the late Sultan to restore them to his successor. In the next year serious disturbances broke out in Syria; Sâlih 'Imad-ed-Deen, Syria aided who had taken Damascus in the reign of El-'Adil, formed by an alliance with the Franks, and purposed the conquest of Egypt; the hostile armies met at Acre, and the Muslim soldiers of 'Imad-ed-Deen deserting to the banner of Es-Sâlih Eiyooib, the Franks were routed. Negotiations for peace were then attempted, but these failing, the Franks were again induced to take the field by the cession of Jerusalem and other places. The king of Egypt, on his part, called Alliance to his assistance the Kharesmeees, who took Jerusalem and with the overran Syria. In the next campaign they were joined by Kharesmeees, the army of Es-Sâlih, under the command of his favourite slave Beybars, who was destined to play a conspicuous part in Egyptian history. The allied army met the Franks, eager to avenge themselves on the Kharesmeees for the horrible atrocities of which they had been guilty in the preceding campaign, and willingly joined by the Muslim princes of Damascus, Hims, and Karak; on the first day the battle raged with unabated fury from daybreak to sunset, and was continued on the morrow until the prince of Hims, having lost 2000 men, gave way and fled towards Damascus. The Christians maintained the unequal fight with great constancy, and were only vanquished after the greater number had fallen. In these encounters 30,000 men (either Christians or Muslims) were either killed or taken prisoners. Various successes followed this victory; Jerusalem was taken by the Egyptians, and Es-Salih laid siege to Damascus in person. The city having capitulated on favourable conditions, his fierce allies, enraged at the loss of pillage, quarrelled with him, and soon after joined his rebellious subjects. Damascus was reduced to the direst straits, but again fortune favoured Es-Salih. He hastened from Egypt, whither he had returned, and totally defeated the enemy. Other advantages were gained by his commander Fakhr-ed-Deen over the Franks in the ensuing year.

Although attacked by illness, the Sultan was once more called to Syria to quell fresh troubles; but at Damascus news reached him of the threatened invasion of Egypt by Crusade of the Crusaders under St Louis, and he travelled back in great suffering from his malady. Damietta, which he rightly judged would be the first point of attack, was strengthened and well stored, and its defence was intrusted to Fakhr-ed-Deen. On Friday, June 4, A.D. 1249, the French anchored before the place, and the next day landed opposite the camp of the Egyptian general, who offered but slight opposition, and in the course of the next night betrayed his trust and retreated southwards. His army was precipitately followed by the entire population of Damietta, and thus this important town with its stores fell into the hands of the invaders without a blow. Fakhr-ed-Deen nearly lost his life for this act of cowardice, and 54 of his principal officers were put to death. In the meantime the Sultan's illness gradually increased, but nevertheless he caused himself to be removed to the town of El-Mansoorah, which he fortified, and there he expired on Nov. 21, at the age of forty-four, and after a reign of ten years. He it was who introduced the Bahree Memlooks, a body of Turkish slaves, who composed his body-guard, and eventually usurped the supreme power. Their name Bahree (or "of the river") originated in their being trained and quartered on the island of Ez-Rédah, where the Sultan had built a palace.

The French were advancing southwards, and, notwithstanding the precautions of Sheger-ed-Durr (the widow of Es-Salih, who assumed the regency), were apprised of the death of the Sultan. Many partial actions took place on the march, and on Dec. 19, their army appeared before El-Mansoorah, the scene of the disaster of Jean de Brienne. Skirmishing continued until Shrove Tuesday, when, a traitor having shown the enemy a ford over the canal of Ashmoon, they surprised the camp and town. Very severe fighting ensued, Fakhr-ed-Deen fell early in the struggle, and the place was nearly lost, when the Bahree Memlooks led by Beybars furiously charged the assailants, and completely turned the fortune of the day. The morrow witnessed another battle, also disastrous to the Crusaders, and a succession of misfortunes followed. Toorán Shah, on hearing of the death of his father, travelled in all haste from Mesopotamia to Egypt, and having reached the camp, assumed the command. He had recourse to the stratagem which had proved so successful under the direction of El-Kamil, and cut off the supplies of the enemy. This, coupled with disease, soon reduced St Louis to great straits, and he sent to propose a truce, but not coming to terms he determined on retreating to Damietta. A memorable conflict took place by land and water, and St Louis with his troops surrendered themselves prisoners of war.

Toorán Shah now gave himself up to debauchery, of-

1 El-Makrezeen, Kitab es-Suleek, MS. Abu-l-Fida. 2 Joinville's Vie de St Louis contains an exceedingly interesting and generally accurate account of this Crusade, and to it, with the histories of El-Makrezeen and El-Ibâkî, we are indebted for this sketch of the period. 3 Hist. des Sultans Memlooks par Mokriti (Kitab es-Suleek), trans. Quatremère; Oriental Translation Fund, Paris. El-Bundukdaree is so perplexed and full of incident as to render a concise account of it very difficult. It commenced with the reduction of a revolt in Syria. The rebels were supported by a Tatar army under Hulagu, but Beybars was everywhere victorious, and Damascus surrendered at discretion. Having subdued all opposition in this quarter, he endeavoured to improve the condition of Egypt, abolished the exorbitant imposts under which the people groaned, and welcomed to his court Ahmad, son of the Khalcefh Edli-Dhahir, who was declared Prince of the Faithful with the title of El-Mustansir bi-Islam, and furnished with a small force, by which he hoped to establish himself in Baghdad. He was, however, repulsed by the Tatars and put to death. The succeeding line of Kha-leelehs, possessed of spiritual, but no temporal authority, remained at the court of the Memlook Sultans until the Turkish conquest. From this time, Beybars continued to extend and confirm his rule. His first expedition was to Syria against the Christians, and the Church of the Nativity at Nazareth was destroyed. Thence he went to the fortified town of Karak, which had more than once resisted the attacks of Salah-ed-Din, but opened its gates to the Memlook conqueror, and its territory was added to his dominions. A great scarcity afflicted Cairo in 662, and Beybars threw open the government stores, and strove in every way to alleviate the sufferings of his subjects.

In 663, he again entered Syria, and took Caesarea and Ursoof; and in the next year he commenced a series of campaigns against the Christians, notwithstanding the earnest remonstrances of the kings of France, of Arragon, and of Armenia. To raise the necessary funds for the expenses of the war, he took occasion of the occurrence of many incendiary fires in Cairo, during his absence on this war, to mullet their co-religionists of the sum of 500,000 decums, ostensibly to repair the damage caused by these fires. He threatened Acre, and took Safad; and relieved from the apprehensions caused by the advance of the Tatars by the death of Hulagu, and the retreat of his army, Beybars despatched a force which effected the conquest of Armenia, and penetrated to the borders of Anatolia; a transient success which was speedily annulled by the advent of Akaba Khan, the son of Hulagu. In the next war, Beybars again attacked the Christians, burning their churches and enslaving the people. He took Antioch, with horrible carnage, advanced to Hims, and Hamsh, and thence returned to Cairo. After a campaign against the Tatars, he ravaged the country around Acre (which place appears to have been the constant object of his attacks) and the "Assassins," so long the terror of dynasties, submitted to his power. About this time the Tatars renewed their inroads and besieged Beyrah; and in the year 671 Beybars took the field against them with two armies, one commanded by himself in person, the other by Kaloon El-Elfece. In the battle of Beyrah the Sultan was completely victorious, and the Tatars fled to the mountains of Kurdistan. In consequence of this victory, Armenia again fell into his hands, and was given up to pillage. Akaba Khan afterwards was again repulsed at Beyrah. Nubia also about this time acknowledged the authority of Beybars. He died at Damascus in the year 676, after another expedition against Anatolia, attended with various success, in which the Tatars were league against him. Great military talents, coupled with the most indefatigable activity, Beybars certainly possessed, but he used his conquests unmercifully; on many occasions he ravaged whole provinces, and sacked many towns, putting great numbers of the inhabitants to the sword. The melancholy annals of the Crusades bear ample testimony to this fact; and while the example of other monarchs, and of the Franks themselves, may be urged as some palliation, nevertheless his barbarity remains an indelible blot on his character. In Egypt he endeavoured to reform abuses and suppress vice; and numerous public works were executed by his orders. Damietta was razed and rebuilt farther inland; and the mouth of the Nile was protected by a boom against sudden invasion. He repaired the fortifications of Alexandria, and the Pharos, the mosque El-Azhar in Cairo, and the walls of the citadel, and built the great mosque known by his name to the north of the city.

The son and successor of Beybars, El-Melik Es-Sa'eed Barakah Khan, was exiled after a short reign, and a younger Barakah brother, El-A'dil Selami, raised to the throne; Kaloon Khan, El-Elfece acting as regent. This Memlook had married a El-A'dil daughter of Beybars, and was consequently nearly allied to the Sultan. He, nevertheless, conspired against him, and El-Mansoor was soon proclaimed king by the title of El-Melik El-Kaloon Mansoor. Distinguished in former wars, he achieved many successes during his reign of ten years. On his accession he despatched an army to reduce disturbances in Syria, and took Damascus. Peace was thus established in that province; and in the year 680, he, in person, defeated a very superior force of Tatars, and raised the siege of Rahabeh. Later in his reign (in the year 688) he besieged Tripoli, which for nearly two centuries had been in the possession of the Christians, and was very rich and flourishing. The town was sacked, and its unfortunate inhabitants put to the sword. His memory is still preserved in Cairo by his hospital and mad-house, adjoining his fine mosque in the principal street of the city. This charitable institution he is said to have founded for expiation of great severity towards the citizens, in enforcing an obnoxious edict. His son, El-Ashraf Khaleel, rendered himself famous by El-Ashraf the siege and capture (in the year 690) of Acre, the last Khaleel stronghold of the Crusaders in Syria. Many thousands of its inhabitants were massacred; and 10,000 who presented themselves before the Sultan and demanded quarter were slaughtered in cold blood. He also took Erzeroom in 691, and two years after was assassinated in Egypt.

El-Melik En-Nasir Mohammad, another son of Kaloon, En-Nasir succeeded him at the age of nine years. The regent Ket-baghia, however, followed the example of Kaloon, and usurped the sovereignty, with the title of El-Melik El-Kaloon 'A'dil. Pestilence and famine were followed by war with the Tatars, who again ravaged Syria. Ket-baghia despatched an army against them, but the valour of his troops was unable to withstand overpowering numbers, and Lagen Kaloon's governor in Syria, was driven into Egypt with an immense crowd of fugitives. Ket-baghia was deposed on the allegation that he had not commanded in person, and El-Melik El-Mansoor Lagen was elevated in his El-Manstead. In little more than two years this king fell in a soor La-conspiracy. His character was amiable, and he deserved a better return for the equity and kindness he showed to his subjects.

A short period of confusion then ensued, during which an Emeer was proclaimed king. En-Nasir Mohammad, however, was at length recalled from his exile at Karak, and elected Sultan in the year 698. Having firmly established himself in Egypt, he led an army against the Tatars, but met with a severe reverse in the plains of Hims; a second expedition proved more fortunate, and this general, then only nineteen years of age, gained a bloody and decisive victory over the enemy near Damascus, in the year 702. The battle lasted three days; during the first two the result was not decisive, although En-Nasir held the field; on the third day the Tatars were utterly routed and pursued for many hours. The Sultan on his entry into Cairo after this achievement, was preceded by 1600 prisoners, each one carrying the head of a comrade slain in the combat, and 1000 other heads were borne on lances in the procession. En-Nasir reigned until the year 708, when he went to Karak and voluntarily abdicated; he had long struggled against the control of two powerful Emirs, Beybars and Silar; and in despair of throwing off their ascendancy, he then openly yielded the reins of government to those who had long really held them. Since this prince's accession, the Christians and Jews of Egypt suffered the most severe persecution (excepting that of El-Hakim) which had yet befallen them. In the year 700, they were ordered to wear, respectively, blue and yellow turbans, and forbidden to ride on horses or mules, or to receive any government employment. The people took advantage of these measures to destroy many churches and synagogues. The churches continued shut for about a year; but some of those which had been destroyed were afterwards rebuilt at the request of Lascaris and other princes. Another event of this period was a great earthquake which half ruined Cairo, giving it the appearance of a city demolished by a siege; Alexandria and other towns of Egypt, as well as Syria, also suffered from it considerably.

On the abdication of En-Nasir, El-Melik El-Mudhaffar-Rukan-ed-Deen Beybars was saluted Sultan; but ere long En-Nasir recovered his courage, and having collected an army, marched to Damascus, where he was acknowledged, and thence to Egypt, entering Cairo without opposition. El-Mudhaffar had fled at his approach, and, never a favourite of the people, he was attacked, on his exit from the metropolis, by a crowd of the citizens, who loaded him with abuse, and pelted him with stones. En-Nasir now for the third time ascended the throne of Egypt, and took the entire authority into his own hands. The remainder of his life was a period of profound peace, during which he occupied himself in improving his dominions, and in embellishing Cairo. But another persecution of the Christians occurred in 721, and all the principal churches in Egypt were destroyed by certain fanatical Muslims. The Sultan threatened a general massacre of the inhabitants of El-Kahireh and El-Fustat; the Christians, however, took revenge themselves by setting fire to very many mosques and houses in the metropolis; much tumult ensued, and many Christians and Muslims were executed. The threats of the mob compelled En-Nasir to permit the people to murder and plunder any Christian whom they might meet in the streets; and the oppressive rules before enacted were rigorously enforced, and made even more degrading.

The sons of En-Nasir followed him in succession, but the reigns of most of them were short and troublous. El-Melik El-Mansoor Seyf-ed-Deen Aboo-Beker, El-Ashraf 'Ali-ed-Deen Koojook, En-Nasir Shihab-ed-Deen Ahmad,

1 El-Makrezees, trans. Quatremere, tom. II., livr. II., p. 125. 2 See Modern Egyptians, supplement; El-Makrezees, trans. Quatremere, tom. II., livr. II., p. 177, et seq.; and for further information on the persecutions of the Christians, Quatremere's Memoires sur l'Egypte, tom. II., pp. 220-206. 3 El-Makrezees, trans. Quatremere, tom. II., livr. II., p. 215, et seq. 4 Not a little of this turbulence was excited by the constantly intriguing Khaledehfs, who used their religious influence against their patrons, at whose court they were indeed but guests. 5 See Englishwomen in Egypt, vol. I., pp. 225-9. 6 Abu-l-Mahasin. had overcome a revolt of the governor of Syria, when Teemoor again threatened that province. Kara Yoosuf and Ahmad sought refuge with the son of their former protector, and Farag's refusing to betray his guests gave occasion to the enemy to continue the war; a battle was fought, Farag was defeated, Aleppo and Hims fell into the hands of the victor, and the Egyptian forces returned and were concentrated in Egypt. Intimidated, however, by the fall of his ally Bâyezîd, Farag sent an embassy to Teemoor with presents and offers of amity, and at length concluded a peace at the sacrifice of territory. Teemoor died in the year 807 (A.D. 1405), and Farag was preparing an expedition to recover his Syrian possessions, when he was surprised in his palace by an insurrection, headed by his brother, 'Abd-el-'Azeez, and compelled to take to flight. The people, believing that he had perished, proclaimed El-Mansoor 'Abd-el-'Azeez his successor. In the space of less than three months, however, he was deposed in favour of Farag, who thenceforth reigned at Damascus, until the Khaleefeh El-Mustâ'een bi-llâh, at the instigation of the Emir Sheikh El-Mahmoodee, who had raised an army, boldly declared himself Sultan, by an appeal to religion gained numbers to his side, instituted criminal proceedings against Farag on the plea of the exactions which he had been forced to levy for the conduct of the war against Teemoor, and accomplished his death. He was beheaded in the month of Safar in the year 815, and his corpse was left unburied. Abu-l-Mahasin gives him the character of an extravagant, cruel, and voluptuous king.

El-Mustâ'een bi-llâh, with the title of El-Melik El-'Adil Abu'l-Fadl, began his reign well; but he had appointed El-Mahmoodee his Weezee as a reward for his services, and this powerful and vigorous chief soon obliged him to abdicate, and eventually exiled him to Alexandria, where he passed the remainder of his days.

El-Melik El-Mu-eiyad Abu-n-Nasr Sheikh El-Mahmoodee (originally a Memlook of Barkook's) waged three successful wars in Syria, in the first of which he was guilty of a breach of faith in putting to death the governor of Damascus and part of the garrison of that city, after they had surrendered on promise of safety. He reigned peacefully in Egypt, and his name is recorded as that of a king who studied the happiness of his subjects and favoured the learned, who counted him among their number. But he was avaricious; although we might judge the contrary from his beautiful mosque, and the elegant minarets over the Bab-Zuweyleh, in Cairo, which are among the chief ornaments of the city.

Three kings followed in rapid succession: El-Mudhaffar Ahmad, a son of El-Mu-eiyad, under two years of age at his accession; Edhi-Dhâhir Tatar and his infant son, Es-Sâlih Mohammad, who was deposed by Barsabey Ed-Dukmâkee. This Memlook assumed the title of El-Melik El-Ashraf, and worthily continued the prosperous reign of El-Mu-eiyad. In power and virtue he ranks second only to Barkook among all the kings of this dynasty. He is known in European history by his expedition in 827 against John III., king of Cyprus, who became his vassal; and by the part he took, about seven years later, in the dissensions of the court of Savoy and the government of Cyprus. He ruled for seventeen years, with great clemency, and died in 841. El-'Azeez Yoosuf, his son, was deposed by El-Mansoor Aboo-Sa'eed Jakmak El-'Ali-ee, a good prince, and a patron of the learned. After a peaceful reign he abdicated at the age of about eighty years in favour of his son, El-Mansoor Abu-s-Sâ'idâ't Othman, who was overthrown by the intrigues of the Khaleefeh El-Kâmir bi-amri llâh, and was succeeded by an aged Memlook, El-Ashraf Abu-n-Nasr Eynâl El-'Ali-ee En-Nâsiree, followed by his son, El-Mu-eiyad Shihâb-ed-Deen Abu-l-Fet-h Ahmad, Edhi-Dhâhir Seyf-ed-Deen-Kheshkadam, a Greek by birth, superseded him, reigning himself for seven years, with El-Mu-eiyad's equity and benignity; presenting a contrast to the cruelty and oppression of his appointed successor, Edhi-Dhâhir Ahmad, and the elevation of the Sultan Aboo-Sa'eed Temer-kadam, beg Edhi-Dhâhirce, who, in his turn, was deposed to make Edhi-Dhâhirce for El-Ashraf Kât Bey, a prince who deserves his Bilbây, special notice for his struggles with the Turks, whereby the Sultan's conquest of Egypt by that people was deferred for a few Temerbeg years. After a period of quiet which followed his accession, he was alarmed by the victory gained by Mohammad II., over his ally the King of Persia, and posted a considerable force on the frontier of Syria. The successes of the conqueror of Constantinople made him desire to abdicate; but the Emirs prayed him to defend his rights, and he consequently prepared for the war. The death of Mohammad, and the dissensions between Bâyezîd II. and Jem (or Zizim) temporarily relieved him of these apprehensions. The fall of Jem, however, and his arrival at the Egyptian court, implicated Kât Bey in the quarrel; and on the final overthrow of this prince he made sure of a war with the more fortunate Bâyezîd, and himself began Bâyezîd, aggressive measures, intercepted the Turkish caravan of Pilgrims, and an ambassador from India who was on his way to Constantinople with presents, and took Tarsus and Adaneh. A remonstrance from Bâyezîd was answered by a successful attack on his Asiatic commander, 'Al-s-ed-Dowleh. In the meantime Tarsus and Adaneh were recovered from him; but the Emir El-Ezbekce, to whom was entrusted the conduct of all future wars, being despatched against these towns, retook them, defeated an army sent to chastise him, and annexed Karamanee. Another force was speedily equipped, and took the field in 893; conditions of peace were refused, and considerable success attended the Turkish arms. El-Ezbekce was, therefore, again ordered to Syria; a Turkish squadron conveying troops was dispersed, and at Tarsus he gave battle. The result was at first unfavourable to the Memlooks, whose commander, however, rallied them under cover of night, and succeeded in surprising and totally defeating the Turks. Long negotiations followed this victory; and at length Kât Bey, who was always most anxious for peace, ceded the disputed towns of Tarsus and Adaneh, and secured repose during the rest of his days. He died in 901, having designated El-Melik En-Nâsir Abu-s-Sâ'idâ't Moham En-Nâsir Mohammad as his successor. This weak and barbarous king was put to death after four years, during which he was deposed, and Kânsooh, surnamed Khamsameyyeh, and Edhi-Dhâhir Abu-n-Nasr Kânsooh were successively installed. The first reigned but eleven days, and the latter abdicated after five months of great difficulty and danger. On the death of En-Nâsir, El-Ashraf Kânsooh Jânbalat was elevated to the throne, but six months sufficed to accomplish his fall, and he was fortunate in preserving his life. The next Sultan, El-'Adil Melik El-'Adil Tozmân Bey, was acknowledged both in Egypt and Syria. He, however, was overthrown and killed in a few months.

The Memlooks now compelled Kânsooh El-Ghoree to assume the dangerous dignity, with the title of El-Melik El-Ashraf. This prince very unwillingly yielded. His previous life shows him to have been both virtuous and learned; and he proved himself to be an able ruler. After an unsuccessful expedition against the Portuguese in the East, he reigned in peace until the year 915, when Kurkood, the father of Seleem I., the Turkish Sultan, obtained his protection and assistance. Events similar to those which accompanied the end of Jem followed; and Seleem availed himself of a pretext to declare war against Egypt. The first reverse which the Egyptians suffered occurred to an army commanded by 'Ali-ed-Dowleh, formerly defeated by Kāt Bey, now in the pay of El-Ghoree. The winter was passed by the latter in preparing energetically for the inevitable struggle, and in the spring he advanced in person. Seleem, on his part, reduced the last place in the hands of the Egyptians in 'Aladowleeyeh, and pretended to march towards Persia; but at the same time he sent to demand of El-Ghoree wherefore he opposed his passage, and commanded in person on the frontier. El-Ghoree replied, that his was merely an army of observation, and that he was desirous of mediating between Seleem and Isma'eel Shah. Seleem, however, rapidly advanced, refused to listen to an attempt at negotiation, and was met by El-Ghoree on the plain of Marj-Dabik, near Aleppo. A long and sanguinary battle ensued, and victory declared for neither side, until Kheyr Bey, commanding the right wing, and El-Ghazalee, over the left of the Egyptian army, basely deserted to the enemy with their troops. The centre then gave way and fled in utter confusion, notwithstanding the efforts of the Sultan to rally them. He was trampled to death by his routed cavalry, while (according to some) in the act of prayer. This event took place on the 26th of Regeb 922 (A.D. 1517). With his death Egypt lost her independence. The shattered remains of the army collected in Cairo. Toomán Bey, a nephew of the deceased king, was elected Sultan, and at once determined on every resistance to the conqueror. His general in Syria, El-Ganbardee, disputed the road with Seleem step by step, and Toomán Bey awaited his arrival near Cairo. Between El-Khankah and the metropolis, at the village of Er-Reylaneeyeh, the opposing armies joined battle, on the 29th of Zu-l-Heggeh. The fall of a favourite general, Sinan Pasha, infuriated the Turks, and the brilliant bravery of the Memlooks availed them not. Immense numbers of them were slain by their enemies in the pursuit, and the survivors reunited in Cairo. El-Ganbardee, however, sacrificed his fame by joining the victor. The Turkish army paused for rest; and time was thus given to Toomán Bey to hire Arabs at a great cost to replenish his thinned ranks. Seleem now passed to the west of Cairo. A night surprise conducted by Toomán failed, but he succeeded in putting to the sword a great many Turks. He fortified himself in the city, and a house-to-house combat ensued, the Memlooks defending every foot with the energy of despair; the citadel fell by assault, and the unfortunate Toomán effected his escape towards Alexandria; but on the way he was taken by Arabs, given up to El-Ganbardee and another, and brought in chains to Seleem, who at first received him with honour, but afterwards falsely accused him of conspiring against him, and, with the cruelty and perfidy characteristic of his race, crucified him over the Bab-Zuweyleh, the place of execution for common malefactors. Thus miserably perished the last independent ruler of Egypt, who possessed the best qualities of his line, and whose noble defence of his kingdom would have secured to him the commiseration of any but a Turk.

In reviewing the period during which Egypt was governed by independent Muslim princes, it is necessary to consider the spirit of the times and the people over whom they ruled. They succeeded to the government of countries worn out by incessant warfare, overrun by savage hordes, and debased by the rule of the Lower Empire. Egypt had long struggled against the slavery to which it was condemned, and the history of the last three dynasties of Pharaohs evinces the patriotism which yet animated her people. But the successive tyranny of the Persians, the Greeks, and the Romans appears to have annihilated their nationality; and when the Arabs invaded the country, these causes, combined with religious strife, induced them to afford to the conquerors every assistance in their power. But the changeful rule of the lieutenants, and the troubles of the Khaleefehs, debarred Egypt (excepting during the reigns of some kings of the dynasties of the Bencee-Tooloon and the Iksbeedeceyeh) from profiting by the enlightenment of the race who held the dominion over it, until the conquest by the Fatimcehs. The Khaleefehs of that dynasty contributed in a great degree to restore to Egypt some portion of its ancient prosperity, and with the House of Eiyooib it attained its greatest military glory under the Muslims; but the edifices erected during the rule of the two dynasties of Memlook kings, the libraries collected in Cairo at that period, and the learned men who then flourished, would point to it as the age in which literature and the arts were cultivated with the most success; a sure evidence of the internal prosperity of any country. This is the more surprising when we consider the state of Syria, which had long before their accession fallen a prey to intestine wars, and the ravages of the Tatars, the Crusaders, and other invaders; and also bear in mind the constitution of their government, in which the more powerful chiefs were constantly aiming at the supreme authority; and the practice of purchasing Memlooks, and rearing them in the households of the great to enable their masters to maintain their ascendancy, augmented the number of these aspirants to the throne. These slaves were, unlike the Bahrees (who were the Turkish Memlooks of the Eiyoobee Sultan, Es-Sulih Negm-ed-Deen), chiefly Circassians, who afterwards composed the Second Dynasty, the Burgee. Many of the Memlook Sultans rivalled in military achievements the great Salah-ed-Deen, and even penetrated farther than he in their foreign expeditions. In Cairo are preserved the finest specimens of Arab architecture, almost all dating during the period comprised under the domination of the two Memlook Dynasties: the libraries of the mosques, and private collections of that city, though grievously injured since the Turkish conquest, are, or very recently were, the best and most considerable of those of Egypt or Syria; and, as before remarked, the University El-Azhar is still, owing to the fostering care of these Sultans, the principal seat of learning of the Eastern world. Some have endeavoured to give a history of Egypt after the European model, with accounts of the state of commerce, taxation, and the like, under the Muslims; but those only who have read the Arab histories of this and other countries can appreciate the general fallacy of these conclusions, and perceive in them that common failing of modern authors, a desire to throw a new light on history, rather than state only as much as the materials warrant.

It would be tedious and unprofitable to follow the details Turkish of Turkish misrule and tyranny which are from this time Pashas presented to the student of Egyptian history. Although Seleem destroyed the power of the Memlooks, he thought fit to appoint twenty-four Beys over the military provinces of that number into which he divided Egypt, subject to the supreme control of a Pasha, whose council was formed of seven Turkish chiefs (qādīs), while one of the Beys held the post of Sheyk el-Beled, or Governor of the Metropolis; an officer who became an object of hatred to the other chiefs. For nearly two centuries the successive Pashas were mostly obeyed; but the ambition of becoming Sheyk el-Beled was the fruitful cause of intrigue and murder. The Memlooks who then held power in Egypt were called the Ghuzz, that being the name of the tribe to which they are said to have at first generally belonged; and they continually bought slaves, of Circassian or Georgian race, to supply the place of children, for they did not intermarry with natives of Egypt, and women of more northern climates are generally either barren or bear sickly offspring in that country. Thus they lacked the surest source of power; few possessed any family ties; but at the same time the slaves in general were remarkably faithful to their patrons.

At the expiration of the period before mentioned, the Beys gradually increased in power, until the authority of the Pasha was almost nominal, and the government became a military oligarchy; this brings us to the rise of the celebrated 'Alee Bey. He was created Sheykh el-Beled in the year 1177; but, having revenged himself on an old enemy who had assassinated 'Alee's master, to whom he owed his elevation to the rank of Bey, he shortly after fled to Syria, and took refuge with the governor of Jerusalem, and thence went to Acre, where the Sheykh Dhahir became his friend; and that same year he returned to Cairo in his former capacity of Sheykh el-Beled. In 1179 his enemies again compelled him to flee, and he betook himself this time to El-Yemen, once more to return to Egypt; after which he gained increased power. His favourite Memlook, Mohammad Aboo-Dhahab, proved ungrateful, and, while enjoying the highest power, entered into a conspiracy against his life; but after receiving the presents of the hostile Beys, he denounced them to his master, who would not listen to warnings of his meditated treachery.

In the year 1182, the Porte demanded the assistance of 'Alee Bey in the Russian war; an order which he was about to obey, when he was apprised of the departure of a messenger with a firman demanding his head, he having been falsely accused at Constantinople of intending to aid the Russians and throw off his allegiance. He caused the bearer of this order to be waylaid and put to death, and having possessed himself of the firman, he convened the Beys, showed them the document, and aided by those of his own household, persuaded the council to expel the Pasha, and declare Egypt independent. The Sheykh Dhahir took part in this rebellion, and the Pasha of Damascus was beaten by him between Mount Lebanon and Tiberias. A period of good but vigorous government and of tranquillity followed these events in Egypt, notwithstanding the very heavy imposts levied for the replenishment of the treasury; and 'Alee's generals gained for him extended power abroad. Mohammad Aboo-Dhahab was despatched to Arabia, and entered Mekkeh, where the Sherief was deposed, and another Bey traversed the eastern shores of the Red Sea. After the expedition to Arabia, Mohammad Bey marched into Syria to assist the Sheykh Dhahir against the Porte, and the co-operation of the Russians was demanded. A successful campaign terminated before the walls of Damascus, the siege of which was abandoned when nearly brought to a close, and Mohammad Bey returned with large forces to Egypt. This man, loaded with benefits by his patron, now openly rebelled; and being joined by 'Alee's enemies, at the head of whom was Ismaeel, chief of the guard (who was sent against him and went over to his side), he advanced on Cairo, and 'Alee escaped to his steady ally, Sheykh Dhahir, the Prince of Acre. These events took place in the year 1186. Mohammad Bey was then declared Sheykh el-Beled. 'Alee Bey in the meanwhile, in conjunction with his ally, gained various advantages in Syria, and, on the information that his return was desired in Egypt, he collected a small force, assisted by Sheykh Dhahir and a Russian squadron, and determined on attempting to recover his power. He, however, fell into an ambuscade near Es-Salibceyeh, and was wounded by one of his Memlooks named Murad (afterwards Murad Bey), carried to the citadel, and poisoned by Mohammad Bey. Thus terminated the career of the famous 'Alee Bey, a man whose energy, talents, and ambition bear a strong resemblance to those of the late viceroy Mohammad 'Alee.

Mohammad Bey Aboo-Dhahab continued Sheykh el-Mohammed Beled, tendered his allegiance to the Porte, and was invested Bey with the pashalic. He then entered Syria, and severely chastised Sheykh Dhahir, taking Guza, Joppa, and Acre itself. Joppa was taken by assault, and suffered a massacre of its inhabitants, and Acre was pillaged. At the latter place the Pasha suddenly died. His mosque in Cairo is the latest fine specimen of Arab architecture, and is not unworthy of its better days.

The chief competitors for power were now Ismaeel, Ibrahim, and Murad, the first of whom was speedily expelled, the contest continuing between the two latter Beys. Ismaeel at length succeeded in causing himself to be pro-claimed Sheykh el-Beled, and Murad contented himself Bay with the office of Emecer el-Hagg, or chief of the pilgrims; but this arrangement was not destined to be of long continuance; a violent quarrel resulted in a recourse to arms, and that again in a peace of three years' duration, during which the two Beys held an equal sway. In the year 1200 the Porte despatched Hasan Capitan (properly Kapoodan) Pasha (or High Admiral) with a Turkish force, to reduce the turbulent Memlooks to obedience, and to claim the annual tribute. Murad Bey was defeated at Er-Rahmanceyeh, and the Turks advanced to Cairo, desolating the country, and acting according to their almost invariable practice on such occasions. The metropolis opened its gates to Hassan Pasha, who determined on pursuing the Beys to Upper Egypt, whither he despatched a large portion of his army, and a sanguinary conflict took place. But a war with Russia recalled this commander to Constantinople. Ismaeel again created Sheykh el-Beled, and he held that post until Bey, the terrible plague of the year 1205, in which he perished, and hence it is commonly called the "Plague of Ismaeel." His death caused the return of Ibrahim and Murad; and eight years after intelligence of the arrival at Alexandria of a French army of 36,000 men, commanded by General Bonaparte, united these chiefs in a common cause.

On the 18th May 1798 (A.H. 1212), this expedition consisting of 13 sail of the line, 6 frigates, and 12 vessels of invasion, smaller size, sailed from Toulon, and made the coast of Egypt on the 1st July. The troops were landed near Alexandria, and the city fell by assault on the 5th of that month. The French conquest and occupation of Egypt belong to European history; a recapitulation of the principal events of the period will therefore suffice in this place. The Memlooks affected to despise their antagonist, and hastened to chastise him; at Shibirees they attacked the French, and were repulsed; but, nothing discouraged, they collected all their forces, exceeding 60,000 men, under the command of Murad, and entrenched themselves at Embieb, opposite Cairo. Here was fought the battle which has been dignified with the name of that of the Pyramids. Battle of European tactics completely bewildered the Memlooks, the Pyrtheir famous cavalry was received on the hayonets of the French squares, a galling fire of grape and musketry mowed down their ranks, and of this great army only about 2500 horse escaped with Murad Bey, while 15,000 men of all arms fell on the field of battle. Having made himself master of Cairo, Bonaparte despatched General Desaix to effect the conquest of Upper Egypt, and the success of the Eastern expedition seemed secured. But, ten days after the victory of Embabéh, the battle of the Nile annihilated the French fleet in Aboo-Keer Bay, and most materially influenced the future conduct of the war. On this point, Napoleon himself says, "La perte de la bataille d'Abockir eut une grande influence sur les affaires d'Egypte et même sur celles du monde; la flotte Française sauve, l'expédition de Syrie n'éprouvait point d'obstacles, l'artillerie de siège se transportait sûrement et facilement au-delà du désert, et Saint-Jean-d'Acre n'arrêtait point l'armée Française. La flotte Française détruite, le divan s'enhardit à déclarer la guerre à la France. L'armée perdit un grand appui, sa position en Égypte changea totalement, et Napoléon dut renoncer à l'espoir d'asseoir à jamais la puissance Française dans l'Orient par les résultats de l'expédition d'Égypte."

The disastrous expedition into Syria, undertaken for the purpose of frustrating the efforts of Sir Sydney Smith before Alexandria, and of Jezzâr Pâshâ, who was advancing from Acre, still further obscured Napoleon's prospects in the East, and the victory soon after obtained by him over the Ottoman army at Aboo-Keer, the second defeat of Murad Bey, and various successes over the Turks, enabled the French general Kléber (Napoleon having left for Europe after the first of these events) to set on foot negotiations for an honourable evacuation of the country. But when the convention was already signed, and the French were about to quit Cairo, Lord Keith signified to Kléber that Great Britain would not consent to the terms of the treaty; and although this refusal was afterwards rescinded, Kléber considered that the withdrawal came too late: he totally defeated 70,000 men under the Grand Vezier at Heliopolis, and returned to Cairo to quell an insurrection of the inhabitants. This distinguished officer was about this time assassinated in the garden of his palace by a fanatic, who was impaled in the great square (then a lake) called the Ezbekeeyeh, in Cairo, and miserably lingered for the space of three days before death put an end to his sufferings. Under Kléber's administration, Egypt began to resume its former prosperity: by his conciliatory and good government, much prejudice against the French was overcome; by ceding a part of Upper Egypt to Murad, he gained the good will of that chief, who gave him no cause to regret this politic step; while under his auspices the "savans" of the Institute collected the valuable mass of information embodied in the "Great French Work."

On the death of Kléber, General Menou succeeded to the command, and although he afterwards conducted the defence of the country with much valour, yet, to his injudicious administration, and his want of military talent, we must mainly ascribe the determination of the British government to attempt the expulsion of the French from Egypt, and the rapid success of the campaign that ensued. On the 2d of March 1801 an army under Sir Ralph Abercromby arrived in Aboo-Keer Bay and made good a landing in the face of a well-disposed French force, which offered every possible resistance. The memorable battle of Alexandria, in which Abercromby fell, decided the fate of the war. A bold march, executed with talent, effected the capitulation of Cairo; Alexandria surrendered on the 1st of September, and the French sailed from the shores of Egypt in the course of that month. General Hutchinson had taken the command of the English expedition, afterwards reinforced by a detachment from India under General Baird; and the army of the Grand Vezier, and that of the Capitan-Pâshâ, with the troops of Ibraïcheen Bey (Murad having died of the plague), had co-operated in the measures which led to the evacuation of the country by Menou.

The history now requires that we should mention the origin of early career of a man who subsequently ruled the destinies of Egypt for a period of nearly forty years. The late 'Alee, viceroy of Egypt, Mohammad 'Alee Pâshâ, was born in the year of the Flight 1182 (A.D. 1768-9) at Cavalla, a small seaport town of Albania. On the death of his father, in early life, he was brought up in the house of the governor of the town, who, as a reward for military prowess, gave him his daughter in marriage. By her he had, it is said, his three eldest sons, Ibraïcheen, Toosoon, and Isma'il. Having attained the rank of buluk-bâshee (or head of a body of infantry), he became a dealer in tobacco, until, in his thirty-third year, he was despatched with his patron's son, 'Alee Agha, and 300 men, the contingent furnished by his native place, with the Turkish expedition against the French in Egypt; and soon after his arrival in that country he succeeded, on the return of 'Alee Agha, to the command, with the nominal rank of bech-bâshee (or chief of a thousand men).

Soon after the evacuation of Egypt by the French, that unfortunate country became the scene of more severe troubles, in consequence of the unwarrantable attempts of the Turks to destroy the power of the Ghuzz. In defiance of promises to the English government, orders were transmitted from Constantinople to Hoseyn Pâshâ, the Turkish High Admiral, to ensnare and put to death the principal Beys. Invited to an entertainment, they were, according to the Egyptian contemporary historian El-Galbarce, attacked on board the flag-ship; Sir Robert Wilson and M. Mengin, however, state that they were fired on, in open boats, in the bay of Aboo-Keer. They offered a heroic resistance, but were overpowered and made prisoners, while Mohammad Bey El-Menookh, Osmân Bey El-Tambruge, Osmân Bey El-Ashtar, Mohammad Bey El-Hassane, Murad Bey the Younger, and Ibraïcheen Kikha El-Senârce (a black), were among the killed. Some, including the afterwards-celebrated Osmân Bey El-Bardeesce, escaped in a boat, and sought refuge with the English, who at that time occupied Alexandria. General Hutchinson, informed of this treachery, immediately assumed threatening measures against the Turks, and in consequence, the killed, wounded, and prisoners were given up to him. Such was the commencement of the disastrous struggle between the Memlooks and the Turks.

Mohammad Khusruf was the first Pâshâ after the expulsion of the French. The form of government, however, Pâshâ was not the same as that before the French invasion; for the Ghuzz were not reinstated. The Pâshâ, and through him, the Sultan, endeavoured on several occasions either to ensnare them, or to beguile them into submission; but their efforts failing, Mohammad Khusruf took the field, and a Turkish detachment 14,000 strong despatched against them to Demenhour, whither they had descended from Upper Egypt, was defeated by a small force under El-Effe. Their ammunition and guns fell into the hands of the Memlooks.

In March 1803 the British evacuated Alexandria, and Departure Mohammad Bey El-Effe accompanied them to England to of the consult respecting the means to be adopted for restoring the British former power of the Ghuzz. About six weeks after, the Arnaoot (or Albanian) soldiers in the service of Khusruf tumultuously demanded their pay, and surrounded the house of the Defferdar, who in vain appealed to the Pashá to satisfy their claims. The latter opened fire from the artillery of his palace on the insurgent soldiery in the house of the Defferdar, across the Ezbeckeeyeh. The citizens of Cairo, accustomed to such occurrences, immediately closed their shops, and the doors of the several quarters, and every man who possessed any weapon armed himself. The tumult continued all the day, and the next morning a body of troops sent out by the Pashá failed to quell it. Táhir, the commander of the Albanians, then repaired to the citadel, gained admittance through an embrasure, and having obtained possession of it, began to cannonade the Pashá over the roofs of the intervening houses, and then descended with guns to the Ezbeckeeyeh, and laid close siege to the palace.

On the following day, Mohammad Khusru made good his escape with his women and servants and his regular troops, and fled to Damietta by the river. This revolt marks the commencement of the rise of Mohammad 'Alee to power in Egypt, and of the breach between the Armaoos and Turks which ultimately led to the expulsion of the latter.

Táhir Pashá assumed the government, but in twenty-three days he met with his death from exactly the same cause as that of the overthrow of his predecessor. He refused the pay of certain of the Turkish troops, and was immediately assassinated. A desperate conflict ensued between the Albanians and Turks; and the palace was set on fire and plundered. The masters of Egypt were now split into these two factions, animated with the fiercest animosity against each other. Mohammad 'Alee became the head of the former, but his party was the weaker, and he therefore entered into an alliance with Ibrahim Bey, and 'Osman Bey El-Bardeesee. A certain Ahmad Pashá, who was about to proceed to a province in Arabia, of which he had been appointed governor, was raised to the important post of Pasha of Egypt, through the influence of the Turks, and the favour of the Sheykh; but Mohammad 'Alee, who with his Albanians held the citadel, refused to assent to their choice; the Memlocks moved over from El-Geezeh, and Ahmad Pashá betook himself to the mosque of Ez-Zahir, which the French had converted into a fortress. He was compelled to surrender by the Albanians; the two chiefs of the Turks who killed Táhir Pashá were taken with him and put to death, and he himself was detained a prisoner. In consequence of the alliance between Mohammad 'Alee and El-Bardeesee, the Albanians gave the citadel over to the Memlocks; and soon after, these allies marched against Khusru Pashá, who having been joined by a considerable body of Turks, and being in possession of Damietta, was enabled to offer an obstinate resistance. After much loss on both sides, he was taken prisoner and brought to Cairo; but he was treated with much respect. The victorious soldiery sacked the town of Damietta, and were guilty of the barbarities usual with them on such occasions.

A few days later, 'Alee Pashá El-Tarabulusee landed at Alexandria with an imperial firman constituting him Pashá of Egypt, and threatened the Beys, who now were virtual masters of Upper Egypt, as well as of the capital and nearly the whole of Lower Egypt. Mohammad 'Alee and El-Bardeesee therefore descended to Rosetta, which had fallen into the hands of a brother of 'Alee Pashá, and having recovered the town and captured its commander, El-Bardeesee purposed to proceed against Alexandria; but the troops required arrears of pay which it was not in his power to give, and the Pashá had cut the dyke between the Lakes of Aboo-Keer and Marcouf, thus rendering the approach to Alexandria more difficult. El-Bardeesee and Mohammad 'Alee therefore returned to Cairo. The troubles of Egypt were now increased by an insufficient inundation, and great scarcity prevailed, aggravated by the exorbitant taxation to which the Beys were compelled to resort in order to raise money to pay the troops; while murder and rapine prevailed to a frightful extent in the capital, the riotous soldiery being under little or no control. In the meantime, 'Alee Pashá, who had been behaving in an outrageous manner towards the Franks in Alexandria, received a khatt-i-shereef from the Sultan, which he sent by his secretary to Cairo. It announced that the Beys should live peaceably in Egypt, with an annual pension, each, of fifteen purses and other privileges, but that the government should be in the hands of the Pashá. To this the Beys assented, but with considerable misgivings; for they had intercepted letters from 'Alee to the Albanians, endeavouring to alienate them from their side to his own; to these, deceptive answers were returned, and he was induced by them to advance towards Cairo, at the head of 2500 men. The forces of the Beys, with the Albanians, encamped near him at Shalakan, and he fell back on a place called Zulfeytch. They next seized his boats conveying soldiers, servants, and his ammunition and baggage; and, following him, they demanded wherefore he brought with him so numerous a body of men, in opposition to usage and to their previous warning. Finding they would not allow his troops to advance, forbidden himself to retreat with them to Alexandria, and being surrounded by the enemy, he would have hazarded a battle, but his men refused to fight. He therefore repaired to the camp of the Beys, and his army was compelled to retire to Syria. In the hands of the Beys, 'Alee Pashá again attempted treachery. A horseman was seen to leave his tent one night at full gallop; he was the bearer of a letter to 'Osman Bey Hassan, the governor of Kié. This offered a fair pretext to the Memlocks to rid themselves of a man whose antecedents, and his present conduct, proved him to be a perilous tyrant. He was sent under a guard of forty-five men towards the Syrian frontier; and about a week after, news was received that in a skirmish with some of his own soldiers he had fallen mortally wounded.

The death of 'Alee Pashá produced only temporary tranquillity; in a few days the return of Mohammad Bey El-Elfée (called the Great or Elder), from England, was the signal for fresh disturbances, which, by splitting the Ghuzz into two parties, accelerated their final overthrow. The jealousy which existed between El-Elfée and the other most powerful Bey, El-Bardeesee, has been before mentioned. The latter was now supreme among the Ghuzz, and this fact considerably heightened their old enmity. While the guns of the citadel, those at Masr El-Ateekah, and even those of the palace of El-Bardeesee, were thrice fired in honour of El-Elfée, preparations were immediately commenced to oppose him. His partisans were collected opposite Cairo, and El-Elfée the Younger held El-Geezeh; but treachery was among them; Hoseyn Bey El-Elfée was assassinated by emissaries of El-Bardeesee, and Mohammad 'Alee, with his Albanians, gained possession of El-Geezeh, which was, as usual, given over to the troops to pillage. In the meanwhile El-Elfée the Great embarked at Rosetta; and not apprehending opposition, was on his way to Cairo, when a little south of the town of Manoof he encountered a party of Albanians, and with difficulty made his escape. He gained the eastern branch of the Nile, but the river had become dangerous, and he fled to the desert. There he had several hair-breadth escapes, and at last secreted himself among a tribe of Arabs at Ras-el-Wadie. A change in the fortune of El-Bardeesee, however, favoured his plans for the future. That chief, in order to satisfy the demands of the Albanians for their pay, gave orders to levy heavy contributions from the citizens of Cairo; and this new oppress-

---

1. The mosque of Edh-Dhahir Beybars, thus commonly called by the people of Cairo. 2. Called by Mezgin Gezairly. 3. The purse was then worth L15, 12s. 6d. The Albanians, alarmed for their safety, assured the populace that they would not allow the order to be executed; and Mohammad 'Alee himself caused a proclamation to be made to that effect. Thus the Albanians became the favourites of the people, and took advantage of their opportunity. Three days later they beset the house of the aged Ibrahim Bey, and that of El-Bardeesee, both of whom effected their escape with considerable difficulty. The Memlooks in the citadel directed a fire of shot and shell on the houses of the Albanians which were situated in the Ezhekeeyeh; but on hearing of the flight of their chiefs, they evacuated the place; and Mohammad 'Alee, on gaining possession of it, once more proclaimed Mohammad Khursuf Pasha of Egypt. For one day and a half he enjoyed the title; the friends of the late Tahir Pasha then accomplished his second degradation, and Cairo was again the scene of terrible enormities, the Albanians revelling in the houses of the Memlook chiefs, whose barrooms met with no mercy at their hands. These events were the signal for the reappearance of El-Efice.

The Albanians now invited Ahmad Pasha Khursheed to assume the reins of government, and he without delay proceeded from Alexandria to Cairo. The forces of the partisans of El-Bardeesee were ravaging the country a few miles south of the capital, and intercepting the supplies of corn by the river; a little later they passed to the north of Cairo, and successively took Bilbeys and Kalyoub, plundering the villages, destroying the crops, and slaughtering the herds of the inhabitants. Cairo was itself in a state of tumult, suffering severely from a scarcity of grain, and the heavy exactions of the Pasha to meet the demands of his turbulent troops, at that time augmented by a Turkish detachment. The shops were closed, and the unfortunate people assembled in great crowds, crying Ya Lateef! Ya Lateef!" "O gracios [God]!" El-Efice and Osman Bey Hasan had professed allegiance to the Pasha; but they soon after declared against him, and they were now approaching from the south; and having repulsed Mohammad 'Alee, they took the two fortresses of Turà. These Mohammad 'Alee speedily retook by night with 4000 infantry and cavalry; but the enterprise was only partially successful. On the following day the other Memlooks north of the metropolis actually penetrated into the suburbs; but a few days later were defeated in a battle fought at Shubra, with heavy loss on both sides. This reverse in a measure united the two great Memlook parties, though their chiefs remained at enmity. El-Bardeesee passed to the south of Cairo, and the Ghuzz gradually retreated towards Upper Egypt. Thither the Pasha despatched three successive expeditions (one of which was commanded by Mohammad 'Alee), and many battles were fought, but without decisive result.

At this period another calamity befell Egypt; about 3000 Delees arrived in Cairo from Syria. These troops had been sent for by Khursheed in order to strengthen himself against the Albanians; and the events of this portion of the history afford sad proof of their ferocity and brutal enormities, in which they far exceeded the ordinary Turkish soldiers and even the Albanians. Their arrival immediately recalled Mohammad 'Alee and his party from the war, and instead of aiding Khursheed, was the proximate cause of his overthrow.

Cairo was ripe for revolt; the Pasha was hated for his tyranny and extortion, and execrated for the deeds of his troops, especially those of the Delees; the Sheyks enjoined the people to close their shops, and the soldiers clamoured for pay. At this juncture a firman arrived from Constantinople conferring on Mohammad 'Alee the pashalic of Jiddah; but the occurrences of a few days raised him to that of Egypt.

On the 12th of Safar A.H. 1220 (May 1805) the Sheyks, with an immense concourse of the inhabitants, assembled in the house of the Kadee; and the Ulama, amid the prayers and cries of the people, wrote a full statement of the heavy wrongs which they had endured under the administration of the Pasha. The Ulama, in answer, were desired to go to the citadel; but they were apprised of treachery; and on the following day, having held another council at the house of the Kadee, they proceeded to Mohammad 'Alee, and informed him that the people would no longer submit to Khursheed. "Then whom will ye have?" said he. "We will have thee," they replied, "to govern us according to the laws; for we see in thy countenance that thou art possessed of justice and goodness." Mohammad 'Alee seemed to hesitate, and then complied, and was at once invested. On this, a bloody struggle commenced between the two Pashas: Cairo had before experienced such conflicts in the streets and over the house-tops, but none so severe as this. Khursheed, being informed by a messenger of the insurrection, immediately laid in stores of provisions and ammunition, and prepared to stand a siege in the citadel. Two chiefs of the Albanians joined his party, but many of his soldiers deserted. Mohammad 'Alee's great strength lay in the devotion of the citizens of Cairo, who looked on him as their future deliverer from their afflictions; and great numbers armed themselves, advising constantly with Mohammad 'Alee, having the sayid Omar and the Sheyks at their head, and guarding the town at night. On the 19th of the same month, Mohammad 'Alee besieged Khursheed. Retrenchments were raised, and Khursheed the lofty minaret of the mosque of the Sultan Hasan was besieged in used as a battery from whence to fire on the citadel; He cannon while guns were also posted on the mountain in its rear, sides and After the siege had continued many days, Khursheed gave bombard orders to cannonade and bombard the town; and for six Cairo days his commands were executed with little interruption, the citadel itself also lying between two fires. Mohammad 'Alee's position at this time was very critical: his troops became mutinous for their pay; the Silahdar, who had commanded one of the expeditions against the Ghuzz, advanced to the relief of Khursheed; and the latter ordered the Delees to march to his assistance. The firing ceased on the Friday, but recommenced on the eve of Saturday, and lasted until the next Friday. On the day following, news came of the arrival at Alexandria of a messenger from Constantinople. The ensuing night in Cairo presented a curious spectacle: many of the inhabitants gave way to rejoicing, in the hope that this envoy would put an end to their miseries, and fired off their weapons as they paraded the streets with bands of music. The Silahdar, imagining the noise to be a fray, marched in haste towards the citadel; while his garrison sallied forth, and commenced throwing up retrenchments in the quarter of Arab-el-Yesir, but were repulsed by the armed inhabitants and the soldiers stationed there; and during all this time, the cannonade and bombardment from the citadel, and on it from the batteries on the mountain, continued unabated.

The envoy brought a firman confirming Mohammad Mohammad 'Alee, and ordering Khursheed to repair to Alexandria, 'Alee consented thereto await further orders; but this he refused to do, on the ground that he had been appointed by a khatt-i-shereef, the Porte. The firing ceased on the following day, but the troubles of the people were rather increased than assuaged; murders and robberies were daily committed by the soldiery, the shops were all shut, and some of the streets barricaded.

Khursuf Pasha has since filled with credit several of the highest offices at Constantinople. He died on the 1st of February in this year, 1855. He was a bigot of the old school, strongly opposed to the influences of western civilization, and consequently to the assistance of France and England in the present war. While these scenes were being enacted, El-Effe was besieging Demenhoor, and the other Beys were returning towards Cairo, Khursheed having called them to his assistance.

Soon after this, a squadron under the command of the Turkish High Admiral arrived in Aboo-Keer Bay, with despatches confirmatory of the firman brought by the former envoy, and authorizing Mohammad 'Alee to continue to discharge the functions of governor for the present. Khursheed at first refused to yield; but at length, on condition that his troops should be paid, he evacuated the citadel, and embarked for Rosetta.

Mohammad 'Alee now possessed the title of Governor of Egypt, but beyond the walls of Cairo his authority was everywhere disputed by the Beys, who were joined by the army of the Silahdar of Khursheed; and many Albanians deserted from his ranks. To replenish his empty coffers he was also compelled to levy exactions, principally from the Copts. An attempt was made to ensnare certain of the Beys, who were encamped north of the metropolis. On the 17th of August, 1805, the dam of the canal of Cairo was to be cut, and some chiefs of Mohammad 'Alee's party wrote, informing them that he would go forth early on that morning with most of his troops to witness the ceremony, inviting them to enter and seize the city; and, to deceive them, stipulating for a certain sum of money as their reward. The dam, however, was cut early in the preceding night, without any ceremony. On the following morning, these Beys, with their Memlooks, a very numerous body, broke open the gate of the suburb El-Hoseynyeeyeh, and gained admittance into the city from the north, through the gate called Bab-el-Putooh. They marched along the principal street for some distance, with kettle-drums behind each company, and were received with apparent joy by the citizens. At the mosque called the Ashrafceyeh they separated, one party proceeding to the Azhar and the houses of certain Sheykhs, and the other continuing along the main street, and through the gate called Bab-Zuweyleh, where they turned up towards the citadel. Here they were fired on by some soldiers from the houses; and with this signal a terrible massacre commenced. Falling back towards their companions, they found the bye-streets closed; and in that part of the main thoroughfare called Beyn-el-Kaeryn, they were suddenly placed between two fires. Thus shut up in a narrow street, some sought refuge in the collegiate mosque El-Barookceyeh, while the remainder fought their way through their enemies, and escaped over the city wall with the loss of their horses. Two Memlooks had, in the mean time, succeeded, by great exertions, in giving the alarm to their comrades in the quarter of the Azhar, who escaped by the eastern gate called Bab-el-Glureyiib. A horrible fate awaited those who had shut themselves up in the Barookceyeh; they begged for quarter and surrendered, were immediately stripped nearly naked, and about fifty were slaughtered on the spot; and about the same number were dragged away, with every brutal aggravation of their pitiful condition, to Mohammad 'Alee. Among them were four Beys, one of whom, driven to madness by Mohammad 'Alee's mockery, asked for a drink of water; his hands were untied, that he might take the bottle, but he snatched a dagger from one of the soldiers, and rushed at the Pashá, and fell, covered with wounds. The wretched captives were then chained, and left in the court of the Pashá's house; and on the following morning the heads of their comrades who had perished the day before were skinned, and stuffed with straw before their eyes. One Bey and two others paid their ransom, and were released; the rest, without exception, were tortured and put to death in the course of the ensuing night. Eighty-three heads (many of them those of Frenchmen and Albanians) were stuffed, and sent to Constantinople, with a boast that the Memlook chiefs were utterly destroyed.

Thus ended Mohammad 'Alee's first massacre of his too confiding enemies.

The Beys, after this, appear to have despaired of regaining their ascendancy; most of them retreated to Upper Egypt, and an attempt at compromise failed. El-Effe offered his submission, on the condition of the cession of the Feiyaneeh and other provinces; but this was refused, and that chief gained two successive victories over the Pashá's troops, many of whom deserted to him.

At length, in consequence of the remonstrances of the English, and a promise made by El-Effe of 1500 purses, the Porte consented to reinstate the twenty-four Beys, and to place El-Effe at their head; but this measure met with the opposition of Mohammad 'Alee, and the determined resistance of the majority of the Memlooks, who, rather than have El-Effe at their head, preferred their present condition; for the enmity of El-Bardeesee had not subsided, and he commanded the voice of most of the other Beys. In pursuance of the above plan, a squadron under Salih Pashá, shortly before appointed High Admiral, arrived at Alexandria on the 1st of July 1806, with 3000 regular troops, and a successor to Mohammad 'Alee, who was to receive the pashalic of Salonica. This wily chief professed his willingness to obey the commands of the Porte; but stated that his troops, to whom he owed a vast sum of money, opposed his departure. He induced the 'Ulama to sign a letter, praying the Sultan to revoke the command for reinstating the Beys; persuaded the chiefs of the Albanian troops to swear allegiance to him, and sent 2000 purses contributed by them to Constantinople. El-Effe was at that time besieging Demenhoor, and he gained a signal victory over the Pashá's troops; but the dissensions of the Beys destroyed their last chance of a return to power. El-Effe and his partisans were unable to pay the sum promised to the Porte; Salih Pashá received plenipotentiary powers from Constantinople, in consequence of the letter from the 'Ulama; and, on the condition of Mohammad 'Alee's paying 4000 purses to the Porte, it was decided that he should continue in his post, and the reinstatement of the Beys was abandoned. Fortune continued to favour the Pashá. In the following month, El-Bardeesee died, aged forty-eight years; and, soon after, a scarcity of provisions excited the troops of El-Effe to revolt. That Bey very reluctantly raised the siege of Demenhoor, being in daily expectation of the arrival of an English army; and at the village of Shubra-ment he was attacked by a sudden illness, and died on the 30th of January 1807, aged 55 years. Thus was the Pashá relieved of his two most formidable enemies; and, shortly after, he defeated Shabteen Bey, with the loss, to the latter, of his artillery and baggage, and 300 men killed or taken prisoners.

On the 17th of March 1807, a British fleet appeared off the British Alexandria, having on board nearly 5000 troops, under the expedition command of General Fraser; and the place, being disaffected of 1807, towards Mohammad 'Alee, opened its gates to them. Here they first heard of the death of El-Effe, upon whose cooperation they had founded their chief hopes of success; and they immediately despatched messengers to his successor, and to the other Beys, inviting them to Alexandria. The British resident, Major Misset, having represented the importance of taking Rosetta and Er-Rahmaneeyeh, to secure supplies for Alexandria, General Fraser, with the concurrence of the Admiral, Sir John Duckworth, detached the 31st regiment and the Chasseurs Britanniques, under Major-General Wauchope and Brigadier-General Meade, on this service; and these troops entered Rosetta without encountering any opposition; but as soon as they had dispersed among the narrow streets, the garrison opened a deadly fire on them from the latticed windows and the roofs of the houses. They effected a retreat on Aboo-Keer and Alexandria, after a very heavy loss of 185 killed and 262 wounded; General Wauchope and three officers being among the former, and General Meade and seventeen officers among the latter. The heads of the slain were fixed on stakes, on each side of the road crossing the Ezbekieh in Cairo.

Mohammad 'Alee, meanwhile, was conducting an expedition against the Beys in Upper Egypt, and he had defeated them near Asyout, when he heard of the arrival of the British. In great alarm lest the Beys should join them, especially as they were far north of his position, he immediately sent messengers to his rivals, promising to comply with all their demands, if they should join in expelling the invaders; and this proposal being agreed to, both armies marched towards Cairo on opposite sides of the river.

To return to the unfortunate British expedition. The possession of Rosetta being deemed indispensable, Brigadier-General Stewart and Colonel Oswald were despatched thither, with 2500 men. For 13 days a cannonade of that town was continued without effect; and on the 20th of April, news having come in from the advanced guard at El-Hamad of large reinforcements to the besieged, General Stewart was compelled to retreat; and a dragoon was despatched to Major Macleod, commanding at El-Hamad, with orders to fall back. The messenger, however, was unable to penetrate to the spot; and the advanced guard—consisting of a detachment of the 71st, two companies of the 78th, one of the 35th, and De Rolles' regiment, with a picquet of dragoons, the whole mustering 733 men—was surrounded, and after a gallant resistance, the survivors, who had expended all their ammunition, became prisoners of war. General Stewart regained Alexandria with the remainder of his force, having lost, in killed, wounded, and missing, nearly 900 men. Some hundreds of British heads were now exposed on stakes in Cairo, and the prisoners were marched between those mutilated remains of their countrymen.

The Beys became divided in their wishes; one party being desirous of co-operating with the British, the other, with the Pasha. These delays proved ruinous to their cause; and General Fraser, despairing of their assistance, evacuated Alexandria on the 14th of September. From that date to the spring of 1811, the Beys from time to time relinquished certain of their demands; the Pasha on his part granted them what before had been withheld; the province of the Feiyoon, and part of those of El-Geezeh and Bnee-Suweyf, were ceded to Sháheen; and a great portion of the Sa'eed, on the condition of paying the land-tax, to the others. Many of them took up their abode in Cairo, but tranquillity was not secured; several times they met the Pasha's forces in battle, and once gained a signal victory. Early in the year 1811, the preparations for an expedition against the Wahhabees in Arabia being complete, all the Memlook Beys then in Cairo were invited to the ceremony of investing Mohammad 'Alee's favourite son, Toosoon, with a pelisse, and the command of the army. As on the former occasion, the unfortunate Memlooks fell into the snare. On the 1st of March, Sháheen Bey, and the other chiefs (one only excepted), repaired with their retinues to the citadel, and were courteously received by the Pasha. Having partaken of coffee, they formed in procession, and, preceded and followed by the Pasha's troops, slowly descended the steep and narrow road leading to the great gate of the citadel; but as soon as the Memlooks arrived at this gate, it was suddenly closed before them. The last of those who made their exit before the gate was shut were Silih Koosh and his Albanians. To these troops their chief now made known the Pasha's orders to massacre all the Memlooks within the citadel; therefore, having returned by another way, they gained the summits of the walls and houses that hem in the road in which the Memlooks were incarcerated, and some stationed themselves upon the eminences of the rock through which that road is partly cut. Thus securely placed, they commenced a heavy fire on their defenceless victims; and immediately the troops who closed the procession, and who had the advantage of higher ground, followed their example. Of the betrayed chiefs, many were laid low in a few moments; some, dismounting, and throwing off their outer robes, vainly sought sword in hand, to return, and escape by some other gate. The few who regained the summit of the citadel experienced the same cruel fate as the rest (for those whom the Albanian soldiers made prisoners met with no mercy from their chiefs or from Mohammad 'Alee), but it soon became impossible for any to retrace their steps even so far; the road was obstructed by the bleeding bodies of the slain Memlooks, and their richly caparisoned horses, and their grooms. Four hundred and seventy Memlooks entered the citadel; and of these, very few, if any, escaped. One of these is said to have been a Bey. According to some, he leaped his horse from the ramparts, and alighted uninjured, though the horse was killed by the fall; others say that he was prevented from joining his comrades, and discovered the treachery while waiting without the gate. He fled, and made his way to Syria. This massacre was the signal for an indiscriminate slaughter of the Memlooks throughout Egypt, orders to this effect being transmitted to every governor; and in Cairo itself, the houses of the Beys were given over to the soldiery, who slaughtered all their adherents, treated their women in the most shameless manner, and sacked their dwellings. During the two following days, the Pasha and his son Toosoon rode about the streets, and endeavoured to stop these atrocious proceedings; but order was not restored until 500 houses had been completely pillaged. In extenuation of this dark blot on Mohammad 'Alee's character, it has been urged that he had received the order for the destruction of the Memlooks from Constantinople, whither the heads of the Beys were sent. It may be answered to this plea, that on other occasions he scrupled not to defy the Porte.

A remnant of the Memlooks fled to Nubia, and a tranquillity was restored to Egypt to which it had long been unaccustomed, and which has rarely been interrupted since. In the year following the massacre the unfortunate exiles were attacked by Ibraheem Pasha, the eldest son of Mohammad 'Alee, in the fortified town of Ibreen, in Nubia. Here the want of provisions forced them to evacuate the place; a few who surrendered were beheaded, and the rest went further south and built the town of New Dongola, where the venerable Ibraheem Bey died in 1816, at the age of 80. As their numbers thinned, they endeavoured to maintain their little power by training some hundreds of blacks; but again, on the approach of Isma'il, another son of the Pasha of Egypt, sent with an army to subdue Nubia and Semnár, some returned to Egypt and settled in Cairo, while the rest, amounting to about 100 persons, fled in dispersed parties to the countries adjacent to Semnár.

Mohammad 'Alee being undisputed master of Egypt, at War with the reiterated commands of the Porte, despatched, in 1811, the Wahabees, an army of 8000 men, including 2000 horse, under the command of Toosoon Pasha, against the Wahhabees. After a successful advance, this force met with a serious repulse at the pass of Safra and Judeiyish, and retreated to Yembo'. In the following year Toosoon, having received reinforcements, again assumed the offensive, and captured El-Medeeneh, after a prolonged siege. He next took Jiddah and Mekkeh, defeating the Wahhabees beyond the latter place, and capturing their general. But some misfortunes followed, and Mohammad 'Alee, who had determined to conduct the war in person, left Egypt for that purpose in the summer of 1813. In Arabia he encountered serious obstacles from the nature of the country and the harassing mode of warfare adopted by his adversaries. His arms

---

1 The account of this expedition is taken from published official papers, Mengin, &c. 2 Correctly Dungulah, but pronounced by the natives Dungulah. met with various fortune; but on the whole his forces proved superior to those of the enemy. He led a successful expedition in the Hijaz, and on the conclusion of a treaty with the Wahhabee chief, 'Abd-Allah, in 1815, he returned to Egypt on hearing of the escape of Napoleon from Elba.

He now confiscated the lands belonging to private individuals, merely allowing them a pension for life, and attempted to introduce the European system of military tactics. A formidable mutiny, however, broke out in the metropolis, the Pasha's life was endangered, and he sought refuge by night in the citadel, while the soldiery committed many acts of plunder. The revolt was reduced by presents to the chiefs of the insurgents, and Mohammad 'Alee very honourably ordered that the sufferers by the late disturbances should receive compensation from the treasury. The project of the "Nizam Gedeed," as the European system is called in Egypt, was, in consequence of this commotion, abandoned for a time.

Soon after Tocoon returned to Egypt, but Mohammad 'Alee, dissatisfied with the treaty which had been concluded with the Wahhabees, and with the non-fulfilment of certain of its clauses, determined to send another army to Arabia, and to include in it the soldiers who had recently proved unruly. This expedition, under Ibraheem Pasha, left in the autumn of 1816. After several unimportant advantages, Ibraheem sat down before the town of Er-Rass; but three months' exertions proving unavailing, he raised the siege, with the loss of nearly half his army. Notwithstanding, he advanced on the capital, Ed-Dir'eeyeh, by slow but sure steps. The last place before reaching that city offered a brave resistance, and Ibraheem, in revenge, caused all its inhabitants to be put to the sword, excepting a number of women and children, the former of whom were spared not from motives of pity. Ed-Dir'eeyeh fell after a five months' siege, in the course of which an explosion destroyed the whole of the besiegers' powder; and had the Wahhabees been aware of the extent of the disaster, few, we may believe, would have escaped to tell the tale. 'Abd-Allah, their chief, was taken, and with his treasurer and secretary was sent to Constantinople, where, in spite of Ibraheem's promise of safety, and of Mohammad 'Alee's intercession in their favour, they were paraded and put to death. At the close of the year 1819, Ibraheem returned to Cairo, having conquered all present opposition in Arabia, but without having broken the spirit of the Wahhabees.

The Pasha, since his return from Arabia, had turned his attention to the improvement of the manufactures of Egypt, and engaged very largely in commerce. The results of these attempts are stated in other places, but the important work of digging the new canal of Alexandria, called the Mahmoodeyeh, must here be again mentioned. The old canal had long fallen into decay, and the necessity of a safe channel between Alexandria and the Nile was much felt. Such was the object of the canal then excavated, and it has on the whole well answered its purpose; but the sacrifice of life was enormous, and the labour of the unhappy Fellahs was forced. Towards the accomplishment of a favourite project, the formation of the Nizam Gedeed, a force was ordered to the southern frontier of Egypt, and the conquest of Sennar was contemplated in order to get rid of the disaffected troops and to obtain a sufficient number of captives to form the nucleus of the new army. The forces destined for this service were led by Isma'il, then the youngest son of Mohammad 'Alee; they consisted of between four and five thousand men, Turks and Arabs, and were despatched in the summer of 1820. Nubia at once submitted, the Shaggeyeh Arabs immediately beyond the province of Dongola were worsted, and Sennar was reduced without a battle. Mohammad Bey, the Defterdar, with another force of about the same strength, was then sent by Mohammad 'Alee against Kurdufan with a like result, but not without a hard-fought engagement. In 1822, Isma'il was, with his retinue, put to death by an Arab chieftain by name Nimr; and the Defterdar, a man infamous for his cruelty, assumed the command in those provinces, and exacted terrible retribution from the innocent inhabitants.

In the years 1821 and 1822 Mohammad 'Alee despatched both ships and men (the latter about 7000 or 8000 Albanians and Turks) to the Morea, Cyprus, and Candia, to aid the Porte in reducing the Greek insurrection; and he continued to take part in that struggle, his fleet being engaged at Navarino, until the English insisted on the evacuation of the Morea, in 1823, by Ibraheem Pasha. In the latter of the two years before mentioned (1822), an army of disciplined troops was at length organized: 8000 men (chiefly slaves, from Sennar and Kurdufan) were trained by French officers at Aswan. Of the vast numbers seized in the countries above named, many died on the way; those who were not eligible were, with the women, sold in Cairo, and in the remainder were incorporated many Fellahs. Colonel Seve (now Suleymán Pasha), a Frenchman who afterwards became a Muslim, superintended their organization; great numbers of the Blacks died of hypochondria, but the Egyptians proved very good troops. Many thousands were pressed in consequence, and they now constitute the bulk of the army. In 1823 the new conscripts amounted to 24,000 men, composing six regiments of infantry, each regiment consisting of five battalions of 800 men, and the battalions of eight companies of 100 men. The organization, pay, &c., of the Egyptian army will be found under section iv.

In 1824, a native rebellion of a religious character broke out in Upper Egypt, headed by one Ahmad, an inhabitant of Es-Salimeyeh, a village situate a few miles above Thebes. He proclaimed himself a prophet, and was soon followed by between 20,000 and 30,000 insurgents, mostly peasants, but some deserters from the Nizam, for that force was yet in a half organized state, and in part declared for the impostor. The insurrection was crushed by Mohammad 'Alee, and about one-fourth of Ahmad's followers perished, but he himself escaped and was never after heard of. Few of these unfortunate possessed any other weapon than the long staff (Nebhoot) of the Egyptian peasant; still they offered an obstinate resistance, and the combat resembled a massacre. In the same year war was once more made on the Wahhabees, who had collected in considerable numbers. The 2d regiment was sent on this service, and it behaved in a very creditable manner.

But the events of the war with the Porte are perhaps the most important of the life of Mohammad 'Alee. The campaign of 1831 had ostensibly for its object the chastigation of 'Abd-Allah, Pasha of Acre: the invading force consisted of six regiments of infantry, four of cavalry, four field-pieces, and a greater number of siege-guns, the whole under the command of Ibraheem Pasha, while the fleet, conveying provisions, ammunition, &c., was to accompany the army by sea. The terrible cholera of 1831, however, stayed the expedition when it was on the eve of departing; 5000 of its number died, and it was not until early in October of the same year that it started. Little opposition was encountered on the way to Acre, whither Ibraheem had gone by sea, and that place was invested on the 29th of November. The artillery of the besieged was well served; an assault in the following February was repulsed, and the cold and rain of a Syrian winter severely tried the Egyptian troops. A second assault in like manner failed, and Ibraheem was called away to repel Osman Pasha, governor of Aleppo. The latter, however, hastily decamped without giving him battle, and Ibraheem, deeming this advantage sufficient, retraced his steps towards Acre. He then pushed the siege with fresh vigour, and stormed the city on the 27th of May: 1400 men fell in the breach, and the garrison was found to be reduced to about 400 men. The fall of Acre was followed by negotiation. Mohammad 'Alee evinced a disposition for peace, but demanded the government of Syria, and the Porte, in consequence, denounced him as a traitor. On his part, Ibrahîm pushed his successes: Damascus was evacuated at his approach, and the battle of Hims, fought on the 8th of July 1832, decided the superiority of the Egyptian army, and the advantage of disciplined troops over an irregular force, although very disproportionate in numbers. The enemy composed the advanced guard of the Turkish army, 30,000 strong, and the Egyptians numbered only 16,000 men.

After this victory, Ibrahîm marched to Hamâh, and thence to Aleppo (which had just before closed its gates against the Turkish general-in-chief, Hoseyn Pâshâ, whose troops became rapidly disorganized), forced the defiles of Beyûlân, and pursued the fugitive Turks to Adaneh. About the same time an Egyptian squadron had chased the Sultan's fleet into Constantinople. Diplomacy was, at this point, again resorted to, but without any result; the Sultan depended on his fleet to protect the capital, and determined to risk another engagement with the victorious enemy. The charge of this venture was intrusted to Resheed Pâshâ, the Grand Vezeeer. In the mean time, Ibrahîm Pâshâ had gained the pass of Taurus, and having beaten the Turks at Oulou-Kishîk, he hesitated not to give battle to Resheed Pâshâ at the head of about 60,000 men, his own army being less than half that strength; the battle of Könyehî, on the plains of Anatolia, proved utterly disastrous to the Porte: in the confusion of the fight, and the darkness of a thick day, the Grand Vezeeer was made prisoner, his army routed, and Constantinople was within six marches of the victor, without an army to oppose his passage. The capital of the Ottoman Empire, in imminent danger by sea and land, was then intrusted to the keeping of its hereditary enemy, as the last resource of the Sultan Mahmood, and a Russian fleet and army were sent thither. Negotiations were, in consequence, opened, and on the 14th of May 1833, a treaty was concluded between Mohammad 'Alee and the Porte, by which the whole of Syria and the district of Adaneh were ceded to the former, on condition of his paying tribute. With this terminated the war, but not the animosity of the Sultan. Ibrahîm, by excessive firmness and rigour, speedily restored security and tranquillity to the greater part of Syria; but some years later, the attempt of Mahmood to get the better of his vassal, and the consequent disaster experienced by his arms at Nezzeb, entailed fresh complications, and the interference of Great Britain ended in the restoration of Syria to the Porte in 1841. The political motives which actuated the Great Powers at this time and in 1831 need not be here discussed; and the operations on the coast of Syria, the bombardment of Acre, and the blockade of Alexandria, are familiar to most newspaper readers. It is undoubtedly true that Mohammad 'Alee placed all his reliance on the co-operation of France, and to its desertion of his cause, and his confidence in its assistance, either morally or physically, must be ascribed the unfortunate issue of the war. That the Syrians, in general, preferred the rule of Mohammad 'Alee to the tyranny of Pâshâs appointed from Constantinople may be safely averred; but we cannot close this account of his possession of that province without animadverting on the horrible cruelties perpetrated by Ibrahîm Pâshâ, or warning our readers not to give credence to the unmeasured praise bestowed by many on the Egyptian troops there engaged. Conceding that they were superior soldiers to the Turks, it must be borne in mind that they were veterans, disciplined and led by French officers and an able general: their opponents were destitute of any European discipline, badly officered, and discouraged by the disasters in Greece. It has, moreover, been stated on good authority, that Ibrahîm owed much of his success to the placing of artillery in the rear of his troops, with orders to fire on them should they show symptoms of wavering.

After the peace of 1841, Mohammad 'Alee gave up all grand political projects, and solely occupied himself in improvements, real or imaginary, in Egypt. He continued to prosecute his commercial speculations and manufacturing, educational, and other schemes. The barrage of the Nile, still uncompleted, was commenced by his direction, and in 1847, he visited Constantinople, where he received the rank of Vezeeer. In the year 1848, however, symptoms of imbecility appeared, and after a short space Ibrahîm was declared his successor. But his rule was very short. In about two months he died; and, according to the Pâshâ terms of the treaty, Abbas, a son of Toosoon, and the eldest Abbas representative of the family, succeeded to the pashalic Pâshâ. This miserable voluptuary, and withal bigoted, though ignorant, Muslim, utterly neglected the affairs of government, and solely consulted his own gratification. He died suddenly, and, as some assert, mysteriously, in July of last year (1854); and the present Viceroy, Sa'ed Pâshâ, the Sa'ed fourth son of Mohammad 'Alee, by his energy of character Pâshâ, and superior intelligence, gives us some hope that Egypt may improve under his rule. He has, it is said, abolished certain government monopolies, is busily occupied in carrying out the works of the barrage, and takes great pains with the disciplining of his army. He is, besides, known to be favourable to the English. But he is new to his office, and it would be idle to speculate on the future career of an Egyptian Turk.

Mohammad 'Alee survived Ibrahîm, and died on the 3d of August 1849. Many and conflicting have been the opinions entertained of this remarkable man; for such at least all acknowledge him to have been. His massacre of the Memlocks has been the great point of attack by his enemies; but that, as well as many other of his acts, must be ascribed to his boundless ambition, not to innate cruelty; for he has proved himself to be averse to unnecessary bloodshed. That he really esteemed European civilization may be doubted; but his intelligent mind could not fail to perceive that therein lay his great strength, and of this he availed himself with consummate ability. To his firm government Egypt is indebted for the profound tranquillity which it has long been its good fortune to enjoy; a traveller of any nation or faith may traverse it in its length and breadth with greater safety than almost any other country out of Western Europe; and the display of fanaticism has been rigorously punished. This has undoubtedly increased the hatred of the Muslims for the professors of other religions; but we may hope that it will eventually produce a better state of feeling. While, however, Egypt has benefited by the establishment of order, the people have suffered most severe exactions. The confiscation of private lands has been before mentioned: to that arbitrary act must be added the seizure of the lands of the mosques, the imposition of heavy taxation, and a system of merciless impressment. In fact, the condition of the Egyptian Fellah has rarely been as wretched as it is at the present day. He also misunderstood the real resources of Egypt, which are certainly agricultural; by the much-landed introduction of cotton, he dealt a severe blow to native produce; and he did more to injure the country by endeavouring to encourage manufacturing industry, and by establishing enormous government monopolies, a measure which crushed the spirit of the agriculturists. His military and governing abilities were assuredly very great, and his career is almost unequalled in Turkish history. Had it not been for the intervention of Great Britain, his Syrian successes over the Porte would probably have led to very beneficial results, by rescuing Egypt from the wretched condition of a Turkish province. But the firman of 1841 entailed the loss of all his military power, the army was reduced to 18,000 men, and the navy condemned to rot in the harbour of Alexandria, while Mohammad 'Alee, failing to gain the great object of his ambition, the establishment of an independent dynasty, and being compelled to look on his then living family as his only heirs, thenceforth confined himself to measures of lesser importance, and did not prosecute even these with his former energy.

The entire constitution of the government of Egypt is the work of Mohammad 'Alee. With few exceptions he destroyed all former usages, and introduced a system partly derived from European models. The army and navy are of his creation, so are the taxation, the regulation of import and export duties, &c., quarantine laws, the manufactories, colleges, and the ministry. Some of these institutions are useful; others, both vexations and ill calculated for the country. The colleges of languages and medicine, and the printing-press at Boolak, are among the former, and are exceedingly praiseworthy efforts in a right direction; and in the same category must be placed many minor improvements, in which Mohammad 'Alee showed himself to be far in advance of his countrymen; while, weighing his chequered life, and numerous disadvantages of position and nation, his moral character, enlightened mind, and distinguished ability, must place him high among the great men of modern times.

SECTION III.

TOPOGRAPHY AND MONUMENTS.

The northern coast of Egypt is low and barren, presenting no features of interest, and affording no indication of the character of the country which it bounds. It is a barrier, generally of sand-hills, but sometimes of rock, for the most part altogether destitute of vegetation, except where grow a few wild and stunted date-palms. Immediately behind are desolate marshy tracts or extensive salt lakes, and then the fertile country. The last is a wide plain, intersected by the two branches of the Nile, and by many canals, whereof some were anciently branches of the river, and having a soil of great richness, though in this particular it is excelled by the valley above. The only inequalities of the surface are the mounds of ancient towns, and those, often if not always ancient, on which stand the modern towns and villages. The palm-trees are less numerous, and not so beautiful as in the more southern part of the country, though other trees are more common. The houses and huts of the towns and villages are of burnt brick near the Mediterranean; but as the climate becomes drier, and the occurrence of rain far less frequent, the use of crude brick obtains, until near the point of the Delta it is very general. The mosques even of the towns are rarely remarkable for architectural beauty in the tract to the north of Cairo. The palaces or villas of the Turkish grandees, which are not uncommon, have, however, a light and picturesque appearance, though their style is not good. The deserts which inclose the plain on either side are rocky tracts of very slight elevation, having their surface overspread with sand, pebbles, and débris.

Of the towns on the northern coast, the most western, Alexandria, called by the natives El-Iskenderceeyeh, is the largest and the most important. It was founded in the year B.C. 332 by Alexander the Great, who gave it the form of a Macedonian mantle (chlamys). The ancient city occupied the space between the sea and the lake Mareotis, being about four miles in its greatest length, and a little less than a mile in its greatest breadth. The island of Pharos was likewise inhabited, and was joined to the continent by the mole called the Heptastadium, a work of Ptolemy Philadelphus, or of his father the first Ptolemy, or of Alexander himself. The Heptastadium and the island divided the bay into two harbours. These were spacious, and although the western, anciently called Eunostus Portus, but now the Old Port, is difficult to enter, and the eastern, Magnus Portus, or the New Port, is not so deep and is less secure, they are by far the best anchorages on the coast of Egypt, and there is nothing else deserving the name of a harbour, nor does there ever seem to have been. Alexandria, which partly occupied the site of the ancient Rhacotis, a place of little importance, speedily increased in consequence, and became the emporium of the trade between Europe, Arabia, and India, owing this prosperity to its harbours. After the death of Alexander the city became the capital of Ptolemy, the son of Lagus, the founder of a dynasty which generally held more extensive dominions than the kingdom of Egypt, and at one time ruled an empire not inferior to that of the most successful of the Pharaohs. By the Ptolemies, Alexandria was adorned with palaces and temples of great magnificence, for which they did not scruple to despise more ancient edifices of some of their chiefest ornaments. While its commercial importance increased, it became a celebrated seat of learning, through the wise interest with which the Greek kings regarded science and letters, and Ptolemy Soter commenced the famous Library. Under the Ptolemies, however, the inhabitants, who were chiefly Greeks, became very troublesome to their rulers, like most commercial populations, and their turbulence was ill restrained by the weakness of the later sovereigns of that line. From the time of the Roman Conquest, B.C. 30, until it was taken by the Arabs, A.D. 640, Alexandria sensibly declined, partly in consequence of its being a provincial capital, instead of a royal residence, but chiefly because of the unruly disposition of its inhabitants, and their violent religious and political disputes, which at last resulted in the seat of government being transferred to the fortress of Egyptian Babylon, near the modern Cairo, which became in some sort the capital. During this time it was distinguished for the learning of its ecclesiastics, and the strong part which they took in the theological differences of the early Church. Under the Muslims, Alexandria never regained the position of metropolis of Egypt, and its importance, with some fluctuations, waned until the discovery and consequent adoption of the route to India by the Cape of Good Hope almost withdrew the main cause of its prosperity. Recently, however, the resumption of the overland route has greatly benefited this city, and although it was not made the capital, it became the favourite residence of Mohammad 'Alee, which in like manner contributed to its welfare.

The older part of the town of Alexandria stands upon the Heptastadium, which is much wider than of old, but the recent part, where are the houses of the European merchants, occupies the site of a portion of the ancient city which was nearest to the mole. The most striking edifice is the castle on the island of Pharos, containing a lighthouse, which has succeeded to the more famous Pharos of antiquity. Here also is the Pasha's palace, as well as a lesser Pharos. The houses of the town are built of stone, or have their lowest story cased with that material, and the portion above of brick plastered and whitewashed. The residences of the European merchants and consuls are spacious and well-built, somewhat in the modern Italian style, but have no claims to architectural beauty. The mosques are not

---

1 The following account of the topography and monuments of Egypt is the result of personal observations made during a long residence in that country. It is not therefore deemed necessary to append references, except in cases of particular importance, or where information has been derived from published works.

2 Comp. Strabo, xvii. 1; and Diod. xvii. 62. remarkable, but the English church will, if ever completed, be a great ornament to the town. The population is estimated at about 80,000 (including the garrison and sailors of the fleet), by Sir Gardner Wilkinson (1843). One of the favourite projects of Mohammad 'Alee was the fortification of Alexandria, which has been thus rendered so strong that if well garrisoned it could not be invested by a force of less than about 40,000 men.

The remains of ancient buildings are very scanty and of little interest, compared to those which are seen on the sites of other Egyptian towns. Two objects are conspicuous, one of the obelisks commonly but inaccurately called "Cleopatra's Needles," and the great column which is incorrectly named "Pompey's Pillar." The former is a fine obelisk of red granite nearly seventy feet in height, bearing hieroglyphic inscriptions with the names of Thothmes III., Rameses II., and a later king. Beside it is a fallen obelisk of the same dimensions, its fellow. They were brought here from some ancient temple during the Greek or Roman rule. "Pompey's Pillar" is in like manner of red granite, and its shaft is about seventy feet high, the whole column being nearly a hundred in height. An inscription in Greek upon its pedestal states that it was dedicated to the Emperor Diocletian, but it is not certain that it was set up to him, nor that it did not form one of a series of such columns, which, however, is unlikely, from its great size. The other remains are not worthy a special description in this article, as space would be thus occupied that must be devoted to more remarkable monuments.

Proceeding to the east of Alexandria, the first place of importance is Er-Rasheed, called by the Europeans Rosetta, a considerable town on the west bank of the branch of the Nile, named the Rosetta Branch, and ancienly the Bolbitine. Before the cutting of the Mahmoodceyeli Canal by Mohammad 'Alee, to connect Alexandria with this branch of the river, Rosetta was a place of greater importance than now; as the overland trade from India chiefly passed through it, in consequence of the decay of the old canal of Alexandria. It is a well-built town, having some gardens, like most of those of Egypt rather picturesque than beautiful, and it is in many respects more agreeable than Alexandria. Its population is stated by Clot-Bey to be scarcely 15,000.

A little to the north of the town is the boghaz, a bar of sand stretching across the mouth of the river, and rendering it often impassable; and between it and Rosetta is an old fort called Fort St Julien by the French who repaired it during their occupation of Egypt, when one of their officers discovered the trilingual tablet thence called the Rosetta Stone, which afforded the clue by which the Egyptian hieroglyphics were interpreted.

In ascending the Rosetta Branch, the first place of interest is the site of Sais, on the eastern bank, marked by lofty mounds, and the remains of massive walls of crude brick, but nothing of greater interest. Perhaps, however, some ruins of the great temple may be buried here. Its position is marked by the walls of crude brick above mentioned, which were those of a great enclosure in which it and doubtless other sacred edifices stood. Sais was one of the most ancient cities of Egypt, and from it Cecrops is said to have led a colony to Athens. The goddess Neit or Neith was the divinity of the place, and a festival of great solemnity was annually held here in her honour, to which pilgrims resorted from other parts of Egypt. Sais was remarkable for the learning of its priests, and for a time held a high political position when Egypt was ruled by the kings of the powerful Twenty-sixth Dynasty, whose native place it was, though it does not seem to have been capital of the country.

A modern village here is called "Sai-el-Hagar," or "Sais of the Stone," a name which probably alludes to the famous monolith described by Herodotus.

In the interior of the modern Delta no remains of importance have been discovered, though there are many ancient sites marked by mounds. The chief towns are El-Mahalleh el-Kebeereh, not far from the Damietta Branch, about forty miles from the sea; Tanta, nearly in the middle of the Delta; and Manoos, farther south. Of these Tanta is best known as the birth-place of the Muslim saint called the seyyid Ahmad El-Bedawee, in whose honour three festivals are annually kept, the greatest of which attracts more pilgrims than any other in Egypt, and is second alone to the pilgrimage to Mekkeh in this particular. Like many celebrations of the kind, the festivals of Tanta are rather distinguished by riot than piety, and recall the revelries of Bubastis and Canopus.

Several sites of interest are found on the course of the Damietta, Damietta Branch, the old Phatnitic or Phatmetic. First of these is the town whence it takes its name, Dimyat, called by the Europeans Damietta, which stands not far from the mouth of this branch, and on its eastern side. In the time of the Crusades it was a strong place, and regarded as the key of Egypt. It was taken and retaken by the contending forces, and formed the basis of the operations of St Louis in the unfortunate Eighth Crusade. Shortly afterwards the Memlook Sultan Edh-Dhahir Beybars, in A.D. 1251, razed it and rebuilt it on the present site somewhat further from the sea. It is a flourishing town, and has a population of about 28,000 inhabitants, according to Sir Gardner Wilkinson.

The next place of importance is the town of El-Mansoorah, founded by El-Melik El-Kamil, the El-Mansoorah nephew of Salih-ed-Deen, during the Sixth Crusade, to commemorate, as its name imports, his success over the invading army of Jean de Brienne. A little to the south of El-Mansoorah, on the opposite bank, at a short distance from the river, are the remains of a very remarkable temple of the goddess Isis, and the mounds of the town of Iseum. Although the temple is entirely thrown down, as though by a natural convulsion, but no doubt by human violence, its plan may be partly traced and its date ascertained, since the materials have not been removed. It was, unlike most Egyptian temples, built altogether of granite, and about 600 feet in length and 200 in breadth. The materials must have been transported from Syene, a distance by the river, on which they were doubtless floated, of more than 600 miles. Bearing in mind this circumstance, and the difficulty of both working and sculpturing so hard a material, this temple must be considered to be one of the most costly in the country. The earliest name which has been found here is that usually assigned to Amyrtaeus of the Twenty-eighth Dynasty, but the most common one is that of Ptolemy Philadelphus. It was in this part of Egypt that Amyrtaeus found a refuge during his long contest with the Persians, and it seems not improbable that when he had at last mounted the throne, and made Egypt once more an independent kingdom, he testified his pious gratitude by commencing this magnificent edifice. A little to the south of this site is the small town of Sememnoed, anciently Seben-Semenmoodytus, the city of Hercules, in like manner on the western bank of the river; and a short distance farther, on the same side, is the village of Aboo-Seer, the ancient Busiris, named Aboo-Seer after Osiris, who, with Isis, was here worshipped. Herodotus mentions, among the great festivals, that of Isis held at the latter place, but this was more probably kept at Iseum, which was near by. For a considerable distance there is Tel-Atreeb, nothing of interest until we reach Tel-Atreeb, where the (Athribis).

---

1 Modern Egypt and Thebes, vol. i., p. 160. 2 Aegypt General, tom. i., p. 196. 3 Englishwoman in Egypt, vol. i., p. 54. 4 Modern Egypt and Thebes, vol. i., p. 452, 463. 5 The temple of Bubastis at the city of the same name was likewise entirely of red granite. Mod. Egypt and Thebes, vol. i., p. 428. 6 Vol. VIII. site of the town of Athribis is marked by high mounds, with remains of ancient houses and some blocks of stone.

To the eastward of the Damietta Branch, in the broad cultivated tract or the desert beyond, are some places worthy of note. The most eastern of these is the site of Pelusium, which was, in the times of the Pharaohs of the Twenty-sixth Dynasty, and probably earlier, the key of Egypt towards Palestine. No important remains have been discovered here. Between this site and the Damietta Branch are the mounds of Tanis, or Zoan, where are considerable remains of the great temple, the most remarkable of which are several fallen obelisks, some of which are broken. From their inscriptions, and those of other blocks, it has been ascertained that the temple was as ancient as the time of the Twelfth Dynasty, and was much beautified by Rameses II. and other kings of that time and the subsequent period. Tanis was on the eastern bank of the Tanitic branch of the Nile, now called the canal of El-Mo'izz. On the same side of the same branch, but considerably to the south, was the city of Bubastis, the site of which is indicated by very lofty mounds, in which may be traced the remains of its great temple. Here was held the festival of the goddess Bubastis, which attracted great crowds of pilgrims, and is ranked by Herodotus first of the festivals of Egypt.

Not far south, and on the borders of the desert, is Bilbeys, which was a place of some importance as a frontier-town in the time of the Elyoobe princes. Still farther south are the mounds of Onion, the Jewish city founded by the high priest Onias, where was a temple closed by Vespasian not long after the overthrow of Jerusalem. The site is called Tell-el-Yahoodieyeh, or "The Mound of the Jewess."

At the point of the Delta is the unfinished Barrage, which was intended, by crossing both branches of the river, to regulate the inundation above and below this place. The river here becomes broader, as it is generally for a great distance higher, than in its divided state. A little south of the point of the Delta, on the eastern bank of the river, near the village of El-Matarceyeh, is the site of the ancient Heliopolis, the City of the Sun, marked by a solitary obelisk, and crude brick ridges formed by the ruins of a massive wall. The obelisk bears the name of Seser-tesen I., the head of the Twelfth Dynasty, in the simple inscription, which runs down each of its sides. It is of red granite, and nearly 70 feet in height. The city was famous rather for the learning of its college than for its size, and the temple of Ra was held in high veneration. Many famous Greek philosophers studied here, and much that has been supposed to have been discovered by them was probably derived from their Egyptian instructors. At a short distance south of Heliopolis is the modern metropolis of Egypt, Cairo, not far inland.

Boolak, the port of Cairo, is a considerable and flourishing town, having two remarkable mosques, and a very large palace, built by Isma'eel Pashá, a son of Mohammad 'Ale, who fell a victim to a conspiracy caused by his own tyranny, while commanding an expedition in Upper Nubia. It was founded A.H. 713, in the reign of the Sultan Mohammad Ibn Kal'a-oon. Two principal roads lead hence to the metropolis, distant about a mile.

Cairo is the fourth Muslim capital of Egypt: the site of one of those that have preceded it is, for the most part, included within its walls, while the other two were a little to the south. 'Amr, the Muslim conqueror of the country, founded El-Fustat, the oldest of these, close to the fortress of Egyptian Babylon, the seat of government at that time. Its name signifies "The Tent," as it was built where 'Amr had pitched his tent. The new town speedily became a place of importance, and was the residence of the Naïbs, or lieutenants, appointed by the orthodox and Umayee Khaleefehs. It received the name of Masr, properly Misr, which was applied by the Arabs to every important capital of the country, Thebes and Alexandria excepted. It declined after the foundation of El-Kahireh, but never became altogether deserted, for a small town, called Masr El-'Atteekah, or "Old Masr," occupies, in the present day, part of what was its area in its time of prosperity. Shortly after the overthrow of the Umayee Dynasty, and the establishment of the Abbássee, the city of El-'Askar was founded (A.H. 133) by Suleymán, the general who subjugated the country, and became the capital and residence of the successive lieutenants of the Abbássee Khaleefehs. El-'Askar was a small town adjacent to El-Fustat, of which it was a kind of suburb. Its site is now entirely desolate. The third capital, El-Katâ'ë, or El-Katâ'ë', was founded about A.H. 260, by Ahmad Ibn-Tooleon, a lieutenant who rendered himself independent of the Abbássee Khaleefeh, and made this his capital. It continued the royal residence of his successors; but not long after the fall of the Dynasty, and a subsequent one, the seat of government was transferred by the Fatimées to a new city, El-Kahireh. El-Katâ'ë, which had been sacked on the overthrow of the Tooleonees, rapidly decayed. A part of the present Cairo occupies its site, and contains its great mosque, that of Ahmad Ibn-Tooleon.

Gölmr el-Ka'id, the general who subjugated Egypt to the power of his master, the Fatimée Khaleefeh El-Mo'izz, founded a new capital A.H. 358, which was named El-Kahireh, that is, "the Victorious," which has been corrupted into Cairo. This town occupied about a fourth part of the present metropolis, being the north-eastern portion. By degrees it became greater than El-Fustat, and took from it the name of Misr or Masr, which is applied to it by the modern Egyptians. It continually increased, so as to include the site of El-Katâ'ë to the south, and of the old town of El-Maks to the west. The famous Salab-ed-Deen, or Saladin, built a citadel on the lowest point of the mountain to the east, which immediately overlooked El-Katâ'ë, and he partly walled round the towns and large gardens within the space now called Cairo. Under the prosperous rule of the Memlouk Sultans this great tract was filled with habitations; a large suburb to the north, the Hoseynecyeh, was added; and the town of Boolak founded. Since the Turkish conquest (A.D. 1517) the metropolis has constantly decayed, but its limits are the same.

Cairo is of an irregular oblong form. Its greatest length is about three miles, and its average breadth about a mile and a half; and its dimensions do not fall very much short of these in any part. This surface is not, however, entirely occupied by houses, for it contains the citadel, various extensive gardens and open spaces, as well as lakes. The streets are extremely narrow, and the markets generally crowded, so that the stranger usually acquires a delusive idea of the density of the population. Mr Lane states the population to have been 240,000 before the great plague of 1835, and adds that the deficiency, equal to not less than one-third of the inhabitants, caused by that terrible visitation, would be speedily supplied from the villages. Sir Gardner Wilkinson, in his Modern Egypt and Thebes, published in 1843, gives the population at about 200,000; and Mrs Poole, writing in 1842, estimates it at about 240,000; but Clot-Bey, whose work appeared in 1840, states the much higher amount of about 300,000 souls. The census of 1847-8, already noticed, states the more moderate sum of 253,641 inhabitants, and in this instance it is not likely to have been far wrong. We may fairly suppose that during the time of comparative prosperity that followed the great plague of 1835 the population gradually increased to about 250,000, and that the cholera in 1848 and the recent conscriptions occasioned by the war between Turkey and Russia have somewhat diminished its amount, which may at the present time be stated at above 200,000, and probably little below 250,000. Of the population of 240,000 in 1834, according to Mr Lane, about 190,000 were Muslim Egyptians; about 10,000 Copts; 3000 or 4000 Jews; and the rest, strangers from various countries. The adult male population was about one-third of the whole, or 80,000 persons, of whom 30,000 were merchants, petty shopkeepers, and artisans; 20,000 domestic servants; 15,000 common labourers, porters, &c.; the remainder chiefly consisting of military and civil servants of the government.

Cairo is still undoubtedly the most remarkable and characteristic of Arab cities. The beauty of its religious and domestic architecture, before the recent Turkish innovations, is unexcelled elsewhere. The edifices raised by the Moorish kings of Spain, and the Muslim rulers of India, may have been more splendid in their materials, and more elaborate in their details; the houses of the great men of Damascus may be more costly than were those of the Memlook Beys; but for purity of taste and elegance of design they are far excelled by many of the mosques and houses of Cairo. These mosques have suffered much in the beauty of their appearance from the effects of time and neglect; but their colour has been often thus softened, and their outlines rendered the more picturesque. What is most to be admired in their style of architecture is its extraordinary freedom from restraint, evidenced in the wonderful variety of its forms, and their being frequently irregular with respect to one another without offending the eye, as well as the skill in design which has made the most intricate details to harmonize with grand outlines. Its beauty seems to resemble that of nature, ever changing, yet ever harmonious, irregular without disproportion, because it appeals to a higher feeling than that which judges by the cold rules of geometry. Yet it never attains to sublimity, unlike the older architecture of the country; for the religion which originated it endeavoured by it to shadow forth the joys of a future paradise in which the senses were to be gratified rather than the soul. The ancient Egyptian raised his pyramid on a rock in the trackless waste, or excavated his sepulchre in one of its most secluded valleys; his time-defying temples stood in the desert, or raised their stern masses above the fields; the Muslim placed his mosque in cities, amidst the homes of men, and where its elegant minaret should be half hidden by the palms, and throw its shadow of red and white across a tranquil lake. Both have now passed away, the ancient art and the modern, and nothing has taken their place that can lessen regret or awaken hope. See the article CAIRO.

To the east of Cairo is a bold spur of the mountains known as El-Gebel El-Mukattam. Beneath it, and to the north of the citadel, is the cemetery of Kāt Bey, remarkable for the splendid tombs of the Memlook Sultans. The most beautiful of these is that of Kāt Bey from which it takes its name, but those of the Sultan Barkook and of El-Ghoree must not be passed by unmentioned. At a little distance to the north-east is the Gebel el-Ahmara "the Red Mountain," and southward of this on the rocky tract is petrified wood in large quantities strewn on the surface. The space between Cairo and the Nile, varying from a mile to a mile and a half in breadth, is occupied by plantations which were made by Ibraheem Pasha during his father's rule. Formerly this side of the city was, as the other three are still to a great extent, bounded by lofty mounds of rubbish; these he caused to be removed, and by doing so conferred a great benefit upon the inhabitants, as well as by planting with trees the intervening space. By irrigating this tract very freely by a steam-engine he considerably lessened the good he had effected, rendering the western part of the city somewhat damp. To the south of Cairo are a great cemetery containing the tomb of the Imām Esh-Shāde'ee, and an aqueduct, built by the Sultan El-Ghoree, which conducts water from the Nile to the Citadel; and further, the Roman fortress of Egyptian Babylon, now called Kasr-esl-Shena, and chiefly occupied by a Coptic convent, as well as the small town of Masr El-'Ateekah, which is all that remains of the famous metropolis El-Fustat. It contains no remarkable edifices; in its immediate neighbourhood however is the oldest mosque in Egypt, that of 'Amr, the Muslim conqueror of the country, but it has been so frequently repaired and almost rebuilt, that it is impossible to form any idea of its original appearance. Opposite to Masr El-'Ateekah, from which it is separated by a very narrow branch of the Nile, is the island of Er-Rōdah, containing the famous Mikyās or Nilometer, and Ibraheem Pasha's garden, which was beautifully laid out after the European manner by the late Mr Traill, a Scottish horticulturist.

The chief place on the western bank of the river near El-Geezeh. Cairo is the small town of El-Geezeh, opposite Masr El-'Ateekah. El-Geezeh is best known as having given its name to the three most famous pyramids of Egypt, which are, with the small ones in their neighbourhood, called by both natives and the Franks the Pyramids of El-Geezeh. These marvellous structures stand on the slightly elevated border of the low Libyan range, not more than a quarter of a mile beyond the limit of the cultivated land. Before describing them it is necessary to form some idea of the great necropolis to which they belong.

The city of Memphis stood on the western bank of the Necropolis Nile about ten miles above Cairo. The kings and people of Mem who dwelt there chose the nearest part of the desert as phis their burial-place, and built tombs on its rocky edge, or excavated them in its sides. The kings raised pyramids around which their subjects were buried in smaller sepulchres. The pyramids were grouped together, and often there is a considerable distance from one group to another. It must be borne in mind, however, that many pyramids have been nearly or wholly destroyed; yet as the largest undoubtedly remain, the general features of the necropolis cannot be much changed. From the citadel of Cairo we obtain a good view of the several groups. First, opposite to us, but a little to the south, are the three great pyramids of El-Geezeh, two of which exceed all the others in magnitude; at some distance farther south we see those of Ahoo-Seer, likewise three in number, of much smaller dimensions; and not so far beyond them the great pyramid of Sakkarah, called from its form that of Steps, with smaller pyramids in its neighbourhood. Farthest of all, after a wider interval, are the two large pyramids of Dahaboor, which approach in size the great structures of El-Geezeh. There are more to

---

1 Modern Egyptians, loc. cit. 2 Arab or Moorish architecture must be held to have originated with Muslim nations. Many things it certainly owed to Byzantine; but as we have no example which does not present the most remarkable essential differences, we cannot say it was the offspring of that style any more than we can assert that Greek architecture was derived from Egyptian. 3 This gentleman, during the period for which he was engaged, visited the gardens of Er-Rōdah, introduced various foreign trees and plants, and gained such information respecting the botany of the country. By his premature death a true friend of science has been carried away, and one who possessed beyond any of his contemporaries the combined knowledge and abilities needed by a describer of the Egyptian Flora, who should supply the deficiencies of Forskal and Delle. That task he did not live to execute, to the lasting detriment of science and the regret of his many friends. the south as far as the Feiyoum, the last being that of El-Lahoon, but none to the south of the pyramids of Dahshoor can be included within the Memphite necropolis. That great tract, which was also the burial-place of Heliopolis, extended, if we measure from the ruined pyramid of Aboo-Ruwesh, somewhat to the north of those of El-Geezeh, to the southernmost pyramid of Dahshoor, throughout a space of nearly twenty miles, in almost every part of which some sepulchres have been discovered, while it cannot be doubted that many more await a fortunate explorer.

The road to the pyramids of El-Geezeh from the town whence they derive their modern appellation, is through cultivated fields diversified by villages in palm-groves. As we approach them, these structures do not give us that idea of size that we had expected from our first distant view; and until we stand at their feet we do not appreciate their vastness. But as we endeavour to scan the height of the Great Pyramid, when about to commence its ascent, we fully realize a result that human labour has not achieved elsewhere. The very dimensions—a height of half a thousand feet, four sides each measuring the seventh of a mile—are in themselves gigantic; but when we know that this huge space is almost wholly solid, containing a few chambers so small as not to be worthy of consideration in calculating its contents, we discover that no monuments of man's raising elsewhere afford any scale by which to estimate its greatness.

The present perpendicular height of the Great Pyramid is, according to the late General Vyse's excellent work, 450 ft. 9 in.; and its present base 746 ft. 0 in. It is about 30 feet lower than it was originally, in consequence of much of the outer masonry having been torn off, as well as the casing-stones; and its base is likewise smaller. Gen. Vyse gives the former height at 480 ft. 9 in., and the former base at 764 ft. 0 in. Like all the other pyramids, it faces the cardinal points. At the completion of the pyramid the faces were smooth and polished, but now they present a series of great steps formed by the courses of stone, and are in some places (particularly in the middle of each face, and at the angles, and about the entrance) much broken. The ascent is easy though fatiguing, and the traveller is amply rewarded by the view which he obtains from the platform, about 32 feet square, at the summit. The prospect of the fertile plain and valley on the one side, and of the undulating barren surface of the Great Desert on the other, as well as of the pyramids and tombs beneath, is alike remarkable from its character and the associations which it calls up. The examination of the interior is no less interesting. All other tombs but the Memphite pyramids and those which were simply pits were not closed, the upper chambers being intended for the performance of funeral rites when the family of the deceased visited his sepulchre. These pyramids, however, were most carefully closed. The chambers, which contained the bodies of the king, and of those (doubtless of his family) who were sometimes buried in the same structure, were without sculptures, and scarcely ornamented in any way, being sometimes wholly plain. The passages leading to them were only large enough to admit a sarcophagus, and after the king's burial were closed by the lowering of heavy stone portcullises, and the blocking up of the entrance. The desired object was security, and we must not, therefore, expect beauty or grandeur in chambers constructed for this purpose, although we cannot fail to admire their massive and gloomy aspect.

The entrance to the Great Pyramid is not far from the middle of the northern face, 49 ft. 0 in. in perpendicular height from the base. The fallen stones and rubbish have, however, raised a mound which reaches nearly to the entrance, the masonry about which having been torn down, we gain some idea of the construction of the pyramid. In this manner the passage has lost somewhat of its length. The passage itself is 3 ft. 11 in. high, and 3 ft. 5½ in. wide, and is lined with fine limestone. It descends at an angle of 26° 41'. At a distance of 68 ft. 2 in. from the beginning of the roof of the present entrance, a second passage commences from this, taking an ascending direction. The entrance of this new passage is obstructed by great blocks of granite which entirely fill it, and have been passed by means of an excavation around them. We thus enter the ascending passage, which is of the same breadth and height as the former, and inclines at an angle of 26° 18'. The stones which line its roof and sides are very rough, and it has evidently been left unfinished. After ascending this passage for a distance of 109 ft. 7 in., we reach the Grand Passage, which, from its greater dimensions presents a comparatively imposing appearance. It ascends at the same angle as the last, while a horizontal passage runs beneath it to a chamber to be subsequently mentioned. Just within, the Grand Passage is the mouth of the Well, an irregular pit, partly excavated in the rock, leading to the lower portion of the first passage. Its object was probably to afford an exit to the workmen who had been engaged in closing the ascending passage. The Grand Passage is 7 ft. 2 in. in width at its base, 28 ft. high, and 156 ft. long. The blocks which compose its sides gradually approach, every course above the second projecting a little, and on each side is a stone bench. At the end of this passage a horizontal one commences, of much smaller but unequal dimensions, and 22 ft. 1 in. in length, leading to the Grand Chamber, commonly called the King's Chamber, which it enters at the eastern end of its north side. This, which is the principal sepulchral chamber (unless, indeed, there be an undiscovered one of greater importance), is lined with red granite, and measures in length 34 ft. 3 in., in width 17 ft. 1 in., and in height 19 ft. 1 in. It is altogether plain, and contains only a sarcophagus of red granite, which is equally unadorned. Above this chamber are five small ones, which may be called entresols, evidently designed to lighten the pressure of the superincumbent masonry, particularly as the uppermost of them has a pointed roof. Four of these were discovered by the late Gen. Howard Vyse, who found in them quarry-marks, bearing the names of Shu-tu and Num-shu-tu, the former of whom had been previously identified with the builder of this pyramid mentioned by Herodotus, Diodorus, and Manetho. These chambers are reached with difficulty, and chiefly by forced passages. The horizontal passage beneath the Grand Passage must now be described. This is but 3 ft. 10 in. high, and 3 ft. 5¼ in. wide for the first 92 feet of its length, and then we descend a step and find the passage to be 6 ft. 8 in. high for 17 ft. 11 in. farther, until it enters the "Queen's Chamber," as it is usually called, at the eastern corner of its north side. This chamber is 18 ft. 9 in. long, and 17 ft. broad, and its extreme height is 20 ft. 3 in. It has a pointed roof, of great blocks of stone, inclined upwards and meeting in the middle. Within it is the entrance of a forced passage. The remainder of the first passage, beyond where the first ascending passage leads to the most interesting parts of the structure, remains to be noticed. It continues below the forced entrance to the ascending passage for a distance of 239 ft. 10 in., being cut through the rock on which the pyramid is built. For this space its inclination and proportions do not change, but it then becomes horizontal for 27 ft., termin-

---

1 See Sir John Herschel's "Observations on the Entrance Passages in the Pyramids of Gizeh," in Vyse's Pyramids of Gizeh, vol. II., pp. 107-109. The different angles of the entrance passages of other pyramids, and the circumstance that they were always closed at the completion of the buildings, show that the fact of this one's having pointed, at the period of its erection, to a Dracoon, which was then the pole-star, is not to be regarded as more than accidental. Nevertheless, as above mentioned, the pyramids face the cardinal points. nating at the entrance of an excavated chamber 46 ft. in length, and 27 ft. 1 in. in breadth, but of irregular and inconsiderable height. There is no doubt that this chamber was left unfinished at the closing of the pyramid. Beyond it the passage continues, opposite to where it entered the chamber, and extends horizontally 52 ft. 9 in. into the rock in the same direction.

Manetho calls the founder of the Great Pyramid Saphis I., but Herodotus names him Cheops, and Diodorus Siculus Chembes, or Chemmis. His hieroglyphic name Shufu, or Khufu, according to the pronunciation of different dialects, was found, as before mentioned, by General Vyse, in the quarry-marks of one of the chambers above the King's, and occurs in the inscriptions of the neighbouring tombs of private individuals. The name of Num-shufu, Manetho's Saphis II., occurs with that of Shufu, both in the quarry-marks and in the tombs; he appears to have ruled jointly with Shufu, and it is not improbable that he was also buried in this pyramid.

The Second Pyramid stands at a short distance to the S.W. of the Great Pyramid, which does not very much exceed it in magnitude, though far superior in its construction. It has a base of 690 feet 9 inches square, and is 447 feet 6 inches in height, being more steep than its larger neighbour. It is chiefly remarkable on account of a great part of its casing having been preserved, extending about a fourth of the distance from the summit. The ascent is thus rendered very difficult, especially as when one has climbed on to the cased portion, he can see nothing of the lower part of the building, and thus feeling as if upon a pyramid in the air, is very liable to become dizzy. There are two entrances, both at the north side, from which, and other peculiarities, it appears probable that it was originally much smaller than now, and that, after its first completion, it was enlarged, and a new entrance and sepulchral chamber added. Herodotus and Diodorus Siculus ascribe its erection to a king whom the former calls Chephren and the latter Kephren, the brother and successor of the builder of the Great Pyramid. Diodorus says, that according to some he was named Chabryis, and was the son of the latter sovereign. These are all variations of the name Shafra or Khafra, of an Elephantinite, Manetho's Sephres, the second king of the Fifth Dynasty, who was about contemporary with Shufu.

The Third Pyramid is almost in a line with the other two, but of much smaller dimensions, being only 203 feet in height, and 354 feet 6 inches square at the base. It is constructed beautifully, and in a costly manner, and in these respects is unexcelled, if equalled, by any other pyramid. The exterior was anciently casing altogether, or in part, with granite, but this has been generally torn off. General Vyse opened it, and found that it had been previously ransacked. In it he discovered a very beautiful sarcophagus (which was unfortunately lost at sea on its way to England), as well as part of a mummy-case, bearing the name of King Menkaura, and the body of a workman, both of which are now in the British Museum. Herodotus and Diodorus ascribe the building of this Pyramid to Mykerinos, whom some, according to the latter, called Mecherinos; but Manetho makes it the work of Queen Nitokris. The former sovereign is Manetho's Mencheres, the fourth ruler of his Fourth Dynasty, and the latter ends his Sixth Dynasty. This apparent inconsistency is explained, as the Chevalier Bunsen first remarked, by the construction of the pyramid, which has two principal chambers, and was evidently enlarged after its first completion, so that we may fairly suppose that it is the sepulchre of both Mencheres and Queen Nitokris.

Near the three large pyramids are six smaller ones; three of these are near the east side of the Great Pyramid, and three on the south side of the Third Pyramid. They were probably the tombs of near relations of the kings who founded the great pyramids. The space around the pyramids is occupied by almost countless tombs, some built of stone, others excavated in the sides of the rock on which the pyramids stand, while others are simply pits with sepulchral chambers leading from them. The most interesting of these occupy a square bounded on the east by the Great Pyramid, and on the south by the Second, and are the sepulchres of the subjects of Cheops and other kings for the most part of the same period. These tombs, which are of inconsiderable dimensions in comparison to many at Thebes and elsewhere, are all built of stone, and have inclined walls, so as to resemble truncated pyramids. They usually contain several small chambers, the walls of which are decorated with most remarkable painted sculptures, portraying the everyday life of the Egyptians at that remote age, with short inscriptions of an explanatory character. The absence of representations of the gods and of the other subjects connected with religion, would lead one to suppose that at this time their belief was purer than at later periods, did not the inscriptions show this to be a false conclusion. Other similar tombs stand to the east and south of the Great Pyramid; and in the former direction are the principal sepulchral grottoes hewn in the side of the elevated rocky tract on which the pyramids stand. Some of these excavations bear similar representations to those of the tombs already mentioned. To the east of the Second Pyramid is the Great Sphinx, one of the most characteristic monuments of this wonderful necropolis. It is a recumbent andro-Sphinx, sphinx, or man-headed lion, 188 ft. 9½ in. in length, hewn out of a natural eminence in the solid rock, some defects of which are supplied by a partial stone-casing, and the legs are likewise added. Steps lead to its front where are a sanctuary and tablets, but these are covered by the sand, which, after the hollow has been cleared, speedily fills it up again. Not far to the westward of the Sphinx is the remarkable excavation known as Campbell's tomb, chiefly consisting of a large pit surrounded by a trench. It was discovered by General Vyse, whose name is honourably connected with the most important discoveries in the necropolis of Memphis. The causeways leading to the Great Pyramid and to the Third, the former of which so greatly excited the admiration of Herodotus, are well worthy of a careful examination. The only pyramid which stands to the north of this group is that of Aboo-Ruweys, which is in so ruined a condition as scarcely to deserve a visit. It of Aboo-lies about five miles to the north of the Great Pyramid.

Southward of the Pyramids of El-Geezeh, the first objects of interest are those forming the similar group of Aboo-Seeer, of much smaller dimensions, the largest being about Seeer, the size of the Third Pyramid. They are on the elevated edge of the Libyan chain, about seven miles from the Third Pyramid, and are four in number, three being large, and the fourth very small. The Northern Pyramid of Aboo-Seeer appears to have been the tomb of Shura or Soris, the first king of the Fourth Dynasty.

About two miles further in the same direction, are the Pyramids of Sakkarah, the greatest and most remarkable of which is called the Pyramid of Steps. The tract around them appears to have been the principal burial-place of Memphis, from its nearness to the site of that city, and the number of the sepulchres. The Pyramid of Steps has a height of 196 feet 6 inches, and its base formerly measured at the north and south sides 351 feet 2 inches, and at the east and west, 393 feet 11 inches. Beneath it are numerous passages and a gallery, which must, for the most part, have been made subsequently to the completion of the structure.

---

1 This body has been erroneously supposed to be that of king Mykerinos. 2 Egypt's Place, vol. ii., p. 165, et seq., and 210, et seq. 3 Brugsch, Reiseberichte aus Aegypten, p. 338. In the centre is a very lofty and narrow chamber, and near it a small one, which was lined with blue tiles. In the latter was an inscription containing the name and titles of a very early king, the former reading Ra-nub-rokhe, or Nub-rokhe-ra, which may correspond to Manetho's Necherchis or Necheropis, the name of the head of the Third Dynasty. In the tract between the Pyramids of Sakkarah and Abou-Seer are the remains of the Serapeum, and the burial place of the Bulls Apis, both discovered by M. Mariette. They are inclosed by a great wall, having been connected, for the Serapeum was the temple of Apis. The tomb is a great subterranean gallery, whence smaller passages branch off, and contains many sarcophagi, in which the bulls were entombed. Not the least important result of this discovery is the certainty that Serapis was a form of Osiris, and that his name was Osar-hapi or Osiris-Apis, as Sir Gardner Wilkinson had long previously suggested. The other pyramids are of comparatively little interest. There are also some curious private tombs, among which may be particularized a large grotto excavated in the face of the rock overlooking the valley, which is remarkable for being vaulted on the principle of the true arch, but without a key-stone. It is of the time of Pianmitchus II. of the Twenty-sixth Dynasty, being, as Sir Gardner Wilkinson remarks, one of the two earliest known examples of the arch in stone, though, as he adds, there are brick arches at Thebes of the time of Amenoph I. of the Eighteenth Dynasty.

The site of Memphis is marked by mounds in the cultivated tract to the east of the Pyramids of Sakkarah, and near the village of Meet-Raheeneh. Of the great temple of Ptah, or Hephaestus, its tutelary divinity, there are no remains above ground, except a few blocks of stone and some broken statues, one of which is a fine colossus of Rameses II., which stood most probably in ancient times before one of the principal entrances of the temple. It is of white chert and beautifully executed, representing the king in a standing posture. It has fallen to the ground, and part of its legs has been broken off; nevertheless it has suffered inconsiderable damage elsewhere, so as to be still one of the finest specimens of Egyptian art. The original height was more than 40 feet. The site of Memphis being in the cultivated tract, and near the modern capitals of Egypt, its monuments have alike suffered from the destructive power of nature, and from the barbarism of those who have used them as quarries or defaced them from motives of fanaticism. The Pyramids have not escaped man's violence, but their vastness has generally defied his attacks.

At a distance of about five miles to the south of the Pyramid of Steps is the northernmost of the Pyramids of Dahshoor, an interesting group, of the history of which nothing certain is known. Two of these are of stone, and three of crude brick. The former exceed in size all the other Pyramids except the First and Second of El-Geezeh, and have remarkable chambers within them. The Northern Stone Pyramid has a base of 700 feet, and a height of 326 feet 6 inches, and has lost somewhat of its size, having originally measured 719 feet 5 inches, and 342 feet 7 inches. Some of the casing remains. It has an entrance in the northern face, leading to three chambers of similar construction to the Grand Passage in the Great Pyramid. The Southern Stone Pyramid is distinguished by the peculiarity of its form and by having two entrances, one in the eastern face and the other in the northern. The lower portion has an angle of 54° 14' 46", but the inclination then changes to 42° 59' 26". It has been supposed that it was suddenly completed, and had been originally intended to be much loftier, but the method in which the pyramids were built renders this unlikely; and it seems rather to have been given this form to gratify a whim of the founder, especially as the entrances in different faces afford a similar peculiarity. Its base is 616 feet 8 inches, and its height 319 feet 6 inches. At its southern side is a small brick Pyramid. The Northern and Southern Brick Pyramids of Dahshoor are to the east of those already described. They are in a very ruined state, being merely low mounds, and one cannot decide which of them is that of Asychis mentioned by Herodotus, for it can scarcely be doubted to be one of them.

It would be ungrateful to conclude this necessarily brief notice without mentioning to whom we are indebted for the most important discoveries made in the necropolis of Memphis. Among the earlier explorers were Belzoni, by whom the Second Pyramid was opened, Salt, and Caviglia, who made interesting excavations in the Great Pyramid and in its neighbourhood. But the late General Howard Vyse undertook a complete examination of the series of Pyramids, and having secured the valuable assistance of Mr Perring and an able staff, carried out this project with well-merited success. His most valuable discoveries have been noticed above, and it should be remembered that by the outlay of his private fortune he accomplished results that have been unexcelled by any expedition supported by the funds and the influence of a government. Dr Lepsius, the head of the Prussian Expedition, opened many tombs near the Pyramids of El-Geezeh and Sakkarah, and has published in his magnificent work (Denkmäler aus Aegypten und Aethiopien) the most interesting sculptures which they contain. M. Mariette, aided by the French government, recently discovered the Serapeum, and the tomb of the Bulls Apis. Many others have explored this great necropolis with various success.

The voyage up the Nile from Cairo may now be described. The traveller usually embarks at Boolak or Masr el-Nil, El-'Ateekah. The objects of interest which he first sees have therefore been mentioned in speaking of those towns and of the environs of Cairo. Not far south of Masr El-'Ateekah the mountain and desert approach very near the river on that side, and soon after the wide opening of a valley is seen. Beyond it is a bold promontory of the eastern range which gradually recedes and then becomes parallel with the river for some distance, leaving but a narrow strip of cultivated land. Behind the village of Turah, the ancient Troja, are the quarries named after it, and a little further to the south are those of El-Massarah. These are Turah and great excavated chambers and passages, which are entered El-Masarah by large square apertures in the steep face of the mountain. Hence were taken the finer blocks of limestone, employed in the construction of the Pyramids of El-Geezeh. Tablets in both quarries record the quarrying executed under different sovereigns. South of the quarries the character of the eastern bank continues unchanged, and presents no remarkable object until we reach the promontory of the sheykh Aboo-Noor, which will be subsequently mentioned. The western bank, on the contrary, is broad and fertile, abounding in villages, and above its palm groves rise in the dis-

---

1 Brugsch, Reiseberichte aus Aegypten, p. 27, et seqq. 2 Modern Egypt and Thebes, vol. i., pp. 368-9. 3 This colossus is the property of the British Museum, but no steps have been taken to remove it to this country. As Sir Gardner Wilkinson remarks, "when the Turks have burnt it for lime, it will be regretted." 4 For an account of the Pyramids, or copies of the bas-reliefs in the tombs around them, see General Vyse's Pyramids of Gizeh, and the folio plates published under the same title; Sir Gardner Wilkinson's Modern Egypt and Thebes; Mrs Poole's Englishwoman in Egypt; Lepsius's Denkmäler aus Aegypten und Aethiopien; Brugsch's Reiseberichte aus Aegypten, &c. 5 Vyse's Pyramids of Gizeh, vol. iii., p. 93, et seqq. The picturesque and massive forms of the long series of pyramids. Considerably beyond those of Dahshour, which may be considered as the most southern of those in the Memphis necropolis, are the two Pyramids of El-Medinet-Abu, which are too small to be seen from the river, Pyramid of and yet farther the solitary Pyramid of Meydum, commonly called the False Pyramid. This is a structure of considerable size, having a base of about 400 feet, and a height of about 310 feet. In consequence of blocks having been pulled off its sides for building purposes, it has the appearance of being built in two degrees, the lower of which is much greater than the upper, while the fallen stones around its base make it seem as if raised upon an eminence to increase its apparent size, and hence its name. The entrance has not been discovered, and as it is so far from Memphis it may have escaped the spoliation which the other pyramids suffered in ancient times. Its position, rising alone above the rich valley and desert beyond, without any object by which to measure its size, render this pyramid, especially when seen from some distance across a broad part of the river to the north, a very striking and picturesque object. There is nothing else worthy of a visit on the western bank until we reach the town of Benne-Suweyf, about seventy miles by the course of the river from Cairo.

Benne-Suweyf is a busy town, being the port of the Feiyoum. A road leads hence to that province, in a northerly direction. After crossing the Bahr-Yousuf, a branch of which waters the Feiyoum, we pass through the opening in the Libyan range, which leads to that province, leaving on our right the ruined brick Pyramid of El-Lahoon, so called from an adjacent village.

The Feiyoum, including its lake, is a pear-shaped tract, its narrowest part being to the west, extending into the desert, and measuring in its greatest length about thirty miles, and in its greatest breadth about twenty. The part now cultivated is more than two-thirds of this extent from the east. At the north-western extremity is the great lake of El-Karn, which is long and narrow, and fills the northern portion of the valley. A branch of the Bahr-Yousuf, as already mentioned, flows through the opening leading to the Feiyoum. This canal soon spreads into many streams, two of which, after joining into a single course, carry off the superabundant waters of the inundation into the lake of El-Karn, while they contribute with the others to irrigate the cultivable tracts.

The site of the famous Labyrinth first claims our notice after entering the Feiyoum. Its position may be known by a ruined circular brick pyramid, that of Hawara, which is spoken of by both Herodotus and Strabo, and may be called the Pyramid of the Labyrinth. The remains of the Labyrinth itself, which had been previously known, were first carefully examined by the Prussian Expedition, headed by Dr. Lepsius, in 1843, and much information was gained respecting it. The structure was so ruined, however, that the results were not as decisive as might have been hoped. Yet the plan was to some extent made out, and the building shown to have contained a great number of very small chambers, as ancient writers had said; and the discovery of royal names of the Twelfth Dynasty, particularly of Amenemha III., to whom Manetho ascribes the founding of the Labyrinth, leaves little doubt that this king was the Moris who built the Labyrinth according to the classic writers. Notwithstanding, the name Moris seems to have been applied to more than one sovereign, although there is little doubt that of these the most important was Amenemha III.

His prenomen Ma-en-ra, probably corrupted into Ma-ra, appears to have originated Moris, and is certainly sufficiently similar to afford some argument for the identity of Amenemha III., with Moris of the Labyrinth. The use of this building has not been distinctly ascertained. Manetho indeed makes it to have been the founder's tomb, but it is most probable that he was buried in the pyramid, which, however, the Egyptian historian may have regarded as part of the Labyrinth, since it is evidently connected with that structure. It seems not improbable that the Labyrinth itself was a kind of council-house where the representatives, at first of the different kingdoms, and afterwards of the various nomes, met to transact the general business of the country, and where the records of these assemblies were preserved. Such an explanation seems best to suit the accounts of ancient writers and the character of the building, but it cannot be regarded as more than hypothetical.

Not far beyond the site of the Labyrinth is the capital of the province, usually called "El-Medinet-Abu" or "the City," and "Medinet-El-Feiyoum," "the City" or "Capital of the Feiyoum," close to the mounds of the ancient Arsinoe, or Crocodilopolis. It is a small but flourishing town. The only monuments of antiquity in its neighbourhood are the remains at Beyshamou somewhat to the north, and the great broken tablet at Begeeq, at a smaller distance to the south. The former are two structures supposed by some to be pyramids, and the latter is a record of the time of Sesertes I., which, since it bears the figures of several divinities, throws some light upon the religion of ancient Egypt at the remote period of his reign, which we may date as having commenced early in the twenty-first century before the Christian era. This is usually called an obelisk, but it must rather be regarded as a very tall and narrow stela or tablet, upwards of forty feet in height.

In this part of the Feiyoum, to the north of El-Medinet-Abu, may be traced the remains of that remarkable hydraulic work the Lake Moris, or, more properly, the Lake of Moris, since Moris is doubtless the name of the king by whose orders it was dug. A French engineer, of whom mention has been made already in this article, M. Limant, was the first to determine the position and character of this famous work of antiquity; and the results of his investigations are in accordance with the opinions of some who had previously noticed the subject in published works. To M. Limant certainly is due the merit of having settled a controversy of no little importance, and the Egyptian Society of Cairo deserves our thanks for the publication of his most interesting memoir. The Moris who gave his name to the lake was probably Amenemha III., the king who can scarcely be doubted to have been the founder of the Labyrinth. The object of the Lake Moris was to regulate the irrigation of the Feiyoum, very anciently the Crocodilopolite Nome, and afterwards the Arsinoite; and it was valuable on account of its fisheries. It seems rather to have deserved the name of a very large reservoir or broad canal than that of a lake. Notwithstanding the drying up of the Lake Moris, the Feiyoum is still an important and fertile province. It produces very large quantities of grapes; and the fields of roses, cultivated for the sake of rose-water, present a remarkable appearance.

The great Lake of El-Karn is perhaps the most interesting object in this part of Egypt. Its name, Birket-el-Karn, signifies "The Lake of the Horn," or "Projection," by which an island is intended, and not its general form, as has been supposed. It is, as already stated, according to Sir Gardner Wilkinson, about 35 miles long, 7 broad at its widest part, and is not deep, as far as has been ascertained. The water is brackish and unwholesome, although derived from the Nile, which has at all seasons a much higher level. It is bounded on the south by tracts in a state of cultivation, or deserted for want of labourers though anciently cultivated, and on the north by the Libyan desert, above which rises a bold range of mountains; and it has a strange and picturesque wildness. Its northern shore was anciently cultivated, at least in part, but is now entirely waste. Near the lake are several sites of ancient towns, and the temple called Kasr-Karoon distinguishes the most important of these. That temple, however, being devoid of sculpture, and doubtless of the Roman period, could not attract attention except in a region so barren of monuments. Not far from it are other remains of still less interest. After this cursory view of the Feiyoom we may return to the Nile and continue our southward course.

Not far south of Bencee-Suweyf the eastern chain is washed by the river at the picturesque promontory of the sheikh Aboo-Noor, whose tomb stands on its summit. From this point as far as the town of Menflood the mountains on the east are close to the Nile, leaving a narrow space of cultivable land, or none at all, while on the contrary the western bank is far broader than before. For forty miles nothing remarkable attracts the eye except the lofty mounds of ancient towns, until one sees the well-proportioned minaret of a mosque in the large village of Semeloet, said to have been erected by the architect of the mosque of the Sultan Hasan at Cairo. Not far beyond, the river washes the picturesque cliffs of Gebel-et-Teyr, or the Mountain of Birds, part of the eastern range. Upon its summit stands a Coptic convent, called the Convent of the Virgin, Deyr-el-'Adra. One of the monks of this convent usually climbs down the steep face of the mountain by a dizzy path, and swims to the traveller's boat to solicit an alms as a fellow Christian; an appeal not to be slighted, however low one's opinion of the Coptic Church may be. In this part of Egypt we first begin to notice the entrances of grottoes in the face of the eastern mountains, but none of these for some distance are known to be of any interest. Not far beyond Gebel-et-Teyr is the town of El-Minyeh, on the western bank, a place wearing a cheerful aspect. Opposite El-Minyeh are quarries and sepulchral grottoes, the most remarkable of the latter being at a site called El-Kam el-Ahmur, or "the Red Mound." These are of the time of the Fourth and Sixth Dynasties; but they have recently sustained so much damage that they do not repay a visit, except from one who is a student of hieroglyphics. The governor of El-Minyeh, an ignorant Turk, used these ancient tombs as quarries, and had it not been for the interference of Mr Harris of Alexandria, the more important grottoes of Bencee-Hasan would have shared the same fate at his hands.

The first remarkable objects above El-Minyeh are the sepulchral grottoes of Bencee-Hasan, just mentioned, which are inferior to none in Egypt for beauty and interest. They are excavated in the face of the eastern mountains, which are here very low and sloping, and separated from the river alone by a small extent of débris and desert, and a very narrow strip of cultivable land. There is a large island beneath, and the channel that runs between it and the eastern mountains is dry for a great part of the year. The grottoes are almost in a line near the summit of the mountain, and at no great height above the river. The two northernmost are remarkable for having porticoes, each supported by two polygonal columns of an order which is believed to be the prototype of the Doric. Most of the grottoes are adorned with sculptures and paintings which portray with eminent truthfulness and character the manners of the Egyptians of the remote period at which they were executed, for they are monuments of the Twelfth Dynasty, dating about B.C. 2000. The persons who were entombed here were governors of what must have been an extensive district, the chief town of which was doubtless not far distant. The tombs generally consist of a chamber of large dimensions, having sometimes a portico before it, and a niche with seated figures of the chief persons buried in it at the extremity, and pits leading to sepulchral chambers. The principal apartment is sometimes supported by pillars cut out of the rock, and vaulted. Its walls bear representations of the diversions of the occupant during his life-time, and of his varied occupations, in scenes depicting hunting, fishing, games, feasts, the processes of agriculture, and the like. The figures of beasts and birds, more especially the latter, are characterized by a remarkable fidelity and beauty, and there can be no doubt that Egyptian art had attained a greater excellence at this time than it possessed under the Fourth Dynasty, although it was not until the rule of the Eighteenth Dynasty that it rose to its highest perfection. A little to the south of these grottoes, in a ravine, is the Speos Artemidos, a small rock temple of Pasht, the Egyptian Diana, and some sepulchres of little interest.

A few miles to the south of the Speos Artemidos are two sites, one on either side of the river, which were marked, within the memory of persons now living, by most important monuments which have since been destroyed by the barbarism of the Turks. That on the right bank, near the large village of El-Ashmooneyn, the ancient Hermopolis Magna, was part of a magnificent portico, bearing the names of Philip Aridaeus, Alexander Ægus, and Ptolemy Lagus, all that stood of the temple of Thoth; while on the opposite side of the river were considerable remains of the edifices of the town of Antinoë, founded by Hadrian. But while we regret the destruction of such interesting records, we must not charge either the Turks or the native Egyptians with all the mischief of this kind which is perpetrated, though our sorrow is increased by the reflection that to European travellers, not excluding the heads of more than one scientific expedition, must be charged no small share in the destruction or mutilation of the monuments. The apathy of the Turks, who cannot comprehend the value of the records of any but their own nation (and happy would they be could they blot out much of those annals); the vulgar desire of every traveller, especially of our own country and of America, to leave his name cut in every monument as a witness of his vandalism, and to aid in its destruction by carrying off a fragment; the culpability of the natives excited by this Frank custom of cutting pieces out of sculptures so as to produce the most deplorable results; and worst of all, the selfishness which has induced savans to take away part of a valuable monument to the ruin of the rest, in order to embellish a museum and gratify a patron,—all these causes have done more than time, or fanaticism, or the rage of an enemy, would have effected in a similar period.

A short distance south of Antinoë is the town of Melawee on the western bank, and a little farther, but on the other side of the river, the promontory called the Gebel-shi-sheikh Sa'eed, which is honeycombed with grottoes, some of which are shown by their sculptures to be very ancient, but are so ill preserved as to require but a short examination. A little beyond, however, in the district of Tell-El-'Amârinch, or the Mound of El-'Amârinch, a small fertile tract where the eastern mountains recede, noted, 'Amârinch, like Bencee-Hasan, for the turbulent and thievish propensities of its inhabitants, are very curious remains of a town. This place has been identified with Alabastron, or with the Psinoula of the Itinerary of Antoninus, but it is not improbable that it was deserted long before the Greek and Ro- man rule in Egypt. It was the principal seat, or the capital of a foreign race of sun-worshippers who gained the chief power in Egypt towards the close of the Eighteenth Dynasty, and it was most likely destroyed when they were overthrown, and not subsequently rebuilt. In the mountain behind it are very curious sculptured grottoes, in which were buried the subjects of these foreigners, and from them we obtain much information respecting the people and their religion, a very pure form of sun-worship. The representations are chiefly of the king, his queen, and their children, distributing presents to the soldiers and others, of acts of worship to the sun, and of temples, as well as gardens and villas. Dr Lepsius has published a valuable series of these records in his great work.

On the western bank of the Nile, a little to the south of Tell-El-Amárinch is the small town of Derout-esh-Shereef, supposed to be on the site of the Thébaïca Phylacée, which was a strong place, guarding, as its name imports, the northern boundary of the Thébats. About 20 miles to the south is the town of Menfiáoot on the same side of the river, which has a decayed appearance from the manner in which the stream has encroached upon, and washed away, part of it. Opposite to Menfiáoot in the eastern range are extensive crocodile-mummy catacombs. There is nothing of note during the next 25 miles of the river's course, which is very winding, and therefore difficult to navigate, until we reach the village of El-Hamra, the port of Asyoot. This town, the capital of Upper Egypt, or the Sa'eed, that is of the whole country above Cairo, and the residence of its governor, lies inland, about two miles from El-Hamra, in a richly cultivated plain. The town with its beautiful mosques, two of which, one of the Memlook style, and the other of the Turkish, are not unworthy of comparison with those of the metropolis, and its Constantinopolitan palace, surrounded on three sides by verdant fields, and having behind it a fine rounded spur of the western chain, which here, for the first time, is near the river, presents a picturesque appearance to one who approaches it. On entering Asyoot he is not disappointed, for the excellence of the goods and provisions sold in the well-built chief market, and the solid look of the houses, indicate activity and prosperity. And it is not a little remarkable that this was an important town at least 3500 years ago, and has thus outlived Thebes and Memphis, Tanis and Pelusium. The ancient Egyptian name was Ssot, or probably Ssot, but the Greeks called it Lycopolis, on account of the worship of the dog-headed or wolf-headed divinity of the place. This was Hephaestus, who seems to have differed from Anubis in his name alone. In the mountain behind Asyoot are some ancient grottoes, one of which is of great size, but their sculptures have unfortunately suffered much, and there is little to see in them after ascending the hill. The view of the valley and the town beneath is however an ample reward for the trouble. Thirty miles further by the course of the river, and on the eastern bank, is the village of Kaw el-Kebereeh where was anciently Anteopolis; the interesting remains of the temple of Anteus, which stood here early in the present century, have entirely disappeared through the encroachment of the river, and also, it is believed, from having been used as a quarry by the Turks. A few miles beyond this, the lofty part of the eastern range called the Gebel-esh-shaykh El-Hareede, a famous Muslim saint, hems in the river on one side for a short distance. It soon however retires again, and the valley on that side becomes broader than usual. Here, a short way from the river, stands the small town of Akhmeem, the ancient Chemmis, or Panopolis. No remains of importance mark this site. About 22 miles farther by the course of the river, on the western bank, is the important town of Girga, which was, until a comparatively recent period, the capital of the Sa'eed. The rise of Asyoot, however, and the agency of the river which is gradually washing it away, have contributed to its decline, and it wears a dilapidated aspect. Near it must have been situated the very ancient city of This, whence the First and Second Dynasties took their name. Probably This stood not far from the sacred city of Abydos, the site of which is a few miles from Girga, in a south-westerly direction, on the border of the Libyan desert, which is separated from the Nile by a broad tract of cultivated country. Two interesting edifices render Abydos worthy of a visit. The southernmost of these is a temple of Osiris, in which we find the names of Rameses II. and his father Sethee I., by whose orders it seems to have been constructed. It is so choked with sand and rubbish that little can be seen of its sculptures, and its plan can scarcely be ascertained; it is very desirable that it should be cleared. The other structure is believed by Sir Gardner Wilkinson to be the famous temple of Osiris, the chief divinity of Abydos. It is smaller, and in a worse state of preservation than the other temple, and among its sculptures are the same names, those of Sethee I. and Rameses II. Hence was taken the famous list of Pharaohs, known as the Tablet of Abydos, which is now one of the most valuable objects in the British Museum. In the desert near by are many sepulchres, which are chiefly remarkable on account of the interesting antiquities which have been discovered by clearing them out. The sanctity of Abydos as a reputed burial-place of Osiris, rendered this a favourite necropolis of the ancient Egyptians from very early times, and the extent of that of Memphis seems to have been partly owing to the same superstition.

At a distance of more than 40 miles from Abydos, but Dendera in nearly the same latitude, is the village of Dendera on the Tentyra-western, or rather southern, bank of the Nile. Before reaching it we pass the small town of Farshoot at the mouth of the great canal, called the Bahr-Yoosuf, and the large village of Hoop, marking the site of Diospolis Parva. Opposite the latter place are some sepulchral grottoes in the eastern chain, called those of Kasr-es-Seiyad which is believed to occupy the position of Chenoboscion. They contain names of kings of the Sixth Dynasty, and that of the head of the Fifteenth, but the representations which occupy their walls are not of an unusual interest. Dendera, however, is remarkable as giving its name to the first well-preserved and unencumbered temple that is seen in a voyage up the Nile. This is the famous temple of Athor the Egyptian Venus, who presided over the town of Tentyra or Tentyris, the capital of the Tentyrite Nome. It stands on the mounds of the town about a mile and a half from the Nile. As this temple gives a good idea of Egyptian architecture as applied to such buildings, it must be described with some care, although but briefly.

The temple is surrounded by a great wall of crude brick, a stone portal in which faces its front. The portal is adorned with sculptures representing the Emperors Domitian and Trajan engaged in acts of worship before several divinities, whose names occur, as well as those of the sovereigns, in the accompanying inscriptions. A wall of brick has been recently built from each end of this portal to the front of the temple, thus forming a narrow passage terminating at the entrance of the portico. The portico is about 135 feet in width, and is one of the richest and most beautiful structures of the kind. It is supported by four and twenty columns, four deep, nearly fifty feet in height, and having a diameter of somewhat more than seven feet at the thickest part. The capitals have a full face of Athor sculptured on each of their four sides, and above these a kind of shrine, or small temple. The portico is not seen to advantage in front, as it is buried to a considerable height in heaped-up rubbish, which partly conceals the intercolumniation that connects the three columns on each side of the entrance. But on descending into the interior, we are struck with the grandeur and justness of its proportions, and the richness of the sculptures which adorn its walls. It is, however, like the rest of the temple, of higher merit as regards its architecture than its sculpture, for the latter art had declined under the Greek and Roman rule to a much greater degree than the former. The sculptures are of the same kind as on the portal, representing offerings made by some of the earlier Caesars; and on the ceiling are various mystical subjects, probably of an astronomical import, and the famous Zodiac from which an extravagant idea of the antiquity of the temple was deduced before hieroglyphics were interpreted. The greater part of the back-wall of the portico was the front of the temple before this portion was added. This inner part consists of three considerable chambers, an isolated sanctuary, and numerous small apartments. The first of these is a hall, supported by a double row of columns, three on each side, of a rather heavy form, for they have, beneath the capital formed of the block with the faces of Athor, and the shrine, another capital of a cup-shape. This hall is entered by a doorway in the middle of the back-wall of the portico, and passing through it we reach a second and third chamber of the same breadth but shorter, and then the sanctuary. The entrance of this chamber is in the same line with the others, but it is much narrower and isolated by a passage running round it. On each side of the chambers and passage are many small apartments, two passages to the exterior, and a staircase; and there are singular inclined passages in the walls, two of which are entered from the sides of the portico. All these chambers and passages, excepting the two last mentioned, are profusely covered with sculptures and inscriptions of a religious character, and chiefly depicting and narrating the piety of the sovereigns by whom the temple was erected. The royal names have not always been filled in, the rings remaining vacant; but when they have been sculptured, they are generally those of the last Cleopatra, and Caesarion, her son by Julius Caesar. The staircase already mentioned is on the left-hand side of the second chamber behind the portico, and conducts us to the roof of the temple. Here are a sort of chapel and some small chambers, one of which is very interesting, because its sculptures relate to the story of Osiris. The exterior of the temple is as completely covered with sculptures as the interior. Among the figures represented here are those of Cleopatra and Caesarion; but they cannot be supposed to convey any resemblance, since they belong not alone to a conventional art, but almost to its lowest period. There are two smaller temples near the great temple of Athor, one of Isis, and the other of the kind called a Typhonium. Both are of the Roman time.

On the opposite side of the Nile, a little above Dendera, is the town of Kiné, between which and Arabia some traffic is carried on by the route through the desert to El-Kuseyr on the Red Sea. The best of the porous water bottles which are used throughout Egypt are manufactured here, as are the great water jars, called "bellasae," which the women carry, at the large village of Bellás, a few miles higher on the western bank. Opposite to Bellás are the villages called Kufi or Kifi, marking the site of the important town of Coptos, which was the emporium on the Nile of the Arabian and Indian trade under the Ptolemies; and somewhat to the south, the inconsiderable town of Koos, the ancient Apollinopolis Parva, which succeeded to the trade of Coptos, under the Muslims, until Kiné supplanted it. On the other, that is, the western bank, a little higher, is the small town of Nakádeh, which the people call Nagidch, where are Roman Catholic and Coptic convents. A short distance beyond Nakádeh are the northernmost of the remains of Thebes.

The monuments of Thebes do not present from afar the imposing appearance of the Pyramids of Memphis. Placed for the most part at a distance from the Nile, as well as from one another, and having on the western side the picturesque form of a much higher mountain than any near Memphis, rising behind them, they do not strike those who see them from the river or its banks. Most of them are not indeed visible from the Nile excepting when it is at its height. The stately colonnade of the temple of El-Uksur, on the very bank, is, however, not unworthy the magnificence of Thebes, and when one approaches the other monuments his utmost expectations are exceeded by the grandeur of El-Karnak, the beauty of the palace-temple of Ramesses II, and the mysteriousness of the tombs of the kings. Nowhere else is the mythology, the history, the very life and manners of the Egyptians of old times so vividly brought before his eyes as in the sculptured and inscribed monuments of the capital of the greatest Pharaohs.

It will be necessary to say a few words as to the position of the principal monuments, and respecting the city which they adorned, before entering into a more detailed description. Thebes, or Diospolis Magna, is called in the hieroglyphic inscriptions Ap-t, or with the article prefixed, T-ap, and Amen-es, or the abode of Amen. The Copts write the former name ṭwṣ, which, according to the Memphite dialect, is pronounced Thaba; and this explains the origin of the Greek Ὀλυμπος. In the Bible it is mentioned as Ἐνώπιον No-Amon, a name of difficult etymology. The date of its foundation is unknown, but remains of the time of the close of the Eleventh Dynasty have been found (cir. B.C. 2100), and it is reasonable to suppose it to have been at least as ancient as the commencement of that line, the first of Diospolite kings. Under the sovereigns of the Twelfth Dynasty it must have become a place of importance, but it probably declined during the troubles of the Shepherd period. With the Eighteenth Dynasty it attained its highest prosperity, and maintained it during the Nineteenth and Twentieth. To this period its greatest monuments belong. Then its decline evidently commenced; but from the manner in which Homer mentions it, Thebes must have been still a great city in his days or not long before, for we can scarcely suppose that he did not speak of its condition in his own time, being doubtless unacquainted with the state of Egypt at the period of the Trojan war. After this it suffered severely from the barbarian violence of the Persians, and then of Ptolemy Lathyrus; so that in Strabo's time the Thebans inhabited villages as now, and there was no longer a city.

The monuments of Thebes, exclusive of its sepulchral Monuments, occupy a space on both sides of the river, of which the extreme length from north to south is about two miles, and the extreme breadth from east to west about four. The city was on the eastern bank, where is the great temple, or rather collection of temples, called after El-Karnak, a modern village near by. The temple of El-Karnak is about half a mile from the river in a cultivable tract. More than a mile to the south-west is the temple of El-Uksur, on the bank of the Nile. On the western bank was the suburb bearing the name Memnonia. The desert near the northernmost of the temples on this side almost reaches the river, but

---

1 Modern Egypt and Thebes, vol. II., pp. 136-7. 2 Modern Egypt and Thebes, vol. II., pp. 253-4. 3 Iliad, ix. 381-384. 4 Strabo, Geogr. xviii., i. soon recedes, leaving a fertile plain generally more than a mile in breadth. Along the edge of the desert, besides the small temple just mentioned as the northernmost, are the Rameseum of El-Kurneh, and that of Medeinet-Haboo less than a mile farther to the south-west, and between them, but within the cultivated land, the remains of the Amenophium, with its two gigantic seated colossi. Behind these edifices rises the mountain, which here attains a height of about 1200 feet. It gradually recedes in a south-westerly direction, and is separated from the cultivated tract by a strip of desert in which are numerous tombs, partly excavated in two isolated hills, and two small temples. A tortuous valley, which commences not far from the northernmost of the temples on this bank, leads to those valleys in which are excavated the wonderful tombs of the kings, near the highest part of the mountain which towers above them in bold and picturesque forms.

The temple of El-Uksur must be first described, as it is nearest of the edifices to the river, and but an appendage to the great group of El-Karnak. It takes its name from the small town of El-Uksur, or Abu-l-Haggag, incorrectly called Luxor, which is built in and around part of it, thus injuring its effect, and rendering examination difficult. It differs from most Egyptian temples in not facing the river, but this is accounted for by its connection with the temple of El-Karnak; from the southern approaches to which a long avenue of sphinxes (now wholly ruined) leads to it, terminating at its entrance. This is a massive portal with wings, 200 feet in width, before which is a very fine obelisk of red granite. Its fellow, which stood on the western side, was removed by the French to Paris in 1831, and now adorns the Place de la Concorde. Both have beautifully cut hieroglyphic inscriptions. The height of that which remains is about 80 feet. It is adorned with three vertical lines of hieroglyphics on each side, in which are celebrated the praises of Rameses II. The other obelisk differs alone from this in being slightly shorter. Close to the winged portal are three seated statues of red granite representing Rameses II.; a fourth has been destroyed. The wings of the portal are covered with sculptures of remarkable interest, representing occurrences in the war of Rameses II. with the Khetas or Hittites, in the early part of his reign. On the left wing is depicted the defeat by the Egyptians, led by their king, of the confederate peoples under the walls of the stronghold called Ketesh, which corresponds to Ashteroth-Karnaim mentioned in the Bible. The king, Rameses II., is represented, according to the Egyptian custom, of a gigantic size, standing in his chariot, which he has urged into the midst of the hostile force, whose warriors fall by his well-directed arrows. The Egyptians, on the other hand, sustain no loss, as in all such representations, which are therefore of a very partial character. It is difficult to understand how a warlike and civilized people could have thought the glory of a victory heightened by the imputation of cowardice to their adversaries, and that they should in such instances, to which the battle-scenes do not afford a single exception, have sacrificed truth to vanity. On the right wing is represented the camp of the Egyptian army during the same war. This has been sculptured over another scene, of which, owing to the falling out of the plaster with which it had been filled, part may be now seen. All these representations are in sunk relief, and beautifully executed.

The entrance to the temple is contracted by the construction of a modern wall, through the small door of which we enter a great court choked by the huts of the town, among which stands a mosque. It is surrounded by a double row of columns, the capitals of which have the form of the bud of the papyrus. A ruined portal with wings forms the end of this court, and with it commences the older part of the edifice, which has a more southerly direction; and its southernmost part in like manner turns a little more in that direction, that is, from the river, though not so remarkably. Some deviation was probably rendered necessary by the course of the Nile. The second court is much obstructed by rubbish, but free from huts; nothing is seen of it but a magnificent avenue of fourteen columns, having capitals of the bell-shaped flower of the papyrus, which led from its portal to that of the next court. The columns are about 60 feet in height, of fine form, and elegantly sculptured. They were raised by Amenoph III., whose name is the oldest which occurs on them and in the rest of the temple. Behind this is another court, which has a double row of columns on each side, and at its end a portico supported by columns four deep. This court is much ruined. Beyond it are several chambers of the time of Amenoph III., and in the midst of them an isolated sanctuary, the sculptures of which bear the name of Alexander Ægus, in whose reign it was built, in the place, no doubt, of one destroyed by the Persians under Cambyses or Ochus, as Sir Gardner Wilkinson remarks. Most of these apartments are in a dilapidated state.

Although there is an approach to the temple of El-Karnak Temple of from that of El-Uksur, the grand entrance was towards the El-Karnak river, and from that entrance must commence a regular examination. This extraordinary assemblage of buildings consists of a great temple and several smaller structures, surrounded by a massive crude brick wall of enclosure. There are other remains similarly inclosed, which were connected with the great temple.

The grand entrance is through a propylon or portal with wings, more than 360 feet wide, for this is its measure above the rubbish which is piled up around it. It was never sculptured, nor was its surface smoothed. It presents, therefore, a rude appearance, and is much ruined, a great part of the left or northern wing having been demolished. The court, of which the propylon forms the front, measures 329 feet in width, and 275 in length, having on each side a gallery with a single row of columns, and a double colonnade, of which one column alone stands, formed an avenue from its entrance to that of the hypostyle hall beyond. On the right side a temple of older date interrupts the side gallery, extending 50 feet into the court. Its front is formed by a propylon, about 90 feet wide, on each wing of which Rameses III., is portrayed in the act of slaying prisoners before Amen-ra. The interior of this temple consists of a court which has on each side a row of Osiridean pillars, and at the end another row of such pillars with columns behind them. A hall or portico supported by eight columns is next to the court, and beyond it are other apartments. Nearly all the sculptures are of the reign of Rameses III., but the names of later sovereigns occur. On the other side of the great court is a small structure which may be called a chapel, or three chapels. The most interesting sculptures in this part of the group of temples are outside the eastern portion of the south wall of the great court, for here is the famous list of countries and towns subdued by, or tributary to, Sheshonk I., or Shishak, the head of the Twenty-second Dynasty. Among the names in the list is that of the kingdom of Judah, and those of several places in the dominions of Rehoboam and Jeroboam I. At the end of the

---

1 The inscriptions are given by Rosellini, Monumenti Storici, No. cxvii. 2 See Rosellini, Monumenti Storici, Nos. civ.-cvii.; and above, section ii. 3 Lepsius reads the first character of this name "k," from its being thus rendered by Hephstion, in the name of one of the decans. 4 Modern Egypt and Thebes, vol. ii., p. 245. 5 Champollion, Lettres, p. 99; Rosellini, Monumenti Storici, No. cxviii. court is a fine portal, the wings of which are much ruined. This is the entrance to the great hypostyle hall, the most magnificent work of its class in Egypt. Its length is 170 feet, and its width 329; it is supported by 134 columns, the loftiest of which are nearly 70 feet in height, and about 12 in diameter, and the rest more than 40 feet in height, and about 9 in diameter. The great columns, 12 in number, form an avenue through the midst of the court from the entrance, and the others are arranged in rows very near together on each side. There is a transverse avenue made by two rows of the smaller columns being placed farther apart than the rest. This great hall is therefore crowded with columns, and the effect is surprisingly grand. The spectator, being generally unable to see beyond those which are immediately around him, perceives the vast dimensions which, if viewed from a distance, might lose their effect. The forest of columns seems interminable in whatever direction he looks, producing a result unsurpassed in any other Egyptian temple. The partial ruin of its stone roof, and of some of the columns, render the hall the more picturesque, and make us wonder at the force which must have been expended in attempting to demolish it.

This grand hall was built by Sethe I., the head of the Nineteenth Dynasty (cir. B.C. 1340), and sculptured partly in his reign and partly in that of his son and successor Rameses II., who has sometimes effaced his father's name to substitute his own. Thus it commemorates, not in its grandeur alone, but by its sculptures, the magnificence and power of these two great Pharaohs. The sculptures of the interior of the walls represent these kings making offerings to the gods, and the like subjects occupy the great columns. Far more interesting are those which adorn the exterior of the walls, and record the achievements of the same kings, those of Sethe I. being on the north wall, and those of Rameses II. on the south. The former are of much greater interest than the latter, as far as we can judge, and in this respect inferior to none in Egypt. The scenes on the north wall are arranged in three compartments, of which the upper one has been nearly destroyed. In them the king is represented of a gigantic size charging in his chariot, and putting to the rout his enemies, capturing their strongholds, and returning home in triumph. The chief nations are the Kheta or Hittites, the Ruten (Luten) or Lydians, who were apparently in those days not seated in Lydia but near to Mesopotamia, the Shasu, the people of the land of Shari, of Remenen (Lemenen) Hermou or Armenia, and of Kanana (Kanuau) or Canaan. Among the captured places is Kethesh or Ashteroth-Karnaim, which was in those days the most important stronghold between Egypt and Mesopotamia. There is also a long list of countries, cities, and tribes conquered or ruled by the king, among which we find Naharaseena, that is Aram-naharaim, or Mesopotamia, Kush, Kush, or Ethiopia, &c. The battle-scenes of Rameses II. on the south wall do not, as far as they are seen, equal these in interest. Here also is a list of the king's conquests and possessions, and on the west side of a wall which joins this one at right angles, forming the side of a court of the southern approach to the temple, is a representation of the capture of Askalona or Askalon, and an inscription recording a treaty between Rameses II. and the Kheta, concluded in the twenty-first year of the king's reign. The back of the hypostyle hall is formed by a ruined propylon bearing the name of Amenoph III., and then at a distance of about 50 feet is another propylon, entirely ruined. In the space between these propylons, which was a court, stands a beautiful obelisk of red granite, upwards of 70 feet high, raised by Thothmes I. The fragments of its fellow, which was more to the north, strew the ground. Behind the second of these propylons is another granite obelisk 92 feet high, and inferior in size to no other known Egyptian obelisk excepting that of San Giovanni Laterano at Rome. This great obelisk of El-Karnak is a monument of Queen Amen-maat who came to the throne in the year B.C. 1458 or 1457, and an inscription on its pedestal records the period which elapsed (nineteen months) from the time that it was begun to be cut in the quarry until its completion in Mesori (the twelfth month) of the queen's sixteenth year (B.C. 1442). The fellow of the great obelisk, which stood to the south of it, has been broken, and its fragments occupy its place. Beyond the great obelisk is the chief sanctuary, a structure almost entirely of granite, divided into two apartments, which was built under Philip Arrhidaios, in the place, no doubt, of one destroyed by Cambyses or Ochus. The space between the hypostyle hall and this sanctuary is extremely ruined, the huge stones being piled up in heaps as though an earthquake had overthrown the temple. But this destruction is doubtless to be ascribed to human violence, having probably been effected by the Persians, or Ptolemy Lathyros, or both. Behind this sanctuary are fragments of a very ancient part of the temple bearing the name of Sesostris I., the first king of the Twelfth Dynasty, who came to the throne cir. B.C. 2090. Considerably farther is a large oblate building of the time of Thothmes III., which affords a remarkable example of architectural caprice, its columns having inverted shafts and capitals, and its cornices being likewise inverted. Behind this and a stone wall of enclosure are ruined chambers, and far beyond, directly behind the centre of the great temple, in the crude brick wall of enclosure is a handsome portal, never finished, bearing the name of Nectanebo I.

The southern approach to the temple of El-Karnak from that of El-Uksur is, as before mentioned, by a ruined avenue of sphinxes, which, when near the great structure, terminates, and two other avenues commence. The westernmost of these, which is of colossal rams, conduits to a temple situated not far to the south-west of the first court of the great temple, which we approach through a stately portal bearing in its inscriptions the name of Ptolemy Euergetes I. The front of the temple, before which was another avenue of rams, is a propylon, which is almost uninjured. Behind it is a court having a double row of columns on each side and at the end, and again behind this is a hall supported by eight columns, and many small chambers. This temple was dedicated to Khuns, the third member of the Theban triad. It was commenced under the Twentieth Dynasty, and continued by the later kings of the Twenty-first. A small edifice having sculptures of the time of the Greek and Roman rule stands on the west of the court of this temple.

The avenue of sphinxes, which branches off at the same place as does that of rams leading to the temple of Khuns, takes an easterly direction and terminates where another begins at right angles to it, which connects the southern courts leading to the great temple with a separate enclosure. The latter contains a lake which has the shape of a horse-shoe, and the remains of sacred structures. At the northern extremity of the avenue, which is of criosphinxes, is a propylon forming the front of a large court which terminates in a second propylon, which, like the other, is much ruined. Beyond this, but not in exactly the same direction, after a vacant space, the approach continues through two smaller propylas, the second of which is nearly destroyed. Each fronts a court, and at the end of the second of these courts was the great side entrance to the temple. The first and second propylas were, like the criosphinxes, monuments of King Har-em-heb, or Oros, of the Eighteenth Dynasty, and were partly built of materials of a temple or palace of the foreign sun-worshippers whom he overthrew. The third propylon is more ancient, since it bears the names of Thothmes III. and Amenoph II., as well as of subsequent kings: the age of the fourth is not certain: the name of Rameses II. occurs here, but it may have been founded before his time. There is an enclosure in the angle formed by the third and fourth propylæa with the great temple, which contains a sacred lake.

Adjoining the great crude brick wall of enclosure at its north-eastern portion is another containing the ruins of an important temple. The chief approach is through a stately portal of the Ptolemaic period, in the crude brick wall. The temple to which it conducted was very beautiful and costly, as we can judge by its remains, which show with how much violence it was destroyed. It seems to have been founded under the Eighteenth Dynasty. There are two small temples or chapels, one of the time of Achoris and the other of that of the supposed Amymtus and Nectaneboes I. in the same enclosure. Another crude brick enclosure of small dimensions, near the south-east corner of that of the great temple, contains some unimportant remains of a small edifice.—The preceding brief description will convey some idea of the magnitude of the temple of Amen-ra at Thebes, with its appendages, since a mere enumeration of its various parts, with their date and a few of their most important sculptures, has occupied so much space. But no one who has not seen that wonderful assemblage of ruins can picture to himself the massiveness of its castle-like propylæa, the grandeur of its hall of columns, the beauty of its great obelisk, and the sublimity of its beaped-up ruins. In that work of two thousand years, amid the records of the might and of the fall of Egypt, the past ushers up a long train of great historic figures, from Sesertesen I. and the Shepherd times to Rameses II., the conqueror, to Shishak, who subdued Judah, to the Persian conquest, and to the final ruin of the "City of Thrones" by Ptolemy Lathyrus, after its last noble struggle. In the great hall, undisturbed by any living thing, we seem to hear the sacred music of the priests and to see the pomp of the returning victor as he passes on to the sanctuary to pay his vows. And when we stand before the lofty obelisk rising above the mass of ruins and pointing heavenwards, like the monument of a devoted city and people, we see the fulfilment of God's decree, "No shall be rent asunder."

In describing the monuments on the western bank at Thebes, it will be best first to notice the remarkable temples and remains of temples, excepting the two small ones among the tombs, and then to give some account of the necropolis. It has been already mentioned that the great suburb which stood here was called the Memnonia.

Beginning our examination from the northward, the first object of interest is the Setheum, a small temple of Sethe I., which the natives call Kasr-Er-Rabeyk, at the ruined village of El-Kurneh. A portico originally supported by ten columns, of which two have fallen, extends along the whole front of the building. Three entrances lead to the interior of the temple; the middle one of these is the door of a hall having twelve columns. From this apartment we pass into several small chambers, which are of no particular interest, like the ruined chambers which we enter from the northern door. The southern door is the entrance of a separate part of the edifice, which contains a small hall supported by two columns, and three chambers behind it, the middle one of which was a sanctuary or chapel, devoted, as its sculptures show, to the worship of Rameses I., the father of Sethe I. The inscriptions of the temple tell us that it was dedicated to Amen-ra by its founder Sethe I., and continued by his son Rameses II., and his grandson Menptah.

The great temple of Rameses II., which may be called the Ramesseum of El-Kurneh, but is commonly though incorrectly known as the Memnonium, is situated at a distance of about a mile to the westward of the Setheum, and is like it on the edge of the desert, which here is much farther from the Nile than it is near the other temple. Notwithstanding that its condition is so much more ruined than that of other edifices here, the beautiful architecture of what remains, and the historical interest of its spirited sculptures, render it altogether second alone in its attractions to the great pile of El-Karnak. A propylæa, 225 feet in width, of which a great part has been thrown down, forms the front of the edifice. Through its portal we enter a spacious court, 180 feet in width and 142 in length. It had originally a double colonnade on either side, every column of which has been destroyed, while the side walls have been entirely demolished, and the end wall partially. On the back of the propylæa are sculptured a battle and other scenes of a campaign in the king's eighth year. In this court is one of the most wonderful objects at Thebes, a colossal statue of Rameses II., broken in pieces, exceeding in its weight and equalling in its dimensions any other known Egyptian statue. It was of a single block of red granite, and must have been transported hither from the quarries of Syene, notwithstanding that its weight was, according to Sir Gardner Wilkinson's computation, about 887 tons, 5½ hundredweight. It was 60 feet in height, representing the king seated on his throne, and was placed on the left side of the entrance to the second court. Of that court, happily, there are more remains than of the first. Its width was about 170 feet and its length about 140, so that it was not much smaller than the other court. It had a double colonnade on each side and at the end, and but a single colonnade at the front. All these were of columns having capitals of the form of the papyrus bud, excepting eight of the ten forming the front row, that is, all of that colonnade but the two extreme columns, and, in like manner, the corresponding ones of the opposite row, which were square Osiridean pillars, or pillars formed of a square block, having in front a figure of Osiris. Many of the columns and pillars have been demolished, nevertheless those which yet stand enable us to judge how magnificent this part of the temple must have been. On what remains of the front wall of the court, that is, on its northern half, are very remarkable sculptures which must not be passed by unnoticed. Here is a great scene representing a battle between the Egyptians, led by Rameses II., and the Khetas or Hittites, near the strong city of Ketesh or Asiteroth-Karnam. The king of Egypt is portrayed routing the chariots of the enemy, who flee in disorder towards Ketesh, across a double moat, beyond which and beneath the city a strong force of regular infantry endeavours to protect their retreat. This was doubtless the decisive action of the campaign against the confederates, which must be regarded as the most important of those which distinguished the reign of Rameses II. Higher up on the same wall is a procession of priests bearing small statues of kings, the first of which is that of Ménès, the earliest sovereign of Egypt, the second of Munt-hotp, a king of the Eleventh Dynasty, and the subsequent ones of the kings of the Eighteenth and Nineteenth Dynasties as far as Rameses II., with whom the series terminates.

Next to the second court is a hypostyle hall, which is the most admirable part of the temple. It measures 100 feet in length and 133 in breadth, and originally contained forty-eight columns in eight longitudinal rows, each consisting of six columns. A central avenue is formed by twelve lofty columns, about 36 feet high, which have capitals of the shape of the papyrus-flower, while the columns on each side, about 24 feet high, have capitals of the shape of the bud of the same flower. The elegance of the form and the justness of the proportions of all these columns is not equalled in any other Egyptian temple, and render this one of the most beautiful structures of its kind. Happily although much injured, it has suffered less from violence than the first and second courts. On its front wall, to the left as one enters, are curious sculptures, representing the rout of a hostile force and the capture of a town, the walls of which the Egyptians ascend by means of scaling-ladders: Rameses II. and six of his sons lead the army. On the end wall are religious subjects, and a series of the sons and daughters of Rameses II., whose legitimate offspring they seem to have been, twenty-six in number, twenty-three sons and three daughters. At the temple of Wadée-es-Suboo'a in Nubia were represented, according to Lepsius, a much larger number of children of this king.

Beyond the hypostyle hall are two smaller chambers, the first of which is entered by a doorway in the middle of the end wall of the hall. It is supported by eight columns, and has on its walls representations of mythological or religious subjects. It is chiefly remarkable, however, for its astronomical ceiling, one of the most precious records of ancient Egyptian science. Behind this is a ruined chamber, which seems to have been of the same dimensions. The other apartments which must have adjoined these are entirely demolished. The description which Diodorus Siculus gives from Hecataeus of Abdera of the Tomb of Osymandias agrees best with the Rameseum of El-Kurneh; and his mention of the sacred library is in accordance with the character of the sculptures of the first chamber beyond the hypostyle hall, as well as with the statement in several papyri that they were written by the scribes in this temple, in which, or attached to which, was a kind of college.

To the south-east of the Rameseum of El-Kurneh, at a distance of less than half a mile, a mound, just within the cultivable plain, marks the site of a magnificent temple of Amenoph III., which may be called the Amenophium, and which, there is reason to believe, was destroyed by Cambyses. Of the obelisks and colossi which stood on either side of the approach to the Amenophium, all are thrown down except the two gigantic statues, one of which is known as the Vocal Memnon. The latter, indeed, was broken, but afterwards restored. These colossi stand about a quarter of a mile to the south-east of the mound where are the scanty remains of the temple. They are of hard gritstone, monolithic, and about 47 feet in height, with pedestals about 12 feet high. They represent a king, Amenoph III. (as their inscriptions attest), seated on his throne. Smaller though colossal standing statues of the king's mother, Queen Mut-em-wa, and of his wife, Queen Taya, rest against the space between the sides of the throne and the legs of the great statues, one at either extremity; while there are remains of another statue of Queen Taya, of smaller size, which stand between the feet. The colossi are a little less than 60 feet apart; a distance judiciously chosen, so that they should neither seem smaller than they actually are, by being placed too far from each other, nor should be so near as to appear but a double statue. As they now stand in the midst of the fields, far away from human habitations or ancient temples, bearing in their mutilated forms the marks of successive ages, as well as of barbarian violence, calling up the story of Egyptian greatness so long departed, and the poetic traditions of Greece once believed, reminding us of those who have stood here before the rising of the sun to hear the mysterious sound, and have themselves passed away with their religion and their power, while they have kept their places as watchmen overlooking the change of empires and of faiths, they are not dumb, and their inarticulate voice tells us more than did that of Memnon in old times.

The Vocal Memnon is the more northern of the two, and is, as before mentioned, imperfect. It was broken in the midst either by the barbarism of Cambyses, or by an earthquake, more probably the former, but long afterwards repaired. It presents in consequence a very shattered appearance, and the other colossus gives us a better idea of what the pair must anciently have been. Many Greek and Latin inscriptions on the Vocal Statue record the visits of those who were with Hadrian, and of others, and relate that they heard the voice of Memnon. There is thus satisfactory evidence to show that some sound was frequently heard here at sunrise; and the only dispute is whether it was produced by a physical cause, or was an imposture of the priests. The former appears to be the more probable view, as such a deception could hardly have been carried on so long without detection; and its being a natural occurrence does not seem impossible from the examples we have of sounds resembling that which is described as having been heard here by the ancients.

Less than half a mile from the mound of the Amenophium, in a south-westerly direction, within the desert, is the Haboo group of temples known as those of Medenet-Haboo. This name is that applied by the Arabs to a town, which appears to be that called Papa in the Roman times. The ruins of its houses obstruct the temples, more especially the larger of the two. The smaller temple may be first described, Small temple since it is nearer to the river, to the eastward of the other, ple. We first enter a ruined court which was never completed, and which had a colonnade whereof two columns alone yet stand, at its end, a little before the first propylon of the temple, which bears the name of Ptolemy Lathyrus and that of Auletis among the sculptures of its gateway. Beyond this is a court which had a colonnade on each side, and a propylon, much smaller than the other, at the end. Most of its columns have fallen, and the propylon has also suffered much. On the latter we see the names of Tirhakah the Ethiopian, and later sovereigns. Beyond this is another court, and then the chambers of the temple. The chief of these is an isolated sanctuary, with a gallery around it having square pillars and fluted columns like those of certain of the tombs at Bence-Hasan. The sanctuary is ornamented with sculptures of sovereigns of the Eighteenth Dynasty, including Queen Amen-munt.

To the south-west of this temple is a very remarkable Palace structure, which differs in its use and architecture from any other ancient monument in Egypt. It is the only palace that has been preserved, although the temples have been supposed to have been likewise palaces, or palace-temples. After passing between what seem to have been lodges we arrive at the main part of the palace of Rameses III. This consists of two towers on each side of a court ending in another tower, beneath which is a gateway conducting to the great temple. On the front of each of the two towers first mentioned Rameses III. is represented slaying his enemies before Amen-ra, and below is a series of captured chiefs. The inscriptions that remain tell us that these are the chiefs of the Khetas, or Hittites, the Amari, or Amorites, the Tokkaree, or Carians, the Khairatana (Khairataan) of the sea, or Cretans (Cherethim), the Turikha (Tuirsha) of the sea, and of other peoples whose names are partly or wholly destroyed. On the walls of the chambers are curious sculptures representing the private life of Rameses III. Among

---

1. Lepsius, Denkmäler, abth. iii., bl. 170. 2. Id., bl. 170, 171. 3. Chronologie der Ägypter, i., p. 39, 53.

---

* The size and character of the only chambers in the temples which could have been used for habitation render it most improbable that any but priests and scribes resided in them, except perhaps on the occasion of some important ceremonies which may have lasted a considerable time; and it is most likely that the royal abodes were usually extensive pavilions constructed of no stronger materials than the houses of the people, and this view the representations of the tombs seem to support. The temples, however, were called palaces. these the king is portrayed playing at a game like that of draughts with one of his daughters, while another stands by him. They are all represented naked.

The great temple of Medinet-Haboo is directly behind the palace through which was, as already mentioned, the approach to it, and is a monument of the same king Rameses III., a sovereign inferior alone as a conqueror to Rameses II., the greatest ruler of Egypt. Both the magnificence of its architecture, and the high interest of its sculptures, render it one of the most interesting edifices at Thebes. It is much obstructed by the remains of the town that formerly stood in and around it.

The first propylon cannot be less than 200 feet wide. It is partly destroyed, and much of it is hidden by the remains of the town. On its wings the king is represented slaying prisoners before the gods, and acts of worship are also depicted. The court, of which this propylon is the front, is about 110 feet in length and about 135 in breadth, and has a colonnade on either side, forming a gallery. The gallery on the right side consists of seven Osiridean pillars, that on the left, of eight columns having capitals of the form of the papyrus-flower, affording a remarkable example of the irregularity of Egyptian architecture. This court is nearly filled with rubbish. At its end is a second propylon, on the left wing of which Rameses III. is represented bringing captives of the Tokkaree, or Carians, before Amen-ra. Passing through the granite portal of this propylon we enter the second or peristyle court, the finest part of the temple. This court measures about 123 feet in length and about 133 or somewhat more in width, thus exceeding in size the first court, contrary to the usual practice of ancient Egyptian architects. It has a single colonnade at the front and on either side, and a double one at the end. The colonnade at the front and that facing it are each of eight Osiridean pillars, while that behind the latter is of columns with capitals of the papyrus-bud, and the side colonnades consist each of five similar columns, one of which, on the left side, has fallen. Happily this court is less choked than the other, and one can form some idea of its original splendour. The Christian inhabitants of the town, the ruins of whose church are seen in the court, defaced many of the sculptures, and particularly the Osiridean pillars; nevertheless the general effect is not lost, and one is struck by a simple grandeur, which is unsurpassed in any similar Egyptian structure.

The sculptures of the walls are of especial interest, and a short description of them must therefore be given. On the back of the left wing of the propylon a series of sculptures relating to the wars of Rameses III. commences and extends along the wall on the left side of the court. The rout of the Rebu or Lechu, perhaps Libyans, is depicted, the triumphant return of the king, the bringing of prisoners before him on the field of battle, and the like; and besides these are subjects portraying ceremonies. On the right side-wall is a curious representation of the celebration of the Panegry of Amen-ra Generator, which, from the detail in which it is given, affords us considerable insight into the manner in which such solemnities were kept. On the end-wall, and on part of each side-wall are depicted the many children of Rameses III. A door in the wall first mentioned conducts to the inner part of the temple, which occupies but little less space than the two courts just described. It is entirely choked with rubbish.

The sculptures of the exterior of this edifice next claim our attention, none of which have been mentioned excepting those which occupy the face of the first propylon. On the north, or rather north-eastern wall, is a remarkably interesting series of sculptures commemorating the events of foreign wars of Rameses III., and equalling in the importance of their subjects and the boldness with which they are executed any other records of the kind in Egypt. In the first representation, which is to the extreme right, we see Rameses III. going to war; in the second is depicted the rout of a people called the Tamhu; and in the third, prisoners of the Tamhu and Mashuash are brought before the king, while scribes count the hands, &c., which have been cut from the slain, showing their number to have been 12,535. Then weapons, probably taken from the enemy, are counted. The next scene is very complicated, and represents a great battle with the Tokkaree or Carians, whose army is defeated by the Egyptians. The Tokkaree fight in chariots of two horses and in wagons drawn by four oxen. Mercenaries or allies who are called Khairctana, (Cherethim or Cretans) fight in the army of Egypt. The scene which follows this is one of the most spirited of Egyptian sculptures, and if compared with the similar Assyrian bas-reliefs in the British Museum shows the great superiority of the best Egyptian art over that of Assyria. The king, who is passing through a marshy country in his chariot, encounters three lions, and having smitten two of them with his javelins, turns round to meet the third which is about to spring. The next subject is the most remarkable of the series, since it represents a sea-fight, in which the Egyptian fleet defeats that of the Khairctana (Cretans) and the Tokkaree (Carians), while Rameses and his army aid their countrymen from the shore. Thus, probably, the Cretans, in whose navies the Carians fought of old, according to a tradition which Herodotus relates, lost the empire of the sea. Rameses then receives the praises of his warriors, and the hands of the slain are brought before him and numbered. Next he leads prisoners, who are of the Tokkarees and Rebu, before the gods of Thebes. The other battle-scenes of the series represent the capture of strong places, the carrying away of captives, &c. On the end wall the king is portrayed setting forth on an expedition, and on the other side-wall, the south-west, is a long calendar, which appears to occupy the whole wall. Not far from the Ramesseum, to the southward, is a small Ptolemaic temple containing three chambers. Farther in the same direction is a great lake, over which in ancient times it is probable that the funeral processions passed. At more than half a mile in a south-westerly direction from the lake is another small temple of Roman times, having an isolated sanctuary and other chambers.

The private and royal tombs must now be briefly noticed, but from their great number, and the variety of the paintings which occupy their walls, it will not be possible to give as detailed an account of them as has been given of the other monuments. Two temples which are situate in the necropolis likewise require a notice. The tombs, as before mentioned, occupy some of the space at the foot of the mountains, or are excavated in their sides towards the valley, and in two isolated hills, excepting the tombs of the kings, which are cut in the sides of two secluded valleys to the westward.

Beginning from the north, we first see the entrances of grottoes in the low spur of the Libyan chain behind the Setheum. Several of these have a series of square apertures, leaving pillars to support the roof, so as to form a kind of portico, behind which is a chamber or chambers, having pits, from which open other chambers for sepulture. Some grottoes here, and others extending towards the Ramesseum, are inhabited by the people of El-Kurneh, whose village is ruined. At the foot of the mountains, as well as on their least steep sides, here and throughout the necropolis, are the entrances of many mummy-pits. On the spur above mentioned are brick pyramids, for the most part nearly destroyed; and in the wide tract beyond, where the mountains recede, are very remarkable sepulchres of the time of the

---

1 *Ancient Egyptians*, vol. vi., pl. 76. Twenty-sixth Dynasty. These are extensive excavations, profusely sculptured almost entirely with hieroglyphics, having before their entrances open courts hewn in the rock, and entered through crude brick propylaeum, from which walls of enclosure of the same material extend around the courts. The largest of these, and indeed of all those known at Thebes, is the tomb of Petamenapt, a priest whose date is not fixed, but who probably lived towards the close of the Twenty-sixth Dynasty, or the beginning of the Twenty-seventh. Sir Gardner Wilkinson says that "the area of the actual excavation is 29,217 square feet, and with the chambers of the pits 23,809, though, from the nature of its plan, the ground it occupies is nearly one acre and a quarter." Almost all the passages and chambers are covered with hieroglyphic inscriptions on a small scale, and the few sculptures are of a religious character. At the end of the Asseceef is a temple which was approached by a very long avenue of sphinxes now entirely demolished. The temple is at the base of a steep cliff, and is partly excavated in the rock, and partly built of masonry. The latter portion is almost wholly destroyed. A portal of red granite which formed its entrance yet remains, bearing the name of Thothmes III., cut over the erased name of Queen Amennumt. A second granite portal stands behind this, almost close to the rock. At some distance to the left of this are two small chambers, one of which is remarkable for the form of its roof, which is vaulted by horizontal stones, of which the two uppermost meet in the centre, all being cut internally, so as to form an arch. The excavated part of the temple consists of an oblong chamber of moderate dimensions, another of smaller size with a cell on each side, and at the end a sanctuary. All these, excepting the sanctuary, are of the time of Queen Amennumt and Thothmes III., and have vaulted roofs. The sanctuary bears the sculptures of Ptolemy Physcon, affording a remarkable contrast to the delicate style of those of the chambers which lead to it, and it is flat-roofed.

The isolated hill of the sheykh 'Abd-El-Kurneh (probably a mistake for 'Ahid-El-Kurneh, meaning "the Devotee of El-Kurneh"), presents a singular appearance from the plain, since on that side it is honeycombed by the entrances of tombs. Several of these, like some of those first mentioned, have porticoes before them hewn in the rock, and many have very interesting paintings, representing scenes of domestic life, funeral ceremonies, arts, trades, &c., in their upper chamber or chambers. These have, unfortunately, suffered greatly from the cupidity of the natives, and the disgraceful vandalism of European travellers. Farther towards Medecinet-Habou is a similar isolated hill, called Kurneh-Mara'eeh, which contains a few grottoes of the same description, and in the valley between this and the main mass of mountain are many other interesting grottoes. At one extremity of this valley, at some distance behind the Rameseum, is a small edifice with a high enclosure of crude brick walls. It is a temple of Athor, of the Ptolemaic period, and has a small portico and three chambers, in one of which, the side chamber to the left, is a curious sculpture, of which the subject is the judgment of a soul by Osiris. Hence we may infer that this was a temple attached to the necropolis, and the same appears to have been the case with that of the Asseceef, since there deceased royal personages receive divine honours, as though they were buried in the vicinity. Beyond the other extremity of this valley is the secluded valley, called that of the Tombs of the Queens from its containing the sepulchres of queens and princesses of the Eighteenth, Nineteenth, and Twentieth Dynasties. These are similar to the tombs of the kings, which are next to be described, but are not large, nor are the subjects on their walls, which seem generally of little interest, well preserved.

A long and winding valley, the entrance to which is an opening in the mountains behind the Setheum, leads to two other valleys, that of the Tombs of the Kings, and the Tombs of Western Valley. Both of these contain royal sepulchres, the kings, but those of the former are more important than those of the latter, as far as is known, for this may contain unopened tombs. The sepulchres in the Valley of the Tombs of the Kings are twenty or twenty-one in number. Nineteen are sculptured, and are the mausolea of kings, of a queen with her consort, and of a prince, all of the Eighteenth, Nineteenth, and Twentieth Dynasties, unless we make Rameses I., the earliest of these sovereigns to have been head of the Nineteenth Dynasty, instead of including him among the rulers of the Eighteenth. One tomb is without sculpture, and there is likewise an unsculptured passage running for a considerable distance into the mountain which may perhaps be regarded as the commencement of a tomb never completed, making the twenty-first. Their plan is always the same in its main particulars, but they differ greatly in extent, in consequence of having been commenced at a king's accession, or even before (since one of them is the tomb of an heir-apparent), and continued throughout his reign, like the pyramids of Memphis. Their paintings and painted sculptures likewise do not present remarkable varieties, since they are almost wholly of a religious character, and principally refer to the future state. They are remarkable for the manner in which they illustrate the Egyptian religion, and the beauty of their execution; but their mysterious and intricate nature forbids any detailed description of them in the present article. The plan of one of the most interesting sepulchres may however be described. The tomb of Sethee I., commonly called Belzoni's, since that explorer first opened it since ancient times, is in the freshest state of preservation, except in its outer part, although the miserable barbarism of modern travellers is yearly lessening its beauty. We enter by a staircase, and pass along a steep passage, which terminates in a deep pit, now filled up. Thus far the subjects and inscriptions which occupy the walls, are unfinished, showing that the tomb was not completed. Immediately beyond the pit the part discovered by Belzoni commences with a hall 26 feet by 27, supported by four square pillars, the walls of which are covered with very beautiful painted sculptures, including the celebrated procession of the four races. To the right of this is another chamber, supported by two columns, the sculptures of which were never commenced, having only been drawn in outline. From the left side of the former chamber we descend a flight of steps, which leads to a passage, another flight of steps, and then another passage ending in a chamber 17 feet by 14, from which we pass into a hall 27 feet square, having six square pillars, and on either side a small chamber. This forms the portico of the great sepulchral hall, the most splendid part of the tomb, which is of an oblong form, 19 feet in length and 30 in breadth, with an arched roof. In the midst, in a depression, was a splendid sarcophagus of alabaster, and on its removal blocks of stone were found filling up the entrance of an inclined descent which was cleared for 300 feet by Belzoni, without its termination being discovered. It is not improbable that the king was buried in a chamber at the end of this passage. The great sepulchral hall is covered with beautiful painted sculptures, and on its ceiling are astronomical or astrological representations, resembling the astronomical ceiling of the Rameseum of El-Kurneh. A door in the left side of the sepulchral hall leads to a chamber which has two square pillars, and on the same side is a cell; there is another chamber on the opposite side. A large apartment, which was left unfinished, is behind that in which was the sarcophagus, and is the last of those contained in the tomb, if the inclined

---

1 *Hora*, pp. 68, 69. 2 *Modern Egypt and Thebes*, vol. ii., p. 222. descent does not lead to other unknown ones. From the entrance to the end of this chamber is a distance of about 300 feet.

The tomb of Rameses III. is among the most splendid of the royal sepulchres. Its length a little exceeds 400 feet, but from the nature of the rock its sculptures are less delicately executed than those of the tomb of Sethee I. In cells on either side of its passage, a little within the entrance, are interesting paintings illustrating manners and customs, in one of which is the celebrated representation of the harpers.

The tombs which have been found in the Western Valley are only four in number, and but two of these contain paintings. The latter are of Amenoph III. and of King Skhai or Skhee, a sovereign who appears to have come to the throne in the year B.C. 1475 or 1474, though some suppose him to have been of the sun-worshippers who succeeded Amenoph III. The former is decorated with paintings in a very good style, but unfortunately they have sustained much damage; the latter is historically interesting as a record of an uncertain king, but its paintings are of poor execution. Nowhere perhaps are we so forcibly struck by the feeling of the ancient Egyptians with respect to death and the future state, as in the Valley of the Tombs of the Kings, and in the sepulchres themselves. The desolation of the spot, apart from all signs and sounds of life, fitted it for the solemn use to which it was assigned, and those long dark passages, and lofty chambers, on whose walls we see the awful punishments of the wicked, and the rewards of the good, show us the most secret mysteries of the Egyptian religion in a manner suited to their greatness. The Pharaohs, whose valour and whose piety we have seen commemorated on the walls of their stately temples, are worthily entombed in these marvellous sepulchres; and here we take our farewell of them and of Thebes, knowing well that the world has since produced no monuments excelling those of “the City of Thrones.”

Not far south of Thebes, on the western bank, is the large village of Arment, the old Hermontis, where stands a picturesque temple built by Cleopatra. It has two courts, having colonnades, and three chambers around which was also a colonnade, of which but one column now stands. It is of small dimensions, having been the Typhonium attached to the great temple of Munt, the divinity of the place, which has been razed. On the other bank of the river, a little higher, at Tétd, anciently Tophium, is a small Ptolemaic temple. Not far beyond, and about 20 miles above Thebes, by the course of the stream, are the “Gebeleyn” or “Two Mountains,” on the western side of the river, where the sandstone begins. The town of Isné, the ancient Sene, called by the Greeks Latopolis, is likewise situated on the western bank, about twelve miles higher, and is remarkable as containing a very fine Egyptian monument, the portico of its great temple of Kneph. This is in the heart of the modern town, and until lately was much choked with rubbish. Mohammad’ Alec having, however, caused it to be cleared, its beautiful proportions can be appreciated. It is supported by twenty-four lofty and massive columns, six in front, and four deep, having capitals of various forms, of which those alone in corresponding positions on opposite sides are of the same description, a deviation from regularity of which we do not see examples previous to the Greek rule. The columns and walls are covered with minute sculptures of the bad style of the period when the portico was erected, that of the Caesars. It contains the hieroglyphic names of Claudius, Vespasian, Titus, and other emperors as late as Severus. The back is, however, more ancient, since it bears the name of Ptolemy Epiphanes, being the front of the older temple of which nothing more is known for cer-

1 De Rougé Tombeaux d’Amenet et Champollion, Lettres, pp. 197, 198. 2 For an account of the Egyptian system of fortification, see Wilkinson in Trans. Royal Society of Literature, new series, vol. iv.; and Popular Account of the Ancient Egyptians, vol. i., pp. 407-409. also facing the river, are the entrances of several excavated tombs, the representations in which are not of a remarkable character. Beyond these are three chapels of the time of the Nineteenth Dynasty. On the opposite side are very important quarries where much of the materials of the great temples was cut, especially under the Eighteenth and subsequent Dynasties.

Beyond Gebel-es-Silsileh, although the mountains recede, the tract of cultivated land is extremely narrow, and sometimes the desert touches the river; this is partly owing to the sinking of the level of the stream, which, as mentioned in an earlier part of this article, was very anciently restrained by some barrier at Silsila. About eleven miles above that place is the extremely picturesque temple of Ombos, placed on a rocky eminence called "Kom-Umboo," or "the Hill of Umboo." It stands within a great enclosure of crude brick walls, which we see on every side, except that towards the river. There is a portal in this wall of the time of Queen Amen-nunt and Thothmes III. The great temple is double, one-half having been dedicated to the worship of Sebaki, and the other to that of Har-oer or Aroeris. It consists of a portico of fifteen columns, whereof two have fallen, the foremost of which were connected by a wall of intercolumniation having two entrances, behind which is a smaller portico and remains of chambers, including the two sanctuaries. The earliest name here is that of Ptolemy Philometer, unless Champollion be right in saying that the name of Epiphanes is also found in the temple, which appears to have been completed by Ptolemy Auletes. There were also remains here of a smaller Ptolemaic temple which have been washed away by the river.

Nothing remarkable occurs between Ombos and Syene, a distance of about twenty miles. The valley is confined to a very narrow space by the mountains, which take bold forms on both sides near the latter place. Just before we reach it, we see the Island of Elephantine, where is the famous Nilometer of the Roman time. The town of Aswan, which represents the ancient Syene, stands amid palm-trees on the eastern bank opposite to Elephantine. It is a considerable place, of greater political than commercial importance, and has succeeded to an older town of the same name, the ruins of which occupy the river's bank, and a granite hill to the south. Among them may be mentioned a pier, which has a well which is most probably the Nilometer constructed by 'Amr, the Muslim conqueror of Egypt. In the ruined town is also a small temple of Roman date. Farther to the south is its extensive Arab cemetery, which is full of curious tombstones bearing inscriptions in Cufic characters. In the granite hills to the eastward are the quarries whence were taken so many of the obelisks and statues which adorned the Egyptian temples.

The bed of the river above Aswan is obstructed by numerous rocks and islands of granite, one of the latter of which, that of Sabeyl, is interesting on account of the numerous hieroglyphic tablets and inscriptions at its southern part. This island is almost a mile and a half above Aswan, and at the distance of another mile from it begin the rapids called the First Cataract, caused by the granite rocks, which almost entirely choke the river. The Cataract is so inconsiderable, that during the inundation, boats favoured by a strong northerly wind can pass it without aid, though at other times it is necessary to hire natives, who drag them through, but then the principal rapid has a fall of only five or six feet, and that is not perpendicular. Nevertheless the roaring of the troubled stream, and the red granite islands and rocks which stud its surface, through which our boat threads its way, give the approach a wild picturesqueness until we reach the open stream, less than two miles farther, and the beautiful isle of Philae suddenly rises before the eyes, completely realizing our highest idea of a sacred place of ancient Egypt.

Philae is beyond the proper limits of Egypt, but as it is usual to describe it in noticing Aswan and the rapids, some account of it will here be given, which is the more desirable as it contains very beautiful and interesting monuments, and was held in high reverence by the ancient Egyptians as a burial-place of Osiris. It is very small, being only a quarter of a mile long, and about 500 feet broad. On its granite rock is a little alluvial soil and some vegetation, with a few date-palms, but its verdure has been exaggerated, and its beauties are little owing to it. On the east side is a small but very picturesque temple, now hypaethral, of the Greek and Roman time, and unfinished. It is 48 feet in width and 63 in length, and has 14 columns with capitals of various forms, connected by intercolumnial walls. The great temple of Isis stands to the westward of this. Its front is formed by a propylon, before which is a kind of court, to be afterwards described. The portal bears the name of Nectanebos I., but the wings were added by the Ptolemies, making the entire width about 122 feet. Through the portal we enter a court, on the right side of which is a gallery fronted by columns, behind which are several small chambers, and on the left side is a separate small temple of Athor, the main entrance to which is by a door and passage in the left wing of the great propylon. This small temple commences with a portico having four columns with the faces of Athor sculptured in high relief upon each of its sides above the capital. Beyond this are three chambers behind one another, above the door of the first of which is a Greek dedication by Ptolemy Physcon, or Euergetes II., and the two Cleopatras. The temple was, however, commenced by Epiphanes. The court of the great temple, or that of Isis, is bounded by a second propylon of smaller dimensions than the first, and forming the entrance to the portico, which is a very elegant structure raised on ten columns, eight of which are at the back and one on each side. It is partly hypaethral, an open space being left between the two columns last mentioned. The beautiful forms of the columns, and the bright remains of colour on them and the walls, with the effect of the sunlight through the aperture of the roof, produce a most graceful and pleasing effect. Behind this hall are several small apartments, one of which, reached by a staircase, contains very curious sculptures relating to the story of Osiris. The temple appears to have been commenced by Ptolemy Philadelphus (whose name is the earliest found there), and was continued under the Roman emperors. The court before the temple remains to be noticed. It is bounded by two galleries with columns in front. One of these is about 250 feet long, and is built close to the western side of the isle terminating at a small temple of Athor near its southern end. This edifice, which is much ruined, was supported by columns with the block adorned with faces of Athor above their capitals, of which six stand; it was raised by Nectanebos I. The eastern gallery, which is shorter than the other, is not parallel with it, and thus shows that this court was not part of the great temple, but rather an approach to it. The other remains are of minor importance, and the same may be said of the ruins of a temple on the neighbouring large island of Biga.

A few words must be said respecting the eastern and western deserts. The latter desert is remarkable for two Western valleys besides those called the Oases. The first of these desert valleys is that of the Natron Lakes to the westward of the Delta, containing four Coptic monasteries, the remains of the famous anchorite settlement of Nitria. To the southward of this, and parallel to it, is a sterile valley called the Bahr bela-Ma, or "River without Water." Yet farther to the southward is the Little Oasis (Oasis Parva), about 100

---

1 Modern Egypt and Thebes, vol. ii., p. 282. 2 Lettres, p. 173. 3 Modern Egypt and Thebes, vol. ii., p. 294. miles from the Nile in E. Long. 29°, nearly due west of the town of Balnesè. It contains remains of little interest. Within 200 miles due south of this oasis is another, of which the usual appellation is Wāh ed-Dākhiléh, where, near the town of El-Kasr, is an Egyptian temple of the Roman period. This, according to Sir Gardner Wilkinson, is the most flourishing of the oases. About half-way between this oasis and the Nile at Thebes lies the Great Oasis (Oasis Magna). Here, near the town called El-Khārigeh is a considerable temple of the Persian and subsequent times; and in the same oasis are other ruins of the period of the Ptolemies and Caesars. The Oasis of Jupiter Ammon, that of Seewah, is not far from the coast at a great distance to the westward, and it is not properly included in Egypt. Various Arab tribes occupy this desert besides the settled inhabitants of the oases.

In the eastern desert must be mentioned the town of Es-Suways, or Suez, anciently Arsinoë, a small place at the head of the gulf to which it gives its name. To the southward, a little below lat. 29°, are the secluded Coptic convents of St Antony and St Paul near the sea. Farther south are the porphyry quarries of Gebel-ed-Dakhán, extensively worked under the Romans, and the granite quarries of Gebel-el-Fatecher. Considerably more to the south, at El-Hammámât, on the old way from Coptos to Philoteras Portus are the Breccia Verde quarries, which were much worked from very early times, and have interesting hieroglyphic inscriptions. At Gebel Zabarah are emerald mines now abandoned as unproductive. At the various mines, and on the routes to them and to the Red Sea, are some small temples and stations, ranging from the Pharaonic to the Roman time. Along the shore of the sea are the sites of several ancient ports, the most important of which were Myos Hormos and Berenice, and the modern town of El-Kuseyr. The northern part of this desert is occupied by the Ma'azee Arabs and smaller tribes as far as the Kuseyr road, beyond which are the 'Abábdeh, an African tribe very different from the Arabs in appearance, and to the south of these, to the east of Lower Nubia, is the Bisháree tribe, a people also of African race.

SECTION IV.

STATISTICS.

Egypt is governed by a Pashá of the family of the late Mohammad 'Alee, in virtue of the firman of the 13th of February 1841, by which the government of that province of the Turkish empire was conferred on him, and on his then living family, the members of which were to succeed him by seniority; by that firman the governor of Egypt was to recognise all laws and treaties enacted and concluded by the Porte; the imposts and revenues of Egypt were to be collected in the name of the Sultan, one-fourth of the revenue was to be transmitted yearly to Constantinople, the army, limited to 18,000 men, the officers above the rank of major to be appointed by the Sultan on the nomination of the Pashá, and ships-of-war to be built only by express permission of the Porte. The non-fulfilment of any of these conditions would cancel the concessions then granted.

Under the Pashá the several departments of the administration are presided over by ministers and councils. These offices were mostly created by Mohammad 'Alee, and are great improvements on the former system of government, although necessarily filled by creatures of the higher power. The principal offices are that of the minister for the internal administration of the affairs of the state, that for foreign affairs, and those for war, marine, finance, and public instruction, a tribunal of commerce, and councils of health in Cairo and Alexandria. The provinces into which Egypt is divided are governed by officers called Mudeers, and the subdivisions of those districts by Mamosors and Nazirs. The Mudeers are Turks, but native Egyptians were appointed by Mohammad 'Alee, and since by his successors, to the inferior posts. The government employés, as clerks, &c., are chiefly Copt scribes.

By the firman of investiture, the army was reduced to Army, 18,000 men, but since the war with Russia it has been very much increased, and, as is well known, the Egyptian contingent not only forms a large portion of 'Omar Páshá's army, but has very honourably distinguished itself. When on the peace-footing it is variously distributed throughout Egypt, but the artillery is confined to Cairo and Alexandria, and a considerable garrison of regular infantry is always maintained in both those cities. Each Muder has under his orders a corps of irregulars, and about five regiments of regular cavalry are generally stationed in Upper Egypt. According to reliable information obtained in 1849, the following is the scale of pay per month:—private soldier, 15 piasters; corporal, 20; sergeant, 25; sergeant-major, 30; lieutenant, 300; captain, 500; major, 2000; lieutenant-colonel, 2750; colonel, 4000. The privates receive rations and clothing, and the officers, rations. The commissioned officers of the cavalry and artillery receive rather more, viz., lieutenant, 360 piasters; captain, 600; colonel, 5000. A soldier in the irregular cavalry (who finds his own horse) receives 112½ piasters, and in the irregular infantry 65, in either case everything included. The pay of the Egyptian army is, therefore, good; but the common soldiers generally receive orders on the treasury, in lieu of money, which are not presentable for some months, and are not always honoured when due. The regular troops are recruited by impressment, every village being required to furnish its quota, but the irregulars are volunteers—Turks and Albanians. In the last war the Páshá also maintained a force of Arab horsemen. A regiment of regular infantry is composed of four battalions of 1000 men each, divided into eight companies, of which one is a grenadier and another a light company, and four guns are attached to each regiment. A regiment of regular cavalry consists of six squadrons, each of 192 men, a battery of horse artillery, of six companies, and one of foot artillery, of eighteen companies. The irregulars (horse and foot) are divided into corps of 400 men, each commanded by a "chief of four hundred."

Since the conclusion of the Syrian war, until the present Navy struggle, the navy has been totally inactive. At the former period it numbered 11 ships of the line, 6 frigates (one moved by steam-power), 5 corvettes, 9 brigs (3 being steamers), and 2 cutters. Some of these were constructed in the naval yard at Alexandria, but the larger number were contracted for in Europe. Great care was bestowed on the formation of the navy, and the establishments connected with it at Alexandria, but the Egyptians do not seem to be a maritime people, or, at any rate, their men-of-war have none of the tautness and neatness of European ships of the class.

Mohammad 'Alee devoted considerable attention to the Colleges establishment of colleges and military schools, besides semi-and schools, young men to Europe for purposes of scientific study. In Cairo and its environs he founded several elementary schools of a higher order than the native schools of the same class (mentioned in Section I. of this article), a school of languages, now at Boolák, a printing-press at Boolák, which, however, has been principally used for the publication of religious works.

---

1 This account of the deserts is chiefly taken from Sir Gardner Wilkinson's Modern Egypt and Thebes, vol. i., p. 382, et seqq.; and ii., p. 353, et seqq. 2 Private Information. See Mengin, Histoire, vol. iii., p. 135; and for details respecting the Navy, ib., p. 143. 3 Government Schools are of three classes or grades, and in all number about fifty in the whole country. tion of works on military and naval sciences, &c., though some valuable books (among these the Thousand and One Nights) have issued from it at the expense of private individuals; and a school of medicine at the Kasr-El-Eynee, between Cairo and Masr El-'Ateekah. At El-Khanakah and in its neighbourhood, he placed a military hospital and a school of medicine, a veterinary college, an infantry school, and a school of music; at El-Grezech, a cavalry school; and as Turah, one of artillery. A civil hospital likewise exists in Cairo, and another at Alexandria. The dock-yard and arsenal of Alexandria, with the gun-factory at the village of El-Hod el-Marsood, organized by French officers, are very creditably conducted. Indeed all these establishments are remarkably well designed and carried out, when we consider the lamentable deficiency of similar institutions in the East, and the bad organization of the few that exist there.

Mohammad 'Alee also promoted manufactures, and established large manufactories of cotton, silk, and woollen goods, tarbooshes, &c., and, especially in Upper Egypt, sugar-refineries. Ibrahim Pasha was much opposed to his father's policy, and in pursuance of his own views he laid out extensive plantations of olive and other trees, erected powerful steam-engines for the irrigation of his lands, and on all his estates endeavoured to encourage agriculture. It cannot be doubted that had he lived the correctness of his conviction that Egypt is an agricultural, and not a manufacturing country, would under his rule have been fully verified.

Mohammad 'Alee introduced cotton, and largely cultivated it; the Turkish grandees found that from it they were able to extract more gain than from other field-produce, and large tracts were speedily devoted to its culture. The necessity, however, of excluding the waters of the Nile has caused several destructive inundations, and the cotton, being a monopoly of the Pasha has not tended to enrich the producer. It may truly be said that the agriculture of the country is in the hands of the government, unless Sa'eed Pasha have made very extensive alterations in the system carried out by his father. By the seizure of almost all private lands, by enormous government monopolies, and by heavy taxation on all the fruit of their labour, Mohammad 'Alee effectually destroyed every feeling in the Fellah beyond the mere desire for daily bread; and the cruelty and oppression of subordinate officers rendered his condition more wretched than these exactions alone would have done. The agriculturists are compelled to sell their produce to the Pasha at his own price, and he again sells it to the consumers, and for export, at an arbitrary tariff, by which he secures an exorbitant profit. This rule applies always to some kinds of produce (as cotton, flax, &c.), and very often to all, although such is not invariably the case.

The principal taxes are direct taxes on land, which, with indirect exactions from the Fellahs, amount to nearly one-half of the entire revenue of Egypt, the poll-tax, a species of income-tax (firdch) of about one-twelfth of a man's annual income, with a maximum of 500 piastras; the tax on palm-trees, water-wheels, &c. To these sources of revenue must be added the profits obtained by the sale of produce, custom-dues at the sea-ports, and a duty paid by the inhabitants of Cairo and other large towns on all kinds of grain, with other custom-dues, tax on fisheries and freight. The total revenue may average about 3,000,000 of pounds sterling. The fullest published table of the revenue and expenditure of Egypt is perhaps that given by Mengin for the year 1833; since that time few great alterations have taken place in the country; but it must be received with caution, as we believe it is derived from government statistics, which in eastern countries are generally distorted for state purposes. It will, however, be found useful as giving the relative amount of various sources of income, and heads of expenditure.

**Revenue for 1833**

| Description | Amount | |--------------------------------------------------|--------| | Land-tax | £25,000| | Capitation, or poll-tax | 70,000 | | Duty on grain | 35,000 | | Profit on other produce | 20,000 | | Do. on linen | 12,000 | | Do. on silks | 9,500 | | Customs and Octroi duties at Alexandria | 6,000 | | Damietta and Boelak | 7,353 | | Old Misr | 1,601 | | Suez and El-Kasmyr | 6,000 | | Derawee | 250 | | Fisheries of El-Menzelch | 2,750 | | Duty on salt, boats, and fish | 3,500 | | Profit on merchandise entering from Syria by land | 4,400 | | Profit on lime, plaster, and stone | 2,771 | | Do. on linseed | 250 | | Do. on fisheries and Octroi of the Feiyeom | 580 | | Do. on hides, dressed and undressed | 7,000 | | Octroi of Upper and Lower Egypt | 3,200 | | Tax on dancers, &c. | 500 | | Do. on beasts for slaughter | 2,000 | | Do. on jewellery and lace | 450 | | Do. on inheritances | 1,200 | | Do. on Wekatehs and Bazaars in Upper Egypt | 400 | | Tribute paid by the payahs | 640 | | Profit on the mint | 3,000 | | Do. on musk | 800 | | Do. on raisins and sal-ammonium | 1,000 | | Do. on soda (Alexandria) | 300 | | Tax on palm-trees | 4,000 | | Freightage of government vessels | 2,400 |

Total: £505,055

**Expenditure for 1833**

| Description | Amount | |--------------------------------------------------|--------| | Army | 120,000| | Principal officers of government | 32,829 | | Employes | 20,000 | | Pensions | 9,500 | | Caravan of Pilgrims | 2,200 | | Manufactories | 21,600 | | Government works | 18,000 | | Tribute to the Porte | 60,000 | | Navy | 10,000 | | Military schools | 5,000 | | Rations of employes | 6,500 | | Irregular cavalry | 5,000 | | Bedawee | 15,000 | | Machinery | 3,300 | | Boat-yard (Boelak) | 1,500 | | Printing-press | 350 | | Dock-yard (Alexandria) | 15,505 | | Pasha's kitchen | 4,000 | | Materiel of war | 14,000 | | Forage | 2,500 | | Purchase of clothing and jewels | 14,000 |

Total: £399,814

The principal field-produce for the same year was as follows:

| Produce | Quantity | |-----------|----------| | Wheat | 1,450,000| | Beans | 700,000 | | Barley | 650,000 | | Maize | 160,000 | | Millet | 750,000 | | Lentils | 70,000 | | Rice | 80,000 | | Linseed | 22,000 | | Sesame Seed| 18,000 |

| Produce | Quantity | |-----------|----------| | Cotton | 114,500 | | Sugar | 8,558 | | Henneh (hinnah) | 35,000 | | Flax | 18,000 | | Nitre | 15,784 | | Indigo | 77,300 | | Opium | 14,500 | | Silk | 6,450 |

---

1 For much information on the hospitals and medical schools, &c., see Clot-Bey, *Aperçu Général*, vol. ii., pp. 394–448. 2 Personal observation. 3 Modern Egyptians; and Mengin, *Histoire d'Egypt sous Mohammed Ali*, vol. iii., p. 150, et seqq. 4 Mengin, ib. According to the annual report issued by the Custom-house at Alexandria, the total amount of exports in 1853 was L3,472,000, and of imports from all parts L2,670,000. Great Britain, Austria, and France, are the countries principally trading with Egypt, and the exports and imports to and from those countries were:

| Country | Exports | Imports | |---------------|---------|---------| | Great Britain | L1,787,549 | L1,153,000 | | Austria | L339,000 | 310,000 | | France | L491,000 | 242,000 |

The same report gives the following table of exports:

- Wheat (quarters): 706,000 - Beans: 215,000 - Barley: 42,000 - Indian Corn: 47,000 - Linseed: 20,000 - Sesame Seed: 32,000 - Cotton (bales): 181,000 - Flax: 44,000 - Wool: 22,000 - Henneb: 5,900

The total value of manufactures imported was L475,000, of which Great Britain contributed L353,000; and the number of merchant-ships that sailed in 1853 from the port of Alexandria was 1191, of which 944 were with cargoes, and 247 in ballast. The imports are principally timber, woollen caps (takooshes), cochinical, copper, and copper wire, coal, cloth, drugs, tin-plates, iron wire, fruit (fresh and dry), oil, paper, jewellery, &c., sugar, cotton, woollen and silk stuffs, glass, &c. From Syria, India, and the East are imported shawls, silks, tobacco, spices, coffee, &c., and from the south, elephant-tusks, hides, castor-oil, senna, colocynth, and slaves; of the latter about 5000 are annually brought from the interior, of which some 1500 are sold in Egypt.

The following shows the amount of the principal exports to Europe for the years 1850–54, both inclusive:

| Year | Bales Cotton | Do. Flax | Ardebb Wheat | Do. Boons | Do. Barley | |------|--------------|----------|--------------|-----------|------------| | 1850 | 145,387 | 29,549 | 961,171 | 474,429 | 180,096 | | 1851 | 121,439 | 30,716 | 1,163,949 | 465,280 | 178,782 | | 1852 | 270,168 | 26,243 | 783,004 | 370,920 | 131,948 | | 1853 | 148,829 | 30,799 | 815,629 | 320,239 | 68,771 | | 1854 | 150,943 | 15,289 | 1,011,693 | 394,167 | 114,428 |

The Egyptian measures are: The "firt" or space measured by the extension of the thumb and first finger; the "shiber" or span; the common cubit = 22½ inches, the cubit of about 25 inches, used principally for Indian goods, and the cubit of about 26½ inches, used for European cloth.

Of the measures of land, the feddah was equal to about 1 English acre and one-tenth; it is now less than an acre. It is divided into "keerats" or 24ths, and consists of 33¾ kasabehs or rods. The kasabeh is 22½ kabdahs, and the kabdah, about 6¼ inches, or the measure of a man's fist with the thumb erect. The Egyptian league varies in Upper and Lower Egypt, and is stated to be, in the former, equal to a journey of an hour and a half, and in the latter, to one hour's journey. The "ardebb" is equal to very nearly 5 bushels, and consists of 6 "weybeh," and each weybeh of 4 "rubas."

The weights are the "kamhab" (or grain of wheat), the 6th weight of a "dirhem," and 4th of a "keerat." It is equal to about ⅓ of an English grain. The "habbeh" (or grain of barley) is the 48th of a dirhem and 3rd of a keerat, and = ⅛ English grain. The keerat, or carat, is the 24th of a "mitkal," and = from 2½ to 3 English grains. The dirhem = 47½ to 48 English grains. The mitkal = weight of a decinar = from 71½ to 72 English grains. The "wukkeh" or ounce = from 571½ to 576 English grains. The "ratl" or pound = from 1 lb. 2 oz. 5¼ dwt., to about 1 lb. 2 oz. 8 dwt. troy. The "wukkah" or oke = from 3 lb. 3 oz. 13½ dwt. to 3 lb. 4 oz. troy. The "kantar" or hundred-weight = from 98 lb., less 200 grs., to about 98 lb. avoirdupois.

European sovereigns and dollars are current in Egypt; money, the former being now equivalent to about 100 piasters, the latter, if French, to about 20 piasters, and if Spanish (pillar-dollars), to about 22 piasters; but the value of these coins is constantly changing. The Spanish doubloon, and Venetian sequin are also current, and so are Constantinople coins. Of native coin the "faddah" (or para) is equal to ⅝ of a farthing, and there are pieces of 5, 10, and 20 faddahs. The "kirsh," or Egyptian piaster, contains 40 faddahs, and is equal to 2½ pence. These coins are of silver and copper. Of gold coins there are the "kheyreeyeh" of 4 piasters, and the kheyreeyeh of 9 piasters (but the value of these coins has recently depreciated), and pieces of 5, 10, 20, and 100 piasters. The "riyal beledee," or native dollar, is equal to 90 paras, but is only a nominal money, as is the "kees," or purse, which contains 500 piasters, and the "khazneh," or treasury of 1000 purses. For the weights, measures, and money we are indebted to the Modern Egyptians.

(n.s.r.)