Book: The Treasury of Ancient Egypt

A >> Arthur E. P. B. Weigall >> The Treasury of Ancient Egypt




The ancient magic of Egypt is still widely practised, and many of the
formulae used in modern times are familiar to the Egyptologist. The
Egyptian, indeed, lives in a world much influenced by magic and thickly
populated by spirits, demons, and djins. Educated men holding Government
appointments, and dressing in the smartest European manner, will
describe their miraculous adventures and their meetings with djins. An
Egyptian gentleman holding an important administrative post, told me the
other day how his cousin was wont to change himself into a cat at night
time, and to prowl about the town. When a boy, his father noticed this
peculiarity, and on one occasion chased and beat the cat, with the
result that the boy's body next morning was found to be covered with
stripes and bruises. The uncle of my informant once read such strong
language (magically) in a certain book that it began to tremble
violently, and finally made a dash for it out of the window. This same
personage was once sitting beneath a palm-tree with a certain magician
(who, I fear, was also a conjurer), when, happening to remark on the
clusters of dates twenty feet or so above his head, his friend stretched
his arms upwards and his hands were immediately filled with the fruit.
At another time this magician left his overcoat by mistake in a railway
carriage, and only remembered it when the train was a mere speck upon
the horizon; but, on the utterance of certain words, the coat
immediately flew through the air back to him.

I mention these particular instances because they were told to me by
educated persons; but amongst the peasants even more incredible stories
are gravely accepted. The Omdeh, or headman, of the village of Chaghb,
not far from Luxor, submitted an official complaint to the police a
short time ago against an _afrit_ or devil which was doing much mischief
to him and his neighbours, snatching up oil-lamps and pouring the oil
over the terrified villagers, throwing stones at passers-by, and so
forth. Spirits of the dead in like manner haunt the living, and often do
them mischief. At Luxor, lately, the ghost of a well-known robber
persecuted his widow to such an extent that she finally went mad. A
remarkable parallel to this case, dating from Pharaonic days, may be
mentioned. It is the letter of a haunted widower to his dead wife, in
which he asks her why she persecutes him, since he was always kind to
her during her life, nursed her through illnesses, and never grieved her
heart.[1]

[Footnote 1: Maspero: 'Etudes egyptologiques,' i. 145.]

These instances might be multiplied, but those which I have quoted will
serve to show that the old gods are still alive, and that the famous
magic of the Egyptians is not yet a thing of the past. Let us now turn
to the affairs of everyday life.

An archaeological traveller in Egypt cannot fail to observe the
similarity between old and modern customs as he rides through the
villages and across the fields. The houses, when not built upon the
European plan, are surprisingly like those of ancient days. The old
cornice still survives, and the rows of dried palm stems, from which its
form was originally derived, are still to be seen on the walls of
gardens and courtyards. The huts or shelters of dried corn-stalks, so
often erected in the fields, are precisely the same as those used in
prehistoric days; and the archaic bunches of corn-stalks smeared with
mud, which gave their form to later stone columns, are set up to this
day, though their stone posterity are now in ruins. Looking through the
doorway of one of these ancient houses, the traveller, perhaps, sees a
woman grinding corn or kneading bread in exactly the same manner as her
ancestress did in the days of the Pharaohs. Only the other day a native
asked to be allowed to purchase from us some of the ancient millstones
lying in one of the Theban temples, in order to re-use them on his farm.
The traveller will notice, in some shady corner, the village barber
shaving the heads and faces of his patrons, just as he is seen in the
Theban tomb-paintings of thousands of years ago; and the small boys who
scamper across the road will have just the same tufts of hair left for
decoration on their shaven heads as had the boys of ancient Thebes and
Memphis. In another house, where a death has occurred, the mourning
women, waving the same blue cloth which was the token of mourning in
ancient days, will toss their arms about in gestures familiar to every
student of ancient scenes. Presently the funeral will issue forth, and
the men will sing that solemn yet cheery tune which never fails to call
to mind the far-famed _Maneros_--that song which Herodotus describes as
a plaintive funeral dirge, and which Plutarch asserts was suited at the
same time to festive occasions. In some other house a marriage will be
taking place, and the singers and pipers will, in like manner, recall
the scenes upon the monuments. The former have a favourite gesture--the
placing of the hand behind the ear as they sing--which is frequently
shown in ancient representations of such festive scenes. The dancing
girls, too, are here to be seen, their eyes and cheeks heavily painted,
as were those of their ancestresses; and in their hands are the same
tambourines as are carried by their class in Pharaonic paintings and
reliefs. The same date-wine which intoxicated the worshippers of the
Egyptian Bacchus goes the round of this village company, and the same
food stuff, the same small, flat loaves of bread, are eaten.

Passing out into the fields the traveller observes the ground raked into
the small squares for irrigation which the prehistoric farmer made; and
the plough is shaped as it always was. The _shadoof_, or water-hoist,
is patiently worked as it has been for thousands of years; while the
cylindrical hoist employed in Lower Egypt was invented and introduced in
Ptolemaic times. Threshing and winnowing proceed in the manner
represented on the monuments, and the methods of sowing and reaping have
not changed. Along the embanked roads, men, cattle, and donkeys file
past against the sky-line, recalling the straight rows of such figures
depicted so often upon the monuments. Overhead there flies the vulture
goddess Nekheb, and the hawk Horus hovers near by. Across the road ahead
slinks the jackal, Anubis; under one's feet crawls Khepera, the scarab;
and there, under the sacred tree, sleeps the horned ram of Amon. In all
directions the hieroglyphs of the ancient Egyptians pass to and fro, as
though some old temple-inscription had come to life. The letter _m_, the
owl, goes hooting past. The letter _a_, the eagle, circles overhead; the
sign _ur_, the wagtail, flits at the roadside, chirping at the sign
_rekh_, the peewit. Along the road comes the sign _ab_, the frolicking
calf; and near it is _ka_, the bull; while behind them walks the sign
_fa_, a man carrying a basket on his head. In all directions are the
figures from which the ancients made their hieroglyphical script; and
thus that wonderful old writing at once ceases to be mysterious, a thing
of long ago, and one realises how natural a product of the country it
was.


[Illustration: PL. IV. In the palm-groves near Sakkara, Egypt.]

[_Photo by E. Bird._

In a word, ancient and modern Egyptians are fundamentally similar. Nor
is there any great difference to be observed between the country's
relations with foreign powers in ancient days and those of the last
hundred years. As has been seen in the last chapter, Egypt was usually
occupied by a foreign power, or ruled by a foreign dynasty, just as at
the present day; and a foreign army was retained in the country during
most of the later periods of ancient history. There were always numerous
foreigners settled in Egypt, and in Ptolemaic and Roman times Alexandria
and Memphis swarmed with them. The great powers of the civilised world
were always watching Egypt as they do now, not always in a friendly
attitude to that one of themselves which occupied the country; and the
chief power with which Egypt was concerned in the time of the Ramesside
Pharaohs inhabited Asia Minor and perhaps Turkey, just as in the middle
ages and the last century. Then, as in modern times, Egypt had much of
her attention held by the Sudan, and constant expeditions had to be made
into the regions above the cataracts. Thus it cannot be argued that
ancient history offers no precedent for modern affairs because all
things have now changed. Things have changed extremely little, broadly
speaking; and general lines of conduct have the same significance at the
present time as they had in the past.

I wish now to give an outline of Egypt's relationship to her most
important neighbour, Syria, in order that the bearing of history upon
modern political matters may be demonstrated; for it would seem that the
records of the past make clear a tendency which is now somewhat
overlooked. I employ this subject simply as an example.

From the earliest historical times the Egyptians have endeavoured to
hold Syria and Palestine as a vassal state. One of the first Pharaohs
with whom we meet in Egyptian history, King Zeser of Dynasty III., is
known to have sent a fleet to the Lebanon in order to procure cedar
wood, and there is some evidence to show that he held sway over this
country. For how many centuries previous to his reign the Pharaohs had
overrun Syria we cannot now say, but there is no reason to suppose that
Zeser initiated the aggressive policy of Egypt in Asia. Sahura, a
Pharaoh of Dynasty V., attacked the Phoenician coast with his fleet, and
returned to the Nile Valley with a number of Syrian captives. Pepi I. of
the succeeding dynasty also attacked the coast-cities, and Pepi II. had
considerable intercourse with Asia. Amenemhat I., of Dynasty XII.,
fought in Syria, and appears to have brought it once more under Egyptian
sway. Senusert I. seems to have controlled the country to some extent,
for Egyptians lived there in some numbers. Senusert III. won a great
victory over the Asiatics in Syria; and a stela and statue belonging to
Egyptian officials have been found at Gezer, between Jerusalem and the
sea. After each of the above-mentioned wars it is to be presumed that
the Egyptians held Syria for some years, though little is now known of
the events of these far-off times.

During the Hyksos dynasties in Egypt there lived a Pharaoh named Khyan
who was of Semitic extraction; and there is some reason to suppose that
he ruled from Baghdad to the Sudan, he and his fathers having created a
great Egyptian Empire by the aid of foreign troops. Egypt's connection
with Asia during the Hyksos rule is not clearly defined, but the very
fact that these foreign kings were anxious to call themselves "Pharaohs"
shows that Egypt dominated in the east end of the Mediterranean. The
Hyksos kings of Egypt very probably held Syria in fee, being possessed
of both countries, but preferring to hold their court in Egypt.

We now come to the great Dynasty XVIII., and we learn more fully of the
Egyptian invasions of Syria. Ahmosis I. drove the Hyksos out of the
Delta and pursued them through Judah. His successor, Amenhotep I.,
appears to have seized all the country as far as the Euphrates; and
Thutmosis I., his son, was able to boast that he ruled even unto that
river. Thutmosis III., Egypt's greatest Pharaoh, led invasion after
invasion into Syria, so that his name for generations was a terror to
the inhabitants. From the Euphrates to the fourth cataract of the Nile
the countries acknowledged him king, and the mighty Egyptian fleet
patrolled the seas. This Pharaoh fought no less than seventeen campaigns
in Asia, and he left to his son the most powerful throne in the world.
Amenhotep II. maintained this empire and quelled the revolts of the
Asiatics with a strong hand. Thutmosis IV., his son, conducted two
expeditions into Syria; and the next king, Amenhotep III., was
acknowledged throughout that country.

That extraordinary dreamer, Akhnaton, the succeeding Pharaoh, allowed
the empire to pass from him owing to his religious objections to war;
but, after his death, Tutankhamen once more led the Egyptian armies into
Asia. Horemheb also made a bid for Syria; and Seti I. recovered
Palestine. Rameses II., his son, penetrated to North Syria; but, having
come into contact with the new power of the Hittites, he was unable to
hold the country. The new Pharaoh, Merenptah, seized Canaan and laid
waste the land of Israel. A few years later, Rameses III. led his fleet
and his army to the Syrian coast and defeated the Asiatics in a great
sea-battle. He failed to hold the country, however, and after his death
Egypt remained impotent for two centuries. Then, under Sheshonk I., of
Dynasty XXII., a new attempt was made, and Jerusalem was captured.
Takeloth II., of the same dynasty, sent thither an Egyptian army to help
in the overthrow of Shalmaneser II.

From this time onwards the power of Egypt had so much declined that the
invasions into Syria of necessity became more rare. Shabaka of Dynasty
XXV. concerned himself deeply with Asiatic politics, and attempted to
bring about a state of affairs which would have given him the
opportunity of seizing the country. Pharaoh Necho, of the succeeding
dynasty, invaded Palestine and advanced towards the Euphrates. He
recovered for Egypt her Syrian province, but it was speedily lost again.
Apries, a few years later, captured the Phoenician coast and invaded
Palestine; but the country did not remain for long under Egyptian rule.
It is not necessary to record all the Syrian wars of the Dynasty of the
Ptolemies. Egypt and Asia were now closely connected, and at several
periods during this phase of Egyptian history the Asiatic province came
under the control of the Pharaohs. The wars of Ptolemy I. in Syria were
conducted on a large scale. In the reign of Ptolemy III. there were
three campaigns, and I cannot refrain from quoting a contemporary record
of the King's powers if only for the splendour of its wording:--

"The great King Ptolemy ... having inherited from his father the royalty
of Egypt and Libya and Syria and Phoenicia and Cyprus and Lycia and
Caria and the Cyclades, set out on a campaign into Asia with infantry
and cavalry forces, a naval armament and elephants, both Troglodyte and
Ethiopic.... But having become master of all the country within the
Euphrates, and of Cilicia and Pamphylia and Ionia and the Hellespont
and Thrace, and of all the military forces and elephants in these
countries, and having made the monarchs in all these places his
subjects, he crossed the Euphrates, and having brought under him
Mesopotamia and Babylonia and Susiana and Persis and Media, and all the
rest as far as Bactriana ... he sent forces through the canals----"
(Here the text breaks off.)

Later in this dynasty Ptolemy VII. was crowned King of Syria, but the
kingdom did not remain long in his power. Then came the Romans, and for
many years Syria and Egypt were sister provinces of one empire.

There is no necessity to record the close connection between the two
countries in Arabic times. For a large part of that era Egypt and Syria
formed part of the same empire; and we constantly find Egyptians
fighting in Asia. Now, under Edh Dhahir Bebars of the Baharide Mameluke
Dynasty, we see them helping to subject Syria and Armenia; now, under
El-Mansur Kalaun, Damascus is captured; and now En Nasir Muhammed is
found reigning from Tunis to Baghdad. In the Circassian Mameluke Dynasty
we see El Muayyad crushing a revolt in Syria, and El Ashraf Bursbey
capturing King John of Cyprus and keeping his hand on Syria. And so the
tale continues, until, as a final picture, we see Ibrahim Pasha leading
the Egyptians into Asia and crushing the Turks at Iconium.

Such is the long list of the wars waged by Egypt in Syria. Are we to
suppose that these continuous incursions into Asia have suddenly come to
an end? Are we to imagine that because there has been a respite for a
hundred years the precedent of six thousand years has now to be
disregarded? By the recent reconquest of the Sudan it has been shown
that the old political necessities still exist for Egypt in the south,
impelling her to be mistress of the upper reaches of the Nile. Is there
now no longer any chance of her expanding in other directions should her
hands become free?

The reader may answer with the argument that in early days England made
invasion after invasion into France, yet ceased after a while to do so.
But this is no parallel. England was impelled to war with France because
the English monarchs believed themselves to be, by inheritance, kings of
a large part of France; and when they ceased to believe this they ceased
to make war. The Pharaohs of Egypt never considered themselves to be
kings of Syria, and never used any title suggesting an inherited
sovereignty. They merely held Syria as a buffer state, and claimed no
more than an overlordship there. Now Syria is still a buffer state, and
the root of the trouble, therefore, still exists. Though I must disclaim
all knowledge of modern politics, I am quite sure that it is no
meaningless phrase to say that England will most carefully hold this
tendency in check prevent an incursion into Syria; but, with a strong
controlling hand relaxed, it would require more than human strength to
eradicate an Egyptian tendency--nay, a habit, of six thousand years'
standing. Try as she might, Egypt, as far as an historian can see, would
not be able to prevent herself passing ultimately into Syria again. How
or when this would take place an Egyptologist cannot see, for he is
accustomed to deal in long periods of time, and to consider the
centuries as others might the decades. It might not come for a hundred
years or more: it might come suddenly quite by accident.

In 1907 there was a brief moment when Egypt appeared to be, quite
unknowingly, on the verge of an attempted reconquest of her lost
province. There was a misunderstanding with Turkey regarding the
delineation of the Syrio-Sinaitic frontier; and, immediately, the
Egyptian Government took strong action and insisted that the question
should be settled. Had there been bloodshed the seat of hostilities
would have been Syria; and supposing that Egypt had been victorious, she
would have pushed the opposing forces over the North Syrian frontier
into Asia Minor, and when peace was declared she would have found
herself dictating terms from a point of vantage three hundred miles
north of Jerusalem. Can it be supposed that she would then have desired
to abandon the reconquered territory?

However, matters were settled satisfactorily with the Porte, and the
Egyptian Government, which had never realised this trend of events, and
had absolutely no designs upon Syria, gave no further consideration to
Asiatic affairs. In the eyes of the modern onlookers the whole matter
had developed from a series of chances; but in the view of the historian
the moment of its occurrence was the only chance about it, the _fact_ of
its occurrence being inevitable according to the time-proven rules of
history. The phrase "England in Egypt" has been given such prominence of
late that a far more important phrase, "Egypt in Asia," has been
overlooked. Yet, whereas the former is a catch-word of barely thirty
years' standing, the latter has been familiar at the east end of the
Mediterranean for forty momentous centuries at the lowest computation,
and rings in the ears of the Egyptologist all through the ages. I need
thus no justification for recalling it in these pages.

Now let us glance at Egypt's north-western frontier. Behind the deserts
which spread to the west of the Delta lies the oasis of Siwa; and from
here there is a continuous line of communication with Tripoli and Tunis.
Thus, during the present winter (1910-11), the outbreak of cholera at
Tripoli has necessitated the despatch of quarantine officials to the
oasis in order to prevent the spread of the disease into Egypt. Now, of
late years we have heard much talk regarding the Senussi fraternity, a
Muhammedan sect which is said to be prepared to declare a holy war and
to descend upon Egypt. In 1909 the Egyptian Mamur of Siwa was murdered,
and it was freely stated that this act of violence was the beginning of
the trouble. I have no idea as to the real extent of the danger, nor do
I know whether this bogie of the west, which is beginning to cause such
anxiety in Egypt in certain classes, is but a creation of the
imagination; but it will be interesting to notice the frequent
occurrence of hostilities in this direction, since the history of
Egypt's gateways is surely a study meet for her guardians.

When the curtain first rises upon archaic times, we find those far-off
Pharaohs struggling with the Libyans who had penetrated into the Delta
from Tripoli and elsewhere. In early dynastic history they are the chief
enemies of the Egyptians, and great armies have to be levied to drive
them back through Siwa to their homes. Again in Dynasty XII., Amenemhat
I. had to despatch his son to drive these people out of Egypt; and at
the beginning of Dynasty XVIII., Amenhotep I. was obliged once more to
give them battle. Seti I. of Dynasty XIX. made war upon them, and
repulsed their invasion into Egypt. Rameses II. had to face an alliance
of Libyans, Lycians, and others, in the western Delta. His son Merenptah
waged a most desperate war with them in order to defend Egypt against
their incursions, a war which has been described as the most perilous in
Egyptian history; and it was only after a battle in which nine thousand
of the enemy were slain that the war came to an end. Rameses III.,
however, was again confronted with these persistent invaders, and only
succeeded in checking them temporarily. Presently the tables were
turned, and Dynasty XXII., which reigned so gloriously in Egypt, was
Libyan in origin. No attempt was made thenceforth for many years to
check the peaceful entrance of Libyans into Egypt, and soon that nation
held a large part of the Delta. Occasional mention is made of troubles
upon the north-west frontier, but little more is heard of any serious
invasions. In Arabic times disturbances are not infrequent, and certain
sovereigns, as for example, El Mansur Kalaun, were obliged to invade the
enemy's country, thus extending Egypt's power as far as Tunis.

There is one lesson which may be learnt from the above facts--namely,
that this frontier is somewhat exposed, and that incursions from North
Africa by way of Siwa are historic possibilities. If the Senussi
invasion of Egypt is ever attempted it will not, at any rate, be without
precedent.

When England entered Egypt in 1882 she found a nation without external
interests, a country too impoverished and weak to think of aught else
but its own sad condition. The reviving of this much-bled, anaemic
people, and the reorganisation of the Government, occupied the whole
attention of the Anglo-Egyptian officials, and placed Egypt before their
eyes in only this one aspect. Egypt appeared to be but the Nile Valley
and the Delta; and, in truth, that was, and still is, quite as much
as the hard-worked officials could well administer. The one task of the
regeneration of Egypt was all absorbing, and the country came to be
regarded as a little land wherein a concise, clearly-defined, and
compact problem could be worked out.


[Illustration: PL. V. The mummy of Sety I. of Dynasty XIX.
--CAIRO MUSEUM.]

[_Photo by E. Brugsch Pasha._


Now, while this was most certainly the correct manner in which to face
the question, and while Egypt has benefited enormously by this
singleness of purpose in her officials, it was, historically, a false
attitude. Egypt is not a little country: Egypt is a crippled Empire.
Throughout her history she has been the powerful rival of the people of
Asia Minor. At one time she was mistress of the Sudan, Somaliland,
Palestine, Syria, Libya, and Cyprus; and the Sicilians, Sardinians,
Cretans, and even Greeks, stood in fear of the Pharaoh. In Arabic times
she held Tunis and Tripoli, and even in the last century she was the
foremost Power at the east end of the Mediterranean. Napoleon when he
came to Egypt realised this very thoroughly, and openly aimed to make
her once more a mighty empire. But in 1882 such fine dreams were not to
be considered: there was too much work to be done in the Nile Valley
itself. The Egyptian Empire was forgotten, and Egypt was regarded as
permanently a little country. The conditions which we found here we took
to be permanent conditions. They were not. We arrived when the country
was in a most unnatural state as regards its foreign relations; and we
were obliged to regard that state as chronic. This, though wise, was
absolutely incorrect. Egypt in the past never has been for more than a
short period a single country; and all history goes to show that she
will not always be single in the future.

Copyright (c) 2007. knowncrafts.net. All rights reserved.