[Hieroglyphs]ⲥⲟⲩⲧⲉⲛ (Ⲣⲏ ⲛⲟϥⲣⲉ (ⲛ̀) ⲕⲁ) ⲥⲓⲣⲏ (Ϣⲃⲕ).“The King (Sun Beneficent of Oblations), Son of the Sun (Shabak).” This is undoubtedly the first of this list of kings. The name is not found upon any of the monuments of Ethiopia, but that is not surprising, so few of the temples there being preserved; but we have undoubted evidence of this king having, as the historians say, reigned over Egypt, for we find his name upon a gate of the temple of Karnak, and also the portrait of the king in his Ethiopian dress, with the same titles, on the interior of the door of the great propylon of the Temple of Luxor, which he repaired. Signor Rosellini states, that he found a date of the twelfth year of his reign; which corroborates the statement of Eusebius, that he reigned twelve years, and not eight only, according to Africanus. I saw at Berlin a scarabæus containing the name of this king, with the uræus on each side, and above the oval a lion couchant: the latter is curious, as it tallies with the singular title I observed above the names at Amarah, of “King of Kings,” represented by the reed and half circle, as king (ⲥⲟⲩⲧⲛ), and a lion, emblematical of king, with the sign of the plural number. Signor Rosellini mentions, also, that this name is on two amulets he purchased for the Museum at Florence, and on a statue in the Villa Albani at Rome. I think the latter must be removed, as I could not find it there, nor do I recollect having seen any other instance of the name of Sciabak or Sabachus, in the splendid collections of Egyptian antiquities at Turin, Berlin, Paris, London, Rome, Naples, Vienna, Munich, &c., except in an inscription on an alabaster Canopian vase at Paris.[Hieroglyphs]ⲥⲟⲩⲧⲛ̀ (Ⲣⲏ.....) ⲡⲓⲕⲁ) ⲥⲓⲣⲏ (Ⲁⲙⲛⲙ (ⲁⲓ) Ϣⲃⲧⲕ), “King (Sun.....of the Offerings), Son of the Sun, (the beloved of Amun Shabatok).” This name is evidently different from the preceding, there being not only a change in the prænomen, but also in the other oval. Besides the title of Beloved of Amun, the addition of the third hieroglyphic, the phonetic sign for T, changes completely the sound. There is as much difference in the names of Shabako and Shabatok, who therefore are as clearly two persons, as the Sabbakon and Sevechus of Eusebius. The Venetian edition of Eusebius calls the latter king Sebichos. When we consider the remote period, the difference of the dialect, the errors of copyists, &c., it is not surprising that so much discrepancy should exist. This name is found on the ruins to the south-east of the great temple at Carnak; and that the king was an Ethiopian is evident from his costume. The style is similar to that of Shabak; but the drawings of Signor Rosellini, which I could have wished to insert, are clearly the portraits of two different kings. I will presently state the learned Italian’s reasons for supposing that both these names allude to the god Seb or Sevek.[Hieroglyphs][Hieroglyphs][Hieroglyphs]ⲥⲟⲩⲧⲛ̀ (Ⲣⲏ-Ⲁⲧⲙⲟⲩⲛⲟϥⲣⲉ, ⲱϥⲉ ⲥⲓⲣⲏ) (Ⲧϩⲣⲕ), “King Sun Atmou beneficent, Corrector, Son of the Sun (Tirhaka).” The name of this king is found on the columns and sides of the temple excavated out of the rock at Gibel el Birkel: it occurs ten times in the inscriptions which I copied there. It is also on the small altar in the great temple; but Major Felix[63]appears to me mistaken in supposing that Tirhaka built that splendid edifice, for his name occursin that instance only. Whereas the name ofⲥⲟⲩⲧⲛ̀ Ⲡⲓⲱⲛϩⲉⲓ, “King Pionchei (the living),” is on the large altar, and also a fragment of it on the western wall of the temple; but the claim even of the latter may be disputed, forVignette A.is the prænomen on the only column which is now standing; and the name on the pillars is usually that of the king who erected the edifice. We have the authority, then, of the monuments of Ethiopia, that Tirhaka was king over that country, and his name, fortunately, still remains on a pylon of a temple at Medenet Abou, and other places at Thebes, to corroborate the testimony of Manetho, that he was also King of Egypt. In the latter instance, his name is written exactly as I have given it, except that the two last hieroglyphics of the prænomen are represented, figuratively I conceive, by an arm and a lash in the hand. I found, also the name of his queen, in the first chamber excavated out of the temple of Gibel el Birkel (Vignette A).ⲥⲟⲩⲧⲛ̀-ϩⲓⲙⲉ Ⲁⲙⲛϯⲕϯϩ,, “royal bride, Amentakatah.” Mr. Wilkinson found two princesses of this family: the first, B, isⲧⲛⲣ ⲥⲓⲟⲩ, orⲧ. ⲧⲏⲣ Ⲁⲙⲛⲁⲧⲥ, “the Divine Star, or the Divine Amenates;” and C, isⲧⲏⲣ ϩⲓⲙⲉ ⲦⲙⲁⲩϢⲛⲓⲛⲟϥⲣⲉ, “the Divine Bride, Mutsheninofra, the Mother, Mistress of Good.” Signor Rosellini states, that there is a date, at Gibel el Birkel, of the year XX.of this king’s reign, confirming the accuracy of Eusebius. I did not perceive it, though, I believe, I copied every hieroglyphic which remains there.[Hieroglyphs]The third king of this dynasty is the Tirhaka of Holy Writ: the narrative there given, is, I conceive, of sufficient importance to justify my noticing it somewhat in detail.[64]In the third year of King Hoshea, the son of Elah, king of Israel, Hezekiah the son of Ahaz began to reign; and, for his zeal in rooting out the idolatry of his people, he was described as one who “trusted in the Lord God of Israel, so that after him was none like him among all the kings of Judah, nor any that were before him.” Hezekiah rebelled against the Assyrians, and smote the Philistines; and in the fourth year of his reign, the king of Assyria, Shalmaneser, besieged Samaria, and, after three years, took it, and carried away the Israelites prisoners. In the fourteenth year of King Hezekiah, Sennacherib, who had succeeded to Shalmaneser, went up against all the “fenced cities of Judah, and took them.” Hezekiah agreed to purchase a peace for three hundred talents of silver and thirty talents of gold; and gave to him, for that purpose, all the treasures in the temples and palaces; but Sennacherib, faithless to this agreement, sent up a great host against Jerusalem, and the three chiefs of the army of the king of Assyria, Tartan, Rabsaris, and Rabshakeh, had a conference with three of the officers of Hezekiah-Eliakim, who was over the household of Judah, Shebni, the scribe, and Joab the son of Asaph the recorder. Rabshakeh asked him, “Now, on whom doest thou trust, that thou rebellest against me?” and taunted them with trusting upon Egypt. “Now, behold, thou trustest upon the staff of this bruised reed, even upon Egypt, on which if a man lean, it will go into his hand, and pierce it: so is Pharaoh king of Egypt unto all that trust on him.” And he begged them to give pledges to the King of Assyria, and not trust on Egypt for chariots or for horsemen.Hezekiah was comforted by the prophet Isaiah, and Rabshakeh returned and told Sennacherib that Tirhaka, king of Ethiopia, was coming up to fight against him. The titles which are given to Tirhaka, in these passages, are most important. In 2 Kings, xix. 9., he is called king of Ethiopia, and in xviii. 21. and 24., Pharaoh of Egypt, which is exactly saying that he was ruler over both countries, as we have seen that Manetho and the monuments prove him to have been.This name, according to Signor Rosellini, is written in Hebrew (תרחקח םלך־כוש) “Tarhaka, Melek Cush,” translated correctly Θαρακα Βασιλευς Αιθιοπων, “Tarhaka, king of the Ethiopians.” The perfect resemblance of the name, which neither upon the monuments nor in the lists is given to any other king of Egypt; the correspondence of the epoch, and the title of king of Ethiopia, given to a sovereign of an Ethiopian dynasty, who by force of arms had annexed Egypt to their paternal kingdom, are circumstances which prove, beyond all doubt, as the learned Italian[65]says, the identity of the Tarhaka of the monuments, with the Tirhaka of holy writ. If, according to Eusebius, we allow 163 years for the 26th dynasty, that is, the one which succeeded to the Ethiopians in Egypt, that number, added to the date of the invasion by Cambyses, 525, will make 688, which, added to the 20 years’ reign of Tirhaka, would make the accession of that king to the throne to be in 708, nearly the exact time assigned by the Scripture chronologists for the relief of Hezekiah and Tirhaka; but Signor Rosellini, principally on the authority of a stela which he obtained at Alexandria, makes the total of the reigns of that dynasty 150 years, which would cause the accession of Tirhaka to the dominion of the Nile to happen in 695. Following exactly the chronology of Scripture, it must have been in the first year of the king’s reign that the destruction of the Assyrian army took place. “Then the angelof the Lord went out and smote in the camp of the Assyrians an hundred fourscore and five thousand: and when they arose early in the morning, behold, they were all dead corpses. So Sennacherib king of Assyria departed, and went and returned, and dwelt at Nineveh. And it came to pass, as he was worshipping in the house of Nisroch his god, that Adrammelech and Sharezer his sons smote him with the sword.”[66]I will here introduce an event related by Herodotus[67], which, notwithstanding many discrepancies, is evidently the same:—“After Sabaco, the Ethiopian, returned into the country, and the blind king Anysis was dead, there reigned,” he says, “a priest of Vulcan, named Sethos. This king treated with contempt the warriors of Egypt, despising them, as if he never would have occasion for them; and, besides other injuries he committed against them, deprived them of the ground which, under the preceding kings, had been granted to each, in portions of twelve fields of a hundred cubits. But afterwards Sennacherib, king of the Arabs and of the Assyrians, having invaded Egypt with a great host, none of the warriors were willing to assist him: then the priest, reduced to extremity, entered into the sanctuary, bewailed before the figure of the divinity the danger to which he was exposed. Thus weeping, he fell asleep, and the divinity appeared unto him in a vision, and exhorted him to take courage, for he would have nothing to dread in going against the army of the Arabians, since he himself would send assistance. Animated by this dream, and having assembled those Egyptians who were willing to follow him, he fixed his camp in Pelusium, since that city forms the entrance into the country. He was followed by none of the warriors, but only by merchants, artificers, and labourers. When they were arrived there, a multitude of field mice were scattered among their adversaries, ate the bands of their armour, of their bows and shields, so that, next day, naked and disarmed, they fled, and many perished.”This Sethos is evidently the Ethiopian Tirhaka. The latter was the successor of an Ethiopian, as Sethos is represented to have been, and it was natural that the Ethiopian should despise the soldiers of Egypt, whom his predecessor had conquered. His depriving them of their land, and consequently of their political importance, was the natural policy of a king who reigned over them by right of conquest; but, as he was a good and beneficent monarch, who had encouraged the arts and internal prosperity of the country, of which we have a proof in his restoring and embellishing the temples, the merchants, artificers, and labourers hastened to his support, being attached to his person by the advantages they had derived from his government. The title of priest is not inappropriate to an Ethiopian king, who was chosen from that order. Diodorus also informs us how much they were under the influence of their priests, submitting even to death itself at their command. Besides the coincidence of the time in the list of Manetho, there is no mention of a king called Sethos, except the first of the 19th dynasty, which was long previous. These circumstances alone almost prove that the Sethos of Herodotus and the Ethiopian Tirhaka are the same; but we have still stronger evidence. The king against whom both marched was the same Sennacherib, King of Assyria, and they are both delivered in the same manner; that is, by a miracle. Herodotus states Pelusium, not Jerusalem, as the scene of their discomfiture. This circumstance made me at first imagine that Sennacherib might have been defeated at both places; but I conceive it more reasonable to attribute these differences of name, place, and the nature of the miracle to the usual confusion of Herodotus, who did not compile his work, like Manetho, from the sacred registers preserved in the temples, but from verbal communications with the priests; perhaps the story of the mice was invented by Herodotus, or his informers, or, at all events, arose in the lapse of time, to explain the manner in which the Deity interfered in their behalf.The Tirhaka, then, of the monuments and of Manetho, is the Sethos of Herodotus, and the Tirhaka who assisted Hezekiah against Sennacherib. From these various accounts, and by separating, in the narrative of Herodotus, the probable from the marvellous, we may conclude that the monarch was pious, since he bore the title of priest, and applied to the divinity for support before he set out on the expedition; that he was powerful, since he was not only able to hold in subjection the entire valley of the Nile, but also to carry his arms to the assistance of his neighbours. He appears, also, to have been an enlightened and an able legislator, since he encouraged the arts; and although a foreigner, had so ingratiated himself with his people, that, strong in their affections, he was not only able to destroy the military despotism of the soldiery, but raise another army, to wage war against the powerful king of Assyria. Eratosthenes (see Strabo[68],) states that this conqueror proceeded as far as the Pillars of Hercules.There is another king mentioned in the Bible, as reigning in Egypt twelve years before the defeat of Sennacherib. It is agreed, almost by all, that he is the Shabatok or Sevechus of the lists; but this is so learnedly and ingeniously discussed by Signor Rosellini, that I make no apology for enriching this chapter with a translation of his remarks. At the seventeenth chapter of 2 Kings, it is related that Shalmaneser, king of the Assyrians, subdued and made tributary Hoshea, king of Israel. That prince having wished to rebel, and having sent for aid to So, king of Egypt, Shalmaneser besieged, conquered, and made him prisoner. The reign of Hoshea over Israel lasted nine years; so that it appears to have happened in his sixth year, that, to throw off the Assyrian yoke, he demanded assistance from the king of Egypt. Therefore, as Shalmaneser besieged and took Samaria in that year, which was the last of Hoshea, Hezekiah began to reign over Judah in the third year of Hoshea; and in the 14th year of Hezekiah occurred the discomfitureof Sennacherib, in which the Pharaoh Tirhaka took part, as the ally of the king of Judah. The sixth year of Hoshea (in which he demanded aid of So, king of Egypt,) corresponds to the third year of the reign of Hezekiah; and since this latter king, in the 14th year of his reign, made a treaty with Tirhaka, it follows that the Pharaoh, called So in the Bible, preceded Tirhaka by an interval of not less than eleven years. But So is called king of Egypt, and Tirhaka was the same; therefore we ought to seek the Pharaoh So among the kings of this Ethiopian dynasty. And since he preceded Tirhaka by an interval of eleven years, we must necessarily recognise him as the immediate predecessor of Tirhaka, who is called by Manetho Sevechus, or Sebichus, and, according to Eusebius, reigned twelve years. Not less manifest than the coincidence of the years is the correspondence of the name in Manetho and the Bible, if we correct the pronunciation according to the true sound of the Egyptian language. I have already mentioned, that the name of Shabatok (so the Sevechus of Manetho is written upon the monuments) may truly, indeed, be considered as a peculiar word of the Ethiopian dialect, which corresponds to the Egyptian Sevek. Sevek is, in the Egyptian mythology, a god, who has attributes relative to the Nile, and is generally represented under the sacred symbol of a crocodile. In this form its name is usually written[Symbol]ⲥ ⲃ ⲕ“Sebek, Sevek;” but when it is represented under a human form, then it is written simply[Symbol]or[Symbol]ⲥ ⲃ“Seb, Sewe.” The titles, attributes, and forms of those two names, Sewe and Sebek, are promiscuous; and we are certain, that, however it is written or pronounced, it means the same divinity.[69]Let us take, therefore, from the Hebrew text, the name of the king of Egypt, to whom Hoshea sent for help. It is writtenסוא: disregarding (particularly in a foreign language) the corrupt pronunciation given to it by Masorete, and the other interpreters, who read So or Soa, and Sua, let the least learned in the languages of the East judge, if the natural pronunciation of these Hebrew elements be not Sewa or Sewe. This is sufficient to show, that the author of the second book of Kings wrote that name with those characters which could give the pronunciation of the Egyptian name Sewe. It is probable that the same name, written upon the monuments in the Ethiopian manner, Shabatok, was commonly called by the Egyptians, Sewe; and, perhaps, they pronounced it also, indifferently, Sewek, since both these words were the designation of the same divinity, to which that name belongs. In fact, Manetho wrote in his history, Sevechus, and, cutting off the Greek termination, it remains Sevek, retaining, from the Ethiopian Shabatok, the pronunciation used in Egypt. Thus the text of the Bible, also, in relating this Egyptian name, maintains that possible orthographic exactness which it has followed in writing all the other Egyptian names. The original monuments, therefore, and the lists of Manetho concur in attesting that the dynasty of the Ethiopians was composed of three kings, whose names I have mentioned, and thus correct the Greek historians who have assigned it to Sabaco only.CHAPTER XX.THE EMIGRATION OF EGYPTIAN SOLDIERS AT THE TIME OF PSAMMITICHUS. — EXPEDITION OF CAMBYSES. — MANNERS, CUSTOMS, ETC. OF THE MACROBIANS, ETC. — CURIOUS CUSTOMS OF THE ETHIOPIANS. — ERGAMENES, THE ETHIOPIAN KING’S, CONQUESTS IN LOWER NUBIA. — ATARRAMON AND SILCO, ETHIOPIAN KINGS. — EXPEDITION OF PETRONIUS. — QUEEN CANDACE. — CHRISTIANITY FIRST INTRODUCED INTO ETHIOPIA. — ITS DURATION. — NAPATA, CAPITAL OF CANDACE. — BLEMMYES AND THE NUBIANS.Underthe reign of Psammitichus, whom Africanus states to have reigned twenty-one years, Eusebius thirty-three, and Herodotus fifteen, after the Ethiopian dynasty, the historian of Halicarnassus informs us (and his account is confirmed by Diodorus), that 240,000 Egyptian soldiers were in garrison at Elephantine against the Ethiopians, at Pelusium against the Arabs and Assyrians, and others, in Marea, opposite Africa. These soldiers having been three years thus in garrison, without being relieved, resolved to go over together from Psammitichus into Ethiopia. Regardless of the entreaties of that king, they engaged themselves to the king of that country, who employed them in subduing some of his discontented subjects, whose land he gave them as a reward. It is added, that the Ethiopians became more civilised, imbibing the customs of Egypt.Herodotus states[70], that part of these soldiers were in garrison at Pelusium, against the Assyrians; probably an attack from thatnation was anticipated, in revenge of the defeat of Sennacherib. According to that author, there were forty days of land journey, and sixteen of navigation, between Elephantina and Meroe, besides a space near Taconso. He says, the distance is the same from there to the country of the Automali, otherwise called Ascami, a term which means “Assistants at the left hand of the king;” by which, according to him, the Egyptian warriors are designated. Whether this last fifty-six days’ journey extends along the Bahr el Abiad, in the direction of Axum, or on the Bahr el Azruk, cannot, with certainty, be decided; but I will presently state my reasons for conceiving the former opinion to be not improbable. The inhabitants of a part of Ethiopia, at such an immense distance from the metropolis, would naturally become more civilised by this Egyptian colony. This passage, at all events, communicates the highly important fact, that the kingdom of Meroe reached more than fifty-six days’ journey, both north and south, from the metropolis; or, in other words, that it was altogether about 1500 miles in length at that period. This accounts for the great power of the king of Ethiopia, but for which it is evident, that a body of 240,000 men would not have been satisfied with having assigned to them a distant and uncivilised portion of his kingdom, but would have been easily able to take possession of the whole.The next important event I shall allude to is the celebrated expedition of the first king of the Persian dynasty in Egypt.Cambyses determined to make war upon three different powers,—the Carthaginians, the Ammonians, and the Egyptian Macrobians. But, before commencing the expedition into Ethiopia, he resolved to send spies into the country, and, for this purpose, sent to the island of Elephantine for some of the Ichthyophagi, who were acquainted with the Ethiopian language. Cambyses, having instructed these ambassadors what they should say, gave them, as presents for the king, a robe of purple, necklaces and bracelets of gold, an alabaster vase of ointment, and anothervase of palm wine. The Ichthyophagi having arrived, and having been introduced to the king, presented their offerings, and addressed him thus:—“Cambyses, King of the Persians, desirous of being your friend and ally, sent us to you with these gifts, in the use of which he takes great delight.”[71]The Ethiopian king, knowing well that they came as spies, answered,—“It is not that the King of the Persians esteems so much my friendship, that he has sent you to me with gifts; neither do you speak truly, for you have come to spy out my kingdom. Neither is he a just man, for if he were just, he would not covet the country of another, nor wish to make slaves of those who have in no way offended him. Present to him this bow, and tell him that the King of the Ethiopians gives this advice to the King of the Persians. When he is able to manage such large bows with as much facility as I do, then let him conduct an army against the Egyptian Macrobians, but one superior to them in number. In the mean time, thank the gods for not putting it into the mind of the Egyptians to usurp the states of others.”Having said this, he unbent the bow, and gave it to them, and having taken the vest of purple into his hand, he asked them what it was, and how it was made? The Ichthyophagi having told him the truth of the purple and the colouring, he said that they were deceivers, and their garments deceitful. Having inquired about the necklace and bracelets of gold, and the Ichthyophagi having answered that they were ornaments, he laughed, conceiving them to be chains, and said, that he had much stronger ones. Lastly, inquiring of the ointment, and being shown how it should be worked with the hand, and used, he said of it the same as he had done of the vest. He then learned how the wine was made, and its use; and being much pleased with the trial he made of it, he asked on what things they lived, and what was the longestperiod of the life of a Persian? They answered, that the King lived on bread, explaining to him the nature of corn, and told him that the space of eighty years was the greatest length of the life of a Persian. The Ethiopian answered, that he was not surprised that, subsisting on mud, they should live so few years; that neither would they live so long, was it not for the wine, and added, “for in this only are the Persians superior to the Ethiopians.”The Ichthyophagi having, in their turn, inquired of the King about his people’s food, and manner of life, he answered, that they lived on meat and milk; that the greatest part of them lived to the age of 120 years, and some even longer. The ambassadors having expressed their surprise at this, the King conducted them to a fountain, after washing in which they became more vigorous, and shining, as with oil; and it sent forth an odour as of violet. And the Ichthyophagi said that this water was so light, that neither wood, nor even lighter substances, would swim on the surface; but that every thing went to the bottom; and that the constant use of this water was the reason why the Ethiopians lived so long.Cambyses, enraged at this reception of the Ethiopians, set out without preparing any store of provisions, and without reflecting that it was the extremity of the world to which he was carrying his arms. Before he had marched a fifth part of the route from Thebes, the want of provisions was felt; yet he madly determined to proceed. The soldiers fed on grass as long as any could be found; at length, when they arrived in the deserts, they were obliged to cast lots, to eat one in ten; which finally induced Cambyses to return to Thebes with the remains of his army.—The defeat of this monarch is also mentioned by Diodorus.If this account be at all correct, the country of the Macrobians must have been at some distance from Meroe, otherwise they could not have been ignorant of the use of necklaces and bracelets, since the figures on the walls of the sepulchres of that metropolis are represented with those ornaments. The fountain mentioned bythe Ichthyophagi is almost as wonderful as the lake which Diodorus reports as seen by Semiramis; but, discarding what bears the stamp of fiction in this narrative, we can easily recognise, in this account of the Macrobians, a powerful nomad tribe, in possession of the gold country which was the great attraction to Cambyses. Their degree of strength and longevity, probably exaggerated, might be gained by the habits of frugality and temperance usual among the nomad tribes. Their food (meat and milk) is exactly that of the Bishareen and other tribes of the desert at the present day. Their not understanding the nature of the ointment, may have been from its being very superior to their own; all that is probable in the description of the fountain is, that it consisted of oil. The Arab tribes are now in the habit of anointing their bodies, conceiving this custom to be in the highest degree salubrious, and indeed necessary, to mitigate the parching effects of a vertical sun and the hot winds of the desert. I tried this custom, and found it very beneficial; and am persuaded I should have suffered less from the heat had I used it more frequently; but the smell of the ointment they now use is not like the violet, as the Ichthyophagi describe that of the Macrobians. It is not, therefore, surprising that a powerful tribe, doubtless less barbarous than at the present day, being in connection with states then more civilised, should have a bath of prepared oil, suited to the pressing wants of the country. A nomad tribe might, very probably, be ignorant how the purple colour was produced; for, with the exception of some shawls worn by the chiefs, none of the Arabs of the present day use any thing but white cotton and linen cloths. The Melek Nazr e’ Deen (seePlate III.), is almost the only exception I have met with. Sheakh Sayd, the chief of all the Ababdes, did not know how the indigo plant (which his country produces) was made into a dye, till he went with me through the manufactory at Berber. I suspect that the account of their contempt for gold, is an embellishment of the Greek historian, or an exaggeration of the ambassadors; forthey must have learnt its value by exchanging it with their more civilised neighbours. It is not, however, impossible that they may have used it for chains, as they might not have possessed other metals, or if they did, might not have had skill to work them into chains so easily as they could gold; or, from their greater rarity, they might have been equally as valuable.[72]Herodotus calls them Egyptian Macrobians, and afterwards Egyptians. I am almost inclined to believe that they may have been a nomad race, blended with the 240,000 soldiers, who, according to Herodotus, deserted from Psammitichus, and had a territory assigned to them, among a people about sixty days’ journey distant from Meroe. It is certain that the Egyptians would marry native wives. They might, as Herodotus says, have improved the manners of the people; but, being warriors, and not mechanics or artificers, and accustomed to a rigid distinction of castes, they might not have introduced a knowledge of the arts, and even what they taught might, in a century and a half, be forgotten by a tribe whose habits would give them little taste for such acquirements. I cannot agree with those who consider the country of the Macrobians to be on or near the Arabian Gulf, in the territory of the present Soumalies, or, as Professor Heeren[73]has placed them, beyond Cape Guardefui; for, mad as Cambyses is represented to have been, he surely could not have been so infatuated as to have attempted to penetrate to so vast a distance, across the immense deserts and inhospitable regions of the interior, the whole population of which would be hostile to his progress, particularly when a far shorter and easier way was open to him by the Arabian Gulf and theStraits of Babelmandel. It may be stated that the Persians were, perhaps, unskilled and averse to navigation; but even if not navigators themselves, they might easily have procured transports. I think the Macrobians should be placed more in the interior; probably on the Bahr el Abiad. Pausanias (lib. iv.) says, that Meroe and the Ethiopian plains are inhabited by the Macrobians, the most just people of the earth: but that they have not in the country any sea, nor any other river but the Nile. This statement, which merits attention, being from one so deeply versed in Egyptian subjects, proves what I have stated,—that the Macrobians did not occupy the territory of the present Soumalies, near the sea; but at the same time brings them nearer to Meroe than we can admit from their state of civilisation, or the testimony of Herodotus, who describes them as being on the southern side of Africa.I have now to mention an historical fact, connected with some curious Ethiopian customs, which might have been rejected as a fable, but for the evidence of a lapidary inscription, which records the name of the king connected with it. This gives to it an authentic character, and affords another proof of the general accuracy of the Sicilian historian’s account of the Ethiopians.“The Ethiopians,” says Diodorus[74], “have many laws differing from those of other nations, particularly as regards the choice of their kings. The priests choose the most respectable of their order, and form them into a circle; and he who by chance is taken hold of by the priest, who enters into the circle, walking and leaping like a satyr, is declared king upon the spot; and all the people worship him, as a man charged with the government by Divine Providence. The king lives after the manner prescribed to him by the law. In all things he follows the customs of the country, neither punishing nor recompensing but accordingto the laws established since the origin of the nation. It is not permitted to the king to cause any of his subjects to be executed, even when they shall have been judged worthy of death; but he sends to the guilty person an officer, who carries to him the signal of death; and immediately the criminal shuts himself in his house, and executes justice on himself. It is not permitted to him to fly into a neighbouring kingdom, and change the pain of death into banishment, as they do in Greece. They relate that a certain man, having received an order of death, which had been sent to him by the king, thought of flying out of Ethiopia. His mother, who suspected his design, passed her girdle around his neck, without his attempting to defend himself, and strangled him, lest, as she said, her son should bring increased disgrace upon his family by his flight.”We perceive, by these passages, that the Ethiopians had regular laws, to which not only the people but the king submitted. The kings, it seems, were chosen from the priests, and therefore it is not extraordinary that they were so completely under their power as we shall shortly see; for probably, like the cardinals at Rome, they did not select always the most talented, but often the most manageable, as their chief. The satyr-like gambols of the priest, which were the cause of his being elected, remind me somewhat of the impositions, or, rather, workings of the spirit, which the Arab fakeers and sheakhs sometimes exhibit.[75][Hieroglyphs]“The death of the kings,” says Diodorus, “is still more extraordinary. The priests at Meroe have acquired great power. When they form the resolution, they send a courier to the king, with an order for him to die. They tell him that the gods (or oracles) had thus decreed, and that he would be guilty of a crime if he violated an order from them. They added many other reasons, which would easily influence a simple man, aware of the ancient custom, and who had not strength of mind sufficient to resist such an unjust command. The first kings submitted to this cruel sentence. Ergamenes, who reigned at the time of the second Ptolemy, and who was instructed in the philosophy of Greece, was the first who dared to throw off this ridiculous yoke. He went with his army to the place difficult to get to, or (εἰς τὸ ἄβατον) fortress, where was formerly the temple of gold of the Ethiopians, and caused all the priests to be massacred, and instituted himself a new religion.” Signor Rosellini found the name of this king on the door of the sanctuary of Dacker.ⲥⲟⲩⲧⲛ̀ (Ⲁⲙⲛⲧⲟⲧ ⲱⲛϩ, Ⲣⲏ-ⲱⲧⲡ) ⲥⲓⲣⲏ (Ⲉⲣⲕⲁⲙⲛ ⲱⲛϩ ϫⲧⲧ, Ⲓⲥⲏⲙⲁⲓ). “King Amentot (hand of Amun), the living, devoted to Phre (Son of the Sun), Erkamon, always living, beloved of Isis.”—Vol. ii. 321.The discovery of the name is of the greatest importance; as the evidence of this lapidary inscription, that there was a kingcalled Ergamenes, or, to give him his proper name, Erkamenes, is strongly corroborative of the whole narrative of Diodorus. He could not have been an Egyptian king, for there is no mention in any of the lists of a king of that name. We may, therefore, with certainty conclude, that it is the Ethiopian monarch Erkamenes. Philæ was generally considered the boundary of Egypt, but we have the indubitable testimony of a long train of splendid monuments, from that island to Solib, that the rulers of Egypt, from the Pharaohs of the eighteenth dynasty until the time of the Cæsars, possessed at all events, at different intervals, that part of Ethiopia.From there being there no Ethiopian edifices, but all Egyptian temples, from the first to the second cataract, it is probable that the Egyptians were generally in possession of that part of the valley of the Nile; but the name of this Ethiopian king having been found on this Ptolemaic edifice, can only be accounted for by his having been in possession of the country. The style of the architecture and sculpture of the temple of Dacker is certainly like that of the Ptolemies. I therefore do not conceive that the temple was built by Erkamenes, but perhaps that conqueror celebrated his victories by religious functions, a representation of which he had sculptured on the temple at the limit of his conquests.[Hieroglyphs]Besides Erkamenes, we have accounts of another Ethiopian monarch, whose name Signor Rosellini found on the temple of Deboud, in Lower Nubia, and which he conceives (I think very correctly), to be also of an Ethiopian king of about the same period.ⲥⲟⲩⲧⲛ̀ (Ⲣⲏ ⲛ̀ ⲱⲧⲡ, ⲥⲱⲧⲛ̀ ⲛ̀ⲛⲓⲧⲏⲣ) ⲥⲓⲣⲏ (Ⲁⲧⲣⲣⲁⲙⲛ, ⲱⲡϩ ϫⲧⲧ)“King (Son of Perfection, approved by the gods), Son of the Sun (Atarramon, always living.)” This, therefore, is an Ethiopian king, whose conquests extended to within a few miles of Philæ.A Greek inscription at Kalabshy mentions the victories of Silco, king of all the Ethiopians, over the Blemmyes. No other Ethiopian names are found in Lower Nubia, except some prisoners represented on the walls of the temple of Rameses at Kalabshy.Strabo[76]gives us a highly important narrative of an event that took place in his time. It is peculiarly interesting, as it accounts for the ruin of the towns and temples which once adorned that part of the valley of the Nile. “The Ethiopians,” says he, “taking advantage of Ælius Gallus having taken away the garrison of Syene, to prosecute his expedition into Arabia, by a sudden and unforeseen attack took possession of Syene, Elephanta, and Philæ; made the inhabitants prisoners, overthrew the statues of Cæsar Augustus; but Petronius, with 10,000 foot and 800 cavalry, attacked their army, composed of 30,000 men, and forced them to fly to Pselchis, an Ethiopian city: he sent ambassadors to them there, to demand what they had taken, and to know what reason they had to complain of the governors. They required three days to consider, and as, after that time, Petronius did not obtain satisfaction, he attacked them, forced them to give battle, and had no difficulty in putting to flight men ill disciplined and ill armed, having only large shields of unmanufactured ox-hide, hatchets, spears, and sabres. Some threw themselves into the town, others fled into the desert. Some gained a neighbouring town by swimming across the river; among the number were the generals of Candace, who reigned over the Ethiopians. This queen, whose courage was beyond her sex, was deprived of one eye.“Petronius crossed the river upon rafts and boats, and made prisoners all those who were in the island, and sent them immediately to Alexandria; afterwards they attacked Pselchis, and took it by assault. From Pselchis, Petronius, crossing the downs ofsand where the army of Cambyses had been swallowed up by the winds, reached Premnis, a town in a strong situation, gained it at the first attack, and advanced afterwards on Napata, the capital of the kingdom of Candace, where her son was then residing. Candace occupied a neighbouring place, whence she sent to demand peace, offering to restore the prisoners who had been brought from Syene, and the statues which they had carried off; but Petronius, regardless of these propositions, attacked Napata, which the queen and her son had abandoned, razed the town, and led away the inhabitants captive.“He returned with his booty, judging the road beyond to be too difficult. He took, however, the precaution to fortify Premnis better, leaving there a garrison of 400 men, with provisions for two years. Candace advanced, with a considerable force, against Premnis, but Petronius came to its relief, and succeeded in throwing himself into the town before the arrival of the queen, and provided various means of defence for the safety of the place. Candace sent ambassadors to Petronius, who ordered them to go to Cæsar (Augustus); and as they pretended not to know who Cæsar was, and which way they must go, he gave them an escort. These ambassadors arrived at Samos, where Cæsar then was. He granted all that they desired, and even freed them from the tribute which he had imposed upon them.”We perceive from this account the superiority of the Roman arms. The discipline of those celebrated troops would have made them irresistible, whatever might have been the inferiority of their number, against such wretched soldiers as Strabo represents the Ethiopians: but Petronius, when at Napata, would scarcely have refrained from proceeding to Meroe, nor eventually would he have shut himself up in Premnis, whatever might have been the force of Candace, had it consisted of the undisciplined, ill-armed people he describes. Augustus does not seem to have despised them, since he concluded a peace on their own terms. In myaccountofthe arts of Meroe, I will mention the probable effects of this destructive invasion of Petronius. Pliny also mentions this expedition[77], and states that, after Pselchis and Premnis, he took also the cities of Aboccis, Phthuris, Cambusis, Attenan, and Stadisis, and afterwards Napata; but he adds, it was not only the Roman arms which made a wilderness of this part of Ethiopia, but the wars with Egypt, alternately ruling over, and subject to, that country.The year of the expedition of Petronius has never been exactly ascertained[78], but according to Dion Cassius (lxiv. s. 7.), Augustus went into the East in the year of Rome 734. Therefore, as the ambassadors of the Ethiopians found him at Samos, on his way into Syria, the expedition of Petronius can only have taken place a very short time before that period, that is, about twenty years before Christ.An event of the greatest importance is recorded in the Gospel, as having taken placeA.D.33. An eunuch, a man of great authority under Candace, who had the charge of all her treasure, was converted by Philip.[79]The time at which Philip met the eunuch was subsequent to that of Ergamenes, when, as we have seen, a taste for Greek literature was spread in Ethiopia; therefore, the Greek language was, without doubt, sufficiently known to enable them to read the Old Testament, which was then translated into that language. It is not extraordinary, that a man who may be supposed to have raised himself to his high station of chief eunuch, by superior talent, should have perceived the superiority of the Jewish religion to that of Amun, nor is it unreasonable to presume that many of the Jews visited Ethiopia, and contributed to his conversion. We find him, therefore, as a believer in the Jewish religion, undertaking a journey of nearly 2000 miles to worship at the holy temple of Jerusalem, and engaged, whenPhilip met him, in studying the promises held out to the chosen people. We have no reason, I think, to assume that, because the sacred writings have only recorded this solitary instance, there were not other Ethiopians who had embraced the Jewish religion. It is well known that, in the East, through every age, the chief eunuch has always been one of the most powerful officers at the court; and it is not unreasonable, I think, to presume that his influence, joined to the persuasive truth of the doctrines of Christianity, may have induced many to forsake the ancient worship of the country, which had then, perhaps, degenerated, as in Egypt, into gross polytheism. Unless we assign a reign of more than fifty years to the Candace of the Gospel, she cannot be the sovereign who reigned at the time of the expedition of Petronius; but Pliny informs us that several queens who reigned in Ethiopia assumed this appellation. Philip met the eunuch, riding in his chariot, on the road from Jerusalem to Gaza, which is a desert tract. Those deserts, which the traveller is now obliged to cross on the fatiguing camel, exposed to the hot sun and parching winds, the eunuch, it seems, rode over comfortably in his chariot. About the year 330, when Athanasius was Patriarch of Alexandria, according to Ludolf[80], Christianity was introduced into Abyssinia, by two youths, Frumentius and Ædisius, who were shipwrecked on the coast of the Red Sea; but it was not until the time of Theodosius that the Nubians were converted; and, according to the Arab writer, Sheref el Edrese,A.D.1153, they were still Christians.I shall not attempt the laborious, and almost useless, task, of endeavouring to trace the history of this country from the time of the Romans until the present day. My object has been to lay before the reader the most important fragments of history connected with the kingdom of Meroe. The capital of Candace was Napata, andnot Meroe. The latter celebrated metropolis seems to have existed until the age of Ptolemy Philadelphus; and at the time of Nero, Pliny describes Napata as of no importance.Oppidum id parvum inter prædicta solum. After this sad decline of the glory of the Ethiopians, we find the wild tribes, whose power was formerly absorbed in the superior greatness of Meroe, now acting the principal part. The wars of the Blemmyes and the Nubians with each other, and against the Roman power, are the most important events afterwards transmitted to us; but, as these tribes have left no monuments of their civilisation, their names, victories, and defeats, have little connection with the history of Meroe. It might be interesting to trace the wasting away of that lamp of civilisation which had shone once so bright; but such an inquiry would exceed my limits, as well as the object prescribed to myself, which was, to show the once great political importance of the Ethiopians of Meroe. I have said, in my topographical description, that my examination of the existing monuments led me to adopt the opinion of those who believe the statement of Diodorus, that Meroe was the cradle of the arts. I shall, in the following chapters, bring forward additional arguments to prove that statement. The establishment of this fact will give an additional interest to that classical land, which we have seen to be the country of Memnon, Zerah, Tirhaka, Ergamenes, &c., and against which the efforts of Semiramis, Cambyses, and the Egyptian Pharaohs[81], were vainly directed.CHAPTER XXI.REQUISITES FOR A STATE ENJOYING EXTENSIVE COMMERCE. — ADVANTAGEOUS POSITION OF MEROE. — PROBABLE EXTENT OF HER COMMERCE. — THE FACILITY AFFORDED TO ITS EXTENSION BY MEANS OF THE CAMEL. — COMMERCE OF ARABIA AND INDIA. — ABUNDANCE OF GOLD. — IRON AND GUM. — ETHIOPIAN TRIBUTE TO EGYPT. — DESCRIPTION OF A SPLENDID ETHIOPIAN PROCESSION AT THEBES. — COMMERCE OF THE INTERIOR. — CAUSES OF THE DECLINE OF MEROE. — DIMINUTION OF HER AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES. — EXHAUSTION OF MINES. — RIVALRY OF EGYPT. — WARS WITH EGYPT. — ARAB CONQUEST. — PRESENT COMMERCE.Commerce of Meroe.—The history of nations, and particularly of cities, clearly evinces the extraordinary effects of commerce. Those countries which have attained to any high degree of power and prosperity have been, in a great measure, indebted for them to that source of wealth. A wise government, anxious for the welfare of its subjects, always affords the utmost encouragement and protection to commerce, guarding it against those accidents which endanger its security, and when, from unavoidable circumstances, one branch is closed, seeks to open other channels to its successful activity. In order that a state may carry on extensive commerce, it ought to possess an advantageous position, contiguous to other rich countries, with the opportunity of becoming an emporium for their commodities, and of supplying them with those in which they are deficient. She ought also to enjoy abundant internal resources, derived from agriculture, manufactures, and mines.A slight examination of the map of this part of Africa will satisfy us that there could not have been a situation, on that immense continent, more admirably adapted for commercial intercoursethan Meroe. Placed at a short distance only from the conflux of the Astaboras and the Nile, she was connected, by the former, with that part of Ethiopia now called Abyssinia; and, by the latter, now denominated the Bahr el Azruk, or Blue River, with the provinces of Sennaar, Fazoukl, and, perhaps, with regions still further to the south. It is also highly probable that, by the Bahr el Abiad, or White River, the true Nile, she communicated extensively with vast districts in the interior of Africa. The distance from these rivers, particularly from the Astaboras, to the present ports of Massoua (the ancient Adule) and Souakim, on the Red Sea, whence she received, perhaps, the productions of Arabia and the Indies, was by no means great. Nature seems to have facilitated the intercourse by providing her with the ship of the desert—the camel. By its means, probably, the commerce of Meroe may have been widely diffused into the centre of Africa; to the countries now called Kordofan and Darfour, which are only at a short distance from the Nile; nor is it improbable that a powerful and enterprising nation, such as the Ethiopians then appear to have been, may have extended their caravan trade to the kingdoms of Soudan, Bornou, &c., and possibly even to the now impervious Timbuctoo.It may be asked, if the profit which the merchants of Meroe could derive from such distant expeditions would repay the cost and hazard; but an examination of the expense of transporting merchandise on camels will remove that objection. In the estimate which I am about to make, of the expenses of sea and land carriage, the rates must, of course, be those of the present day; this, however, will be to the disadvantage of my argument, as navigation, at that remote period, was in a much more imperfect state, and consequently more tedious and expensive, than it now is. I shall select wool, as a bulky article, and, therefore, more difficult to transport by land. I shall suppose a vessel, laden with 1000 bags of wool, of 450 lbs. each, and that itsaverage passage was thirty days, for which the owners received a freight of 1d.per lb., which, I believe, is about the usual rate for a voyage of that length. Supposing, also, that the average sailing of the vessel, allowing for detentions from contrary winds, and for the time occupied in loading and reloading, be fifty miles per day, making thus 1500 miles. Now, the usual load for a camel is 500 lbs., sometimes 600 lbs., so that 450 lbs. is a very moderate calculation; and at the rate the merchandise of the Pasha is now carried down to Cairo, not more than sixty days would be necessary to accomplish the above distance. They charged me eighteen shillings for twenty days, averaging about twenty-five miles per day; therefore the expense of the sixty days, at present, would not exceed two pounds fourteen shillings; about sixteen shillings more than by water.In ancient times the expense of labour and camels was not likely to differ materially from what it now is; but that of maritime conveyance must have been much larger. We know the number of men that were necessary to impel the boats, and their system of following all the sinuosities of the coasts. Hence the time taken to accomplish a voyage of any extent must have been very long. The period required by Solomon’s vessels to reach the country of Ophir is a proof of the dilatory, and consequently expensive, navigation in that age. As I have stated in my account of Dongolah, 2500 loads of gum, of 450 rotols each, are carried down to Cairo, that is, a distance of about 1800 miles, for 2l., including all expenses; being thirteen per cent. on the value.This calculation proves, that the cost of land carriage, particularly for the short journeys to the Red Sea, Kordofan, and Darfour, would be only a slight inconvenience; and even the expense of a regular trade to Fezzan and Bornou, by the route which the Mamelukes took, would have been no very heavy burden on the articles. That on which I have chosen to make this calculation, was, as already observed, one of the most disadvantageousthat could have been selected. The expense of 18s.(and I, as a traveller, of course paid the highest price), on conveying, for a journey of twenty days, 500 pounds weight of rich Indian stuffs, or of Arabian spices, must have been quite trifling.Meroe, therefore, enjoyed the advantage, not only of a direct water communication by the Nile, Bahr el Abiad, Bahr el Azruk, and the Astoboras, to an extent of several thousand miles of the vast continent of Africa, but also, by means of the ship of the desert, had an intercourse with her ports on the Red Sea, and could thence open a communication with Arabia, and through it, perhaps, with India. Thus, also, she could exchange her merchandise or the rich natural productions of the centre of Africa. The circumstance mentioned in my topographical description (page 200.), that in the reign of the fourth caliph after Mahomet, this country was overrun by a powerful tribe from Yemen, and not from the Hedjas, as was generally supposed, renders it very probable, that that part of Arabia in particular had been deeply engaged in the commerce of Meroe. The knowledge thus obtained of its former wealth and power, its then entirely decayed condition, and the facilities afforded by its ports to invaders, were likely to induce a nation, then in full power, and inflamed by religious zeal, to invade and lay waste that country to which it was formerly, perhaps, tributary, or even subject.A glance at the map is sufficient to show, that the commerce of the Indies must have been much more easily carried on with Meroe than with Egypt; for, whether the Ethiopians navigated directly to India, or received the produce of that rich country, by the caravans and vessels of the Arabians; in either case, she possessed superior local advantages over Egypt. Her ports on the Red Sea were better, the distance far shorter, and the dangerous navigation of that sea in a great measure avoided.Adule, supposed, by some, to be near the present Arkeko, latitude 15° 30′ N., is called, by Pliny (vi. 29.) the very great emporiumof the Troglodytes and the Ethiopians, and the commerce chiefly consisted in ivory, horns of the rhinoceros, hides of the hippopotamus, shells of the tortoise, sphinxes, and slaves.[82]According to Bruce, there are, at the entrance of the Arabian Gulf, the ruins of a place, from which, to Arabia Felix, the passage only requires a few hours. The direct commerce with Arabia, and sale of her manufactures in that populous peninsula, must also have been very great; but the commerce of Africa was, doubtless, the principal source of the power of Meroe.The superfluity of gold, which Herodotus (in his account of the Ichthyophagi sent as ambassadors, or rather spies, by Cambyses to the king of Ethiopia), describes as being applied to such common purposes, that even the prisoners were bound in chains of that metal, may, perhaps, have been a Greek mode of hyperbolically expressing its great abundance. I believe the supply of this metal to have been drawn chiefly from the interior. Diodorus says (lib. i. 29.), and Strabo repeats the passage, without acknowledging his author, “that island contains mines of gold, silver, iron, copper, and great abundance of ebony, and various kinds of precious stone, και μέταλλα χρυσου τε και αργύρου, &c., but the search of the Pasha after them has been fruitless. She may have derived a certain portion from mines in her own territories, and even in the island, which are now exhausted; but, from the limited traces of such mines hitherto discovered, I conceive it more probable that she obtained that abundance of the precious metals, not only from the now exhausted mines in the Great Nubian desert[83](see pages23.and28.), but principally from the centre or the south ofAfrica. The Turkish governors now, when they make their expeditions into the Habeesh and the negro countries, frequently amass an immense quantity of gold; it is said, as much as 2000 or 3000 ounces; and before the conquest of the Pasha, I am informed that every peasant girl wore gold ornaments to a large amount. The inhabitants of the countries south of Sennaar are described to me as still possessing great abundance of gold, which must, in fact, be the case, for many merchants have told me that there is always plenty in the markets.The exclusive commerce which Meroe must have long enjoyed with so considerable a portion of that vast continent, was quite sufficient to raise her to a great height of opulence. The countries of the interior, if not really conquered by her, would, at all events, gladly exchange their gold, and other natural productions, for her manufactures and merchandise, which, doubtless, far exceeded in quality what they made themselves, or could procure elsewhere, being the production of a people more advanced in civilisation and the arts; while they, isolated by immense deserts from the rest of the world, would be little visited, except by the caravans from the metropolis. Gold was, probably, not the only return these countries afforded to Meroe. Brown has given an account of the productions of Darfour, and, as I have said before, 2500 camel loads of gum are sent yearly from Kordofan to Cairo. Iron mines have been found both in Kordofan and Darfour. I have specimens of this metal from the latter country, which is current in the bazaars, like money.[84]I may here remark, that, not improbably, the Ethiopianstone, mentioned by Herodotus as employed to make incisions in the bodies, for the purpose of embalming and forming them into mummies, was iron procured from that country by the Egyptians, who had no mines of their own. Ivory is still found abundantly in Abyssinia, and also in the province of Fazoukl; and elephants are always found in the territory of the Bugara tribe, behind Kordofan. Probably Meroe received many other commodities, with which an imperfect knowledge of those remote regions prevents us from being acquainted; besides others, perhaps, which are no longer produced.Herodotus (Thalia, 97.) says,—“The Ethiopians on the confines of Egypt, whom Cambyses subdued in his expedition, and those who inhabit the sacred island of Nysa, celebrate festivals to Bacchus. These Ethiopians and their neighbours bring, according to my memory, two half measures of pure gold, two hundred (φάλαγγας) long round pieces of ebony, five Ethiopian children, and twenty-large elephants’ teeth.” This passage reminds me of that magnificent procession in a tomb at Thebes, of the time of Thothmes III. Fifty figures are represented, exclusive of the Egyptians, painted red; six are black, and four of a dark brown, but apparently of the same country. These people, not having the Egyptian dress, are doubtless Ethiopian, and most of them are so called by the hieroglyphics. The splendid presents which they are presenting to the royal owner of the tomb, almost exactly correspond with the account just quoted from Herodotus.They consist of ivory, ebony, a most beautiful collection of vases, and a variety of animals,—horses, cows, the giraffe, capricorn, leopards, cynocephali, greyhounds, &c. Among a gorgeous pile of offerings appear heaps of gold and silver, skins, precious wood, and indigo. In the same procession are also thirty-seven white people, with very nearly the features of Jews, although many, from the hieroglyphics, consider them to be Scythians. Some of the latter are leading a chariot and horses, an elephant, youngchildren, and one of them a bear; they are also carrying a variety of elegant vases. I conceive these presents, with the exception, perhaps, of the bear, to be chiefly from Ethiopia, and from the richness and elegance of the form of the vases, the abundance of gold and silver, and the curious manner in which the latter is wrought into the form of the heads of animals, we have the very strongest proofs of the exquisite taste, knowledge, and wealth of the Ethiopians: but as this procession is so extremely interesting, so intimately connected with Ethiopia, and is, at the same time, one of the most gorgeous and magnificent paintings that adorn the walls of Thebes, I have selected it from my Egyptian portfolio, conceiving that it will give great additional value to this work to publish it with all the colours, which still exist, almost quite fresh. The hieroglyphics are unfortunately very much defaced, but sufficient remain to distinguish in several instances the names of the people and that of the King, Thothmes III., who reigned about 1500 B.C.PartsI.II.III.andIV.form the whole of this procession; they are drawn to a scale of two inches to a foot, so that the reader may join them together, if he thinks proper. I will give a detailed description of them according to the plates. The first figure inPart I.has in one hand an ornamented vase, containing perhaps dates or some other dried fruit, in the other, apparently, an ivory club, and a string of precious stones hanging from his arm. The second figure has a couple of feathers in one hand, which are evidently those of the ostrich, from the circumstance of the vase he carries in the other containing the eggs. The third and fourth in this row bear a tree. The fifth carries a bowl, apparently of dates, in one hand, and in the other a couple of ostrich feathers, and a cord to which a leopard is attached. The sixth man has a gold or gilded vase in his hand, and has also charge of a monkey. The seventh bears a log of ebony on his shoulder, and is also leading a capricorn, an animal which abounds near Mount Sinai, and also, I believe, in the Bahiouda desert. The eighth has alog of ebony on his shoulder. The ninth, tenth, and last, are negroes, which may be distinguished from their colour and features. They have blue skull caps[85]and cinctures, with blue and red borders around their waists. The two last are carrying elephants’ teeth, and one of them has a string of precious stones, and the other the skin of a leopard turned inside out. The other negro is carrying a log of ebony, and, as will be observed, the light-coloured veins in that wood are distinctly marked.
[Hieroglyphs]
[Hieroglyphs]
[Hieroglyphs]
ⲥⲟⲩⲧⲉⲛ (Ⲣⲏ ⲛⲟϥⲣⲉ (ⲛ̀) ⲕⲁ) ⲥⲓⲣⲏ (Ϣⲃⲕ).“The King (Sun Beneficent of Oblations), Son of the Sun (Shabak).” This is undoubtedly the first of this list of kings. The name is not found upon any of the monuments of Ethiopia, but that is not surprising, so few of the temples there being preserved; but we have undoubted evidence of this king having, as the historians say, reigned over Egypt, for we find his name upon a gate of the temple of Karnak, and also the portrait of the king in his Ethiopian dress, with the same titles, on the interior of the door of the great propylon of the Temple of Luxor, which he repaired. Signor Rosellini states, that he found a date of the twelfth year of his reign; which corroborates the statement of Eusebius, that he reigned twelve years, and not eight only, according to Africanus. I saw at Berlin a scarabæus containing the name of this king, with the uræus on each side, and above the oval a lion couchant: the latter is curious, as it tallies with the singular title I observed above the names at Amarah, of “King of Kings,” represented by the reed and half circle, as king (ⲥⲟⲩⲧⲛ), and a lion, emblematical of king, with the sign of the plural number. Signor Rosellini mentions, also, that this name is on two amulets he purchased for the Museum at Florence, and on a statue in the Villa Albani at Rome. I think the latter must be removed, as I could not find it there, nor do I recollect having seen any other instance of the name of Sciabak or Sabachus, in the splendid collections of Egyptian antiquities at Turin, Berlin, Paris, London, Rome, Naples, Vienna, Munich, &c., except in an inscription on an alabaster Canopian vase at Paris.
[Hieroglyphs]
[Hieroglyphs]
[Hieroglyphs]
ⲥⲟⲩⲧⲛ̀ (Ⲣⲏ.....) ⲡⲓⲕⲁ) ⲥⲓⲣⲏ (Ⲁⲙⲛⲙ (ⲁⲓ) Ϣⲃⲧⲕ), “King (Sun.....of the Offerings), Son of the Sun, (the beloved of Amun Shabatok).” This name is evidently different from the preceding, there being not only a change in the prænomen, but also in the other oval. Besides the title of Beloved of Amun, the addition of the third hieroglyphic, the phonetic sign for T, changes completely the sound. There is as much difference in the names of Shabako and Shabatok, who therefore are as clearly two persons, as the Sabbakon and Sevechus of Eusebius. The Venetian edition of Eusebius calls the latter king Sebichos. When we consider the remote period, the difference of the dialect, the errors of copyists, &c., it is not surprising that so much discrepancy should exist. This name is found on the ruins to the south-east of the great temple at Carnak; and that the king was an Ethiopian is evident from his costume. The style is similar to that of Shabak; but the drawings of Signor Rosellini, which I could have wished to insert, are clearly the portraits of two different kings. I will presently state the learned Italian’s reasons for supposing that both these names allude to the god Seb or Sevek.
[Hieroglyphs]
[Hieroglyphs]
[Hieroglyphs]
[Hieroglyphs]
[Hieroglyphs]
[Hieroglyphs]
[Hieroglyphs]
[Hieroglyphs]
[Hieroglyphs]
ⲥⲟⲩⲧⲛ̀ (Ⲣⲏ-Ⲁⲧⲙⲟⲩⲛⲟϥⲣⲉ, ⲱϥⲉ ⲥⲓⲣⲏ) (Ⲧϩⲣⲕ), “King Sun Atmou beneficent, Corrector, Son of the Sun (Tirhaka).” The name of this king is found on the columns and sides of the temple excavated out of the rock at Gibel el Birkel: it occurs ten times in the inscriptions which I copied there. It is also on the small altar in the great temple; but Major Felix[63]appears to me mistaken in supposing that Tirhaka built that splendid edifice, for his name occursin that instance only. Whereas the name ofⲥⲟⲩⲧⲛ̀ Ⲡⲓⲱⲛϩⲉⲓ, “King Pionchei (the living),” is on the large altar, and also a fragment of it on the western wall of the temple; but the claim even of the latter may be disputed, forVignette A.is the prænomen on the only column which is now standing; and the name on the pillars is usually that of the king who erected the edifice. We have the authority, then, of the monuments of Ethiopia, that Tirhaka was king over that country, and his name, fortunately, still remains on a pylon of a temple at Medenet Abou, and other places at Thebes, to corroborate the testimony of Manetho, that he was also King of Egypt. In the latter instance, his name is written exactly as I have given it, except that the two last hieroglyphics of the prænomen are represented, figuratively I conceive, by an arm and a lash in the hand. I found, also the name of his queen, in the first chamber excavated out of the temple of Gibel el Birkel (Vignette A).ⲥⲟⲩⲧⲛ̀-ϩⲓⲙⲉ Ⲁⲙⲛϯⲕϯϩ,, “royal bride, Amentakatah.” Mr. Wilkinson found two princesses of this family: the first, B, isⲧⲛⲣ ⲥⲓⲟⲩ, orⲧ. ⲧⲏⲣ Ⲁⲙⲛⲁⲧⲥ, “the Divine Star, or the Divine Amenates;” and C, isⲧⲏⲣ ϩⲓⲙⲉ ⲦⲙⲁⲩϢⲛⲓⲛⲟϥⲣⲉ, “the Divine Bride, Mutsheninofra, the Mother, Mistress of Good.” Signor Rosellini states, that there is a date, at Gibel el Birkel, of the year XX.of this king’s reign, confirming the accuracy of Eusebius. I did not perceive it, though, I believe, I copied every hieroglyphic which remains there.
[Hieroglyphs]
[Hieroglyphs]
The third king of this dynasty is the Tirhaka of Holy Writ: the narrative there given, is, I conceive, of sufficient importance to justify my noticing it somewhat in detail.[64]
In the third year of King Hoshea, the son of Elah, king of Israel, Hezekiah the son of Ahaz began to reign; and, for his zeal in rooting out the idolatry of his people, he was described as one who “trusted in the Lord God of Israel, so that after him was none like him among all the kings of Judah, nor any that were before him.” Hezekiah rebelled against the Assyrians, and smote the Philistines; and in the fourth year of his reign, the king of Assyria, Shalmaneser, besieged Samaria, and, after three years, took it, and carried away the Israelites prisoners. In the fourteenth year of King Hezekiah, Sennacherib, who had succeeded to Shalmaneser, went up against all the “fenced cities of Judah, and took them.” Hezekiah agreed to purchase a peace for three hundred talents of silver and thirty talents of gold; and gave to him, for that purpose, all the treasures in the temples and palaces; but Sennacherib, faithless to this agreement, sent up a great host against Jerusalem, and the three chiefs of the army of the king of Assyria, Tartan, Rabsaris, and Rabshakeh, had a conference with three of the officers of Hezekiah-Eliakim, who was over the household of Judah, Shebni, the scribe, and Joab the son of Asaph the recorder. Rabshakeh asked him, “Now, on whom doest thou trust, that thou rebellest against me?” and taunted them with trusting upon Egypt. “Now, behold, thou trustest upon the staff of this bruised reed, even upon Egypt, on which if a man lean, it will go into his hand, and pierce it: so is Pharaoh king of Egypt unto all that trust on him.” And he begged them to give pledges to the King of Assyria, and not trust on Egypt for chariots or for horsemen.Hezekiah was comforted by the prophet Isaiah, and Rabshakeh returned and told Sennacherib that Tirhaka, king of Ethiopia, was coming up to fight against him. The titles which are given to Tirhaka, in these passages, are most important. In 2 Kings, xix. 9., he is called king of Ethiopia, and in xviii. 21. and 24., Pharaoh of Egypt, which is exactly saying that he was ruler over both countries, as we have seen that Manetho and the monuments prove him to have been.
This name, according to Signor Rosellini, is written in Hebrew (תרחקח םלך־כוש) “Tarhaka, Melek Cush,” translated correctly Θαρακα Βασιλευς Αιθιοπων, “Tarhaka, king of the Ethiopians.” The perfect resemblance of the name, which neither upon the monuments nor in the lists is given to any other king of Egypt; the correspondence of the epoch, and the title of king of Ethiopia, given to a sovereign of an Ethiopian dynasty, who by force of arms had annexed Egypt to their paternal kingdom, are circumstances which prove, beyond all doubt, as the learned Italian[65]says, the identity of the Tarhaka of the monuments, with the Tirhaka of holy writ. If, according to Eusebius, we allow 163 years for the 26th dynasty, that is, the one which succeeded to the Ethiopians in Egypt, that number, added to the date of the invasion by Cambyses, 525, will make 688, which, added to the 20 years’ reign of Tirhaka, would make the accession of that king to the throne to be in 708, nearly the exact time assigned by the Scripture chronologists for the relief of Hezekiah and Tirhaka; but Signor Rosellini, principally on the authority of a stela which he obtained at Alexandria, makes the total of the reigns of that dynasty 150 years, which would cause the accession of Tirhaka to the dominion of the Nile to happen in 695. Following exactly the chronology of Scripture, it must have been in the first year of the king’s reign that the destruction of the Assyrian army took place. “Then the angelof the Lord went out and smote in the camp of the Assyrians an hundred fourscore and five thousand: and when they arose early in the morning, behold, they were all dead corpses. So Sennacherib king of Assyria departed, and went and returned, and dwelt at Nineveh. And it came to pass, as he was worshipping in the house of Nisroch his god, that Adrammelech and Sharezer his sons smote him with the sword.”[66]
I will here introduce an event related by Herodotus[67], which, notwithstanding many discrepancies, is evidently the same:—“After Sabaco, the Ethiopian, returned into the country, and the blind king Anysis was dead, there reigned,” he says, “a priest of Vulcan, named Sethos. This king treated with contempt the warriors of Egypt, despising them, as if he never would have occasion for them; and, besides other injuries he committed against them, deprived them of the ground which, under the preceding kings, had been granted to each, in portions of twelve fields of a hundred cubits. But afterwards Sennacherib, king of the Arabs and of the Assyrians, having invaded Egypt with a great host, none of the warriors were willing to assist him: then the priest, reduced to extremity, entered into the sanctuary, bewailed before the figure of the divinity the danger to which he was exposed. Thus weeping, he fell asleep, and the divinity appeared unto him in a vision, and exhorted him to take courage, for he would have nothing to dread in going against the army of the Arabians, since he himself would send assistance. Animated by this dream, and having assembled those Egyptians who were willing to follow him, he fixed his camp in Pelusium, since that city forms the entrance into the country. He was followed by none of the warriors, but only by merchants, artificers, and labourers. When they were arrived there, a multitude of field mice were scattered among their adversaries, ate the bands of their armour, of their bows and shields, so that, next day, naked and disarmed, they fled, and many perished.”
This Sethos is evidently the Ethiopian Tirhaka. The latter was the successor of an Ethiopian, as Sethos is represented to have been, and it was natural that the Ethiopian should despise the soldiers of Egypt, whom his predecessor had conquered. His depriving them of their land, and consequently of their political importance, was the natural policy of a king who reigned over them by right of conquest; but, as he was a good and beneficent monarch, who had encouraged the arts and internal prosperity of the country, of which we have a proof in his restoring and embellishing the temples, the merchants, artificers, and labourers hastened to his support, being attached to his person by the advantages they had derived from his government. The title of priest is not inappropriate to an Ethiopian king, who was chosen from that order. Diodorus also informs us how much they were under the influence of their priests, submitting even to death itself at their command. Besides the coincidence of the time in the list of Manetho, there is no mention of a king called Sethos, except the first of the 19th dynasty, which was long previous. These circumstances alone almost prove that the Sethos of Herodotus and the Ethiopian Tirhaka are the same; but we have still stronger evidence. The king against whom both marched was the same Sennacherib, King of Assyria, and they are both delivered in the same manner; that is, by a miracle. Herodotus states Pelusium, not Jerusalem, as the scene of their discomfiture. This circumstance made me at first imagine that Sennacherib might have been defeated at both places; but I conceive it more reasonable to attribute these differences of name, place, and the nature of the miracle to the usual confusion of Herodotus, who did not compile his work, like Manetho, from the sacred registers preserved in the temples, but from verbal communications with the priests; perhaps the story of the mice was invented by Herodotus, or his informers, or, at all events, arose in the lapse of time, to explain the manner in which the Deity interfered in their behalf.
The Tirhaka, then, of the monuments and of Manetho, is the Sethos of Herodotus, and the Tirhaka who assisted Hezekiah against Sennacherib. From these various accounts, and by separating, in the narrative of Herodotus, the probable from the marvellous, we may conclude that the monarch was pious, since he bore the title of priest, and applied to the divinity for support before he set out on the expedition; that he was powerful, since he was not only able to hold in subjection the entire valley of the Nile, but also to carry his arms to the assistance of his neighbours. He appears, also, to have been an enlightened and an able legislator, since he encouraged the arts; and although a foreigner, had so ingratiated himself with his people, that, strong in their affections, he was not only able to destroy the military despotism of the soldiery, but raise another army, to wage war against the powerful king of Assyria. Eratosthenes (see Strabo[68],) states that this conqueror proceeded as far as the Pillars of Hercules.
There is another king mentioned in the Bible, as reigning in Egypt twelve years before the defeat of Sennacherib. It is agreed, almost by all, that he is the Shabatok or Sevechus of the lists; but this is so learnedly and ingeniously discussed by Signor Rosellini, that I make no apology for enriching this chapter with a translation of his remarks. At the seventeenth chapter of 2 Kings, it is related that Shalmaneser, king of the Assyrians, subdued and made tributary Hoshea, king of Israel. That prince having wished to rebel, and having sent for aid to So, king of Egypt, Shalmaneser besieged, conquered, and made him prisoner. The reign of Hoshea over Israel lasted nine years; so that it appears to have happened in his sixth year, that, to throw off the Assyrian yoke, he demanded assistance from the king of Egypt. Therefore, as Shalmaneser besieged and took Samaria in that year, which was the last of Hoshea, Hezekiah began to reign over Judah in the third year of Hoshea; and in the 14th year of Hezekiah occurred the discomfitureof Sennacherib, in which the Pharaoh Tirhaka took part, as the ally of the king of Judah. The sixth year of Hoshea (in which he demanded aid of So, king of Egypt,) corresponds to the third year of the reign of Hezekiah; and since this latter king, in the 14th year of his reign, made a treaty with Tirhaka, it follows that the Pharaoh, called So in the Bible, preceded Tirhaka by an interval of not less than eleven years. But So is called king of Egypt, and Tirhaka was the same; therefore we ought to seek the Pharaoh So among the kings of this Ethiopian dynasty. And since he preceded Tirhaka by an interval of eleven years, we must necessarily recognise him as the immediate predecessor of Tirhaka, who is called by Manetho Sevechus, or Sebichus, and, according to Eusebius, reigned twelve years. Not less manifest than the coincidence of the years is the correspondence of the name in Manetho and the Bible, if we correct the pronunciation according to the true sound of the Egyptian language. I have already mentioned, that the name of Shabatok (so the Sevechus of Manetho is written upon the monuments) may truly, indeed, be considered as a peculiar word of the Ethiopian dialect, which corresponds to the Egyptian Sevek. Sevek is, in the Egyptian mythology, a god, who has attributes relative to the Nile, and is generally represented under the sacred symbol of a crocodile. In this form its name is usually written[Symbol]ⲥ ⲃ ⲕ“Sebek, Sevek;” but when it is represented under a human form, then it is written simply[Symbol]or[Symbol]ⲥ ⲃ“Seb, Sewe.” The titles, attributes, and forms of those two names, Sewe and Sebek, are promiscuous; and we are certain, that, however it is written or pronounced, it means the same divinity.[69]
Let us take, therefore, from the Hebrew text, the name of the king of Egypt, to whom Hoshea sent for help. It is writtenסוא: disregarding (particularly in a foreign language) the corrupt pronunciation given to it by Masorete, and the other interpreters, who read So or Soa, and Sua, let the least learned in the languages of the East judge, if the natural pronunciation of these Hebrew elements be not Sewa or Sewe. This is sufficient to show, that the author of the second book of Kings wrote that name with those characters which could give the pronunciation of the Egyptian name Sewe. It is probable that the same name, written upon the monuments in the Ethiopian manner, Shabatok, was commonly called by the Egyptians, Sewe; and, perhaps, they pronounced it also, indifferently, Sewek, since both these words were the designation of the same divinity, to which that name belongs. In fact, Manetho wrote in his history, Sevechus, and, cutting off the Greek termination, it remains Sevek, retaining, from the Ethiopian Shabatok, the pronunciation used in Egypt. Thus the text of the Bible, also, in relating this Egyptian name, maintains that possible orthographic exactness which it has followed in writing all the other Egyptian names. The original monuments, therefore, and the lists of Manetho concur in attesting that the dynasty of the Ethiopians was composed of three kings, whose names I have mentioned, and thus correct the Greek historians who have assigned it to Sabaco only.
THE EMIGRATION OF EGYPTIAN SOLDIERS AT THE TIME OF PSAMMITICHUS. — EXPEDITION OF CAMBYSES. — MANNERS, CUSTOMS, ETC. OF THE MACROBIANS, ETC. — CURIOUS CUSTOMS OF THE ETHIOPIANS. — ERGAMENES, THE ETHIOPIAN KING’S, CONQUESTS IN LOWER NUBIA. — ATARRAMON AND SILCO, ETHIOPIAN KINGS. — EXPEDITION OF PETRONIUS. — QUEEN CANDACE. — CHRISTIANITY FIRST INTRODUCED INTO ETHIOPIA. — ITS DURATION. — NAPATA, CAPITAL OF CANDACE. — BLEMMYES AND THE NUBIANS.
Underthe reign of Psammitichus, whom Africanus states to have reigned twenty-one years, Eusebius thirty-three, and Herodotus fifteen, after the Ethiopian dynasty, the historian of Halicarnassus informs us (and his account is confirmed by Diodorus), that 240,000 Egyptian soldiers were in garrison at Elephantine against the Ethiopians, at Pelusium against the Arabs and Assyrians, and others, in Marea, opposite Africa. These soldiers having been three years thus in garrison, without being relieved, resolved to go over together from Psammitichus into Ethiopia. Regardless of the entreaties of that king, they engaged themselves to the king of that country, who employed them in subduing some of his discontented subjects, whose land he gave them as a reward. It is added, that the Ethiopians became more civilised, imbibing the customs of Egypt.
Herodotus states[70], that part of these soldiers were in garrison at Pelusium, against the Assyrians; probably an attack from thatnation was anticipated, in revenge of the defeat of Sennacherib. According to that author, there were forty days of land journey, and sixteen of navigation, between Elephantina and Meroe, besides a space near Taconso. He says, the distance is the same from there to the country of the Automali, otherwise called Ascami, a term which means “Assistants at the left hand of the king;” by which, according to him, the Egyptian warriors are designated. Whether this last fifty-six days’ journey extends along the Bahr el Abiad, in the direction of Axum, or on the Bahr el Azruk, cannot, with certainty, be decided; but I will presently state my reasons for conceiving the former opinion to be not improbable. The inhabitants of a part of Ethiopia, at such an immense distance from the metropolis, would naturally become more civilised by this Egyptian colony. This passage, at all events, communicates the highly important fact, that the kingdom of Meroe reached more than fifty-six days’ journey, both north and south, from the metropolis; or, in other words, that it was altogether about 1500 miles in length at that period. This accounts for the great power of the king of Ethiopia, but for which it is evident, that a body of 240,000 men would not have been satisfied with having assigned to them a distant and uncivilised portion of his kingdom, but would have been easily able to take possession of the whole.
The next important event I shall allude to is the celebrated expedition of the first king of the Persian dynasty in Egypt.
Cambyses determined to make war upon three different powers,—the Carthaginians, the Ammonians, and the Egyptian Macrobians. But, before commencing the expedition into Ethiopia, he resolved to send spies into the country, and, for this purpose, sent to the island of Elephantine for some of the Ichthyophagi, who were acquainted with the Ethiopian language. Cambyses, having instructed these ambassadors what they should say, gave them, as presents for the king, a robe of purple, necklaces and bracelets of gold, an alabaster vase of ointment, and anothervase of palm wine. The Ichthyophagi having arrived, and having been introduced to the king, presented their offerings, and addressed him thus:—“Cambyses, King of the Persians, desirous of being your friend and ally, sent us to you with these gifts, in the use of which he takes great delight.”[71]
The Ethiopian king, knowing well that they came as spies, answered,—“It is not that the King of the Persians esteems so much my friendship, that he has sent you to me with gifts; neither do you speak truly, for you have come to spy out my kingdom. Neither is he a just man, for if he were just, he would not covet the country of another, nor wish to make slaves of those who have in no way offended him. Present to him this bow, and tell him that the King of the Ethiopians gives this advice to the King of the Persians. When he is able to manage such large bows with as much facility as I do, then let him conduct an army against the Egyptian Macrobians, but one superior to them in number. In the mean time, thank the gods for not putting it into the mind of the Egyptians to usurp the states of others.”
Having said this, he unbent the bow, and gave it to them, and having taken the vest of purple into his hand, he asked them what it was, and how it was made? The Ichthyophagi having told him the truth of the purple and the colouring, he said that they were deceivers, and their garments deceitful. Having inquired about the necklace and bracelets of gold, and the Ichthyophagi having answered that they were ornaments, he laughed, conceiving them to be chains, and said, that he had much stronger ones. Lastly, inquiring of the ointment, and being shown how it should be worked with the hand, and used, he said of it the same as he had done of the vest. He then learned how the wine was made, and its use; and being much pleased with the trial he made of it, he asked on what things they lived, and what was the longestperiod of the life of a Persian? They answered, that the King lived on bread, explaining to him the nature of corn, and told him that the space of eighty years was the greatest length of the life of a Persian. The Ethiopian answered, that he was not surprised that, subsisting on mud, they should live so few years; that neither would they live so long, was it not for the wine, and added, “for in this only are the Persians superior to the Ethiopians.”
The Ichthyophagi having, in their turn, inquired of the King about his people’s food, and manner of life, he answered, that they lived on meat and milk; that the greatest part of them lived to the age of 120 years, and some even longer. The ambassadors having expressed their surprise at this, the King conducted them to a fountain, after washing in which they became more vigorous, and shining, as with oil; and it sent forth an odour as of violet. And the Ichthyophagi said that this water was so light, that neither wood, nor even lighter substances, would swim on the surface; but that every thing went to the bottom; and that the constant use of this water was the reason why the Ethiopians lived so long.
Cambyses, enraged at this reception of the Ethiopians, set out without preparing any store of provisions, and without reflecting that it was the extremity of the world to which he was carrying his arms. Before he had marched a fifth part of the route from Thebes, the want of provisions was felt; yet he madly determined to proceed. The soldiers fed on grass as long as any could be found; at length, when they arrived in the deserts, they were obliged to cast lots, to eat one in ten; which finally induced Cambyses to return to Thebes with the remains of his army.—The defeat of this monarch is also mentioned by Diodorus.
If this account be at all correct, the country of the Macrobians must have been at some distance from Meroe, otherwise they could not have been ignorant of the use of necklaces and bracelets, since the figures on the walls of the sepulchres of that metropolis are represented with those ornaments. The fountain mentioned bythe Ichthyophagi is almost as wonderful as the lake which Diodorus reports as seen by Semiramis; but, discarding what bears the stamp of fiction in this narrative, we can easily recognise, in this account of the Macrobians, a powerful nomad tribe, in possession of the gold country which was the great attraction to Cambyses. Their degree of strength and longevity, probably exaggerated, might be gained by the habits of frugality and temperance usual among the nomad tribes. Their food (meat and milk) is exactly that of the Bishareen and other tribes of the desert at the present day. Their not understanding the nature of the ointment, may have been from its being very superior to their own; all that is probable in the description of the fountain is, that it consisted of oil. The Arab tribes are now in the habit of anointing their bodies, conceiving this custom to be in the highest degree salubrious, and indeed necessary, to mitigate the parching effects of a vertical sun and the hot winds of the desert. I tried this custom, and found it very beneficial; and am persuaded I should have suffered less from the heat had I used it more frequently; but the smell of the ointment they now use is not like the violet, as the Ichthyophagi describe that of the Macrobians. It is not, therefore, surprising that a powerful tribe, doubtless less barbarous than at the present day, being in connection with states then more civilised, should have a bath of prepared oil, suited to the pressing wants of the country. A nomad tribe might, very probably, be ignorant how the purple colour was produced; for, with the exception of some shawls worn by the chiefs, none of the Arabs of the present day use any thing but white cotton and linen cloths. The Melek Nazr e’ Deen (seePlate III.), is almost the only exception I have met with. Sheakh Sayd, the chief of all the Ababdes, did not know how the indigo plant (which his country produces) was made into a dye, till he went with me through the manufactory at Berber. I suspect that the account of their contempt for gold, is an embellishment of the Greek historian, or an exaggeration of the ambassadors; forthey must have learnt its value by exchanging it with their more civilised neighbours. It is not, however, impossible that they may have used it for chains, as they might not have possessed other metals, or if they did, might not have had skill to work them into chains so easily as they could gold; or, from their greater rarity, they might have been equally as valuable.[72]
Herodotus calls them Egyptian Macrobians, and afterwards Egyptians. I am almost inclined to believe that they may have been a nomad race, blended with the 240,000 soldiers, who, according to Herodotus, deserted from Psammitichus, and had a territory assigned to them, among a people about sixty days’ journey distant from Meroe. It is certain that the Egyptians would marry native wives. They might, as Herodotus says, have improved the manners of the people; but, being warriors, and not mechanics or artificers, and accustomed to a rigid distinction of castes, they might not have introduced a knowledge of the arts, and even what they taught might, in a century and a half, be forgotten by a tribe whose habits would give them little taste for such acquirements. I cannot agree with those who consider the country of the Macrobians to be on or near the Arabian Gulf, in the territory of the present Soumalies, or, as Professor Heeren[73]has placed them, beyond Cape Guardefui; for, mad as Cambyses is represented to have been, he surely could not have been so infatuated as to have attempted to penetrate to so vast a distance, across the immense deserts and inhospitable regions of the interior, the whole population of which would be hostile to his progress, particularly when a far shorter and easier way was open to him by the Arabian Gulf and theStraits of Babelmandel. It may be stated that the Persians were, perhaps, unskilled and averse to navigation; but even if not navigators themselves, they might easily have procured transports. I think the Macrobians should be placed more in the interior; probably on the Bahr el Abiad. Pausanias (lib. iv.) says, that Meroe and the Ethiopian plains are inhabited by the Macrobians, the most just people of the earth: but that they have not in the country any sea, nor any other river but the Nile. This statement, which merits attention, being from one so deeply versed in Egyptian subjects, proves what I have stated,—that the Macrobians did not occupy the territory of the present Soumalies, near the sea; but at the same time brings them nearer to Meroe than we can admit from their state of civilisation, or the testimony of Herodotus, who describes them as being on the southern side of Africa.
I have now to mention an historical fact, connected with some curious Ethiopian customs, which might have been rejected as a fable, but for the evidence of a lapidary inscription, which records the name of the king connected with it. This gives to it an authentic character, and affords another proof of the general accuracy of the Sicilian historian’s account of the Ethiopians.
“The Ethiopians,” says Diodorus[74], “have many laws differing from those of other nations, particularly as regards the choice of their kings. The priests choose the most respectable of their order, and form them into a circle; and he who by chance is taken hold of by the priest, who enters into the circle, walking and leaping like a satyr, is declared king upon the spot; and all the people worship him, as a man charged with the government by Divine Providence. The king lives after the manner prescribed to him by the law. In all things he follows the customs of the country, neither punishing nor recompensing but accordingto the laws established since the origin of the nation. It is not permitted to the king to cause any of his subjects to be executed, even when they shall have been judged worthy of death; but he sends to the guilty person an officer, who carries to him the signal of death; and immediately the criminal shuts himself in his house, and executes justice on himself. It is not permitted to him to fly into a neighbouring kingdom, and change the pain of death into banishment, as they do in Greece. They relate that a certain man, having received an order of death, which had been sent to him by the king, thought of flying out of Ethiopia. His mother, who suspected his design, passed her girdle around his neck, without his attempting to defend himself, and strangled him, lest, as she said, her son should bring increased disgrace upon his family by his flight.”
We perceive, by these passages, that the Ethiopians had regular laws, to which not only the people but the king submitted. The kings, it seems, were chosen from the priests, and therefore it is not extraordinary that they were so completely under their power as we shall shortly see; for probably, like the cardinals at Rome, they did not select always the most talented, but often the most manageable, as their chief. The satyr-like gambols of the priest, which were the cause of his being elected, remind me somewhat of the impositions, or, rather, workings of the spirit, which the Arab fakeers and sheakhs sometimes exhibit.[75]
[Hieroglyphs]
[Hieroglyphs]
[Hieroglyphs]
“The death of the kings,” says Diodorus, “is still more extraordinary. The priests at Meroe have acquired great power. When they form the resolution, they send a courier to the king, with an order for him to die. They tell him that the gods (or oracles) had thus decreed, and that he would be guilty of a crime if he violated an order from them. They added many other reasons, which would easily influence a simple man, aware of the ancient custom, and who had not strength of mind sufficient to resist such an unjust command. The first kings submitted to this cruel sentence. Ergamenes, who reigned at the time of the second Ptolemy, and who was instructed in the philosophy of Greece, was the first who dared to throw off this ridiculous yoke. He went with his army to the place difficult to get to, or (εἰς τὸ ἄβατον) fortress, where was formerly the temple of gold of the Ethiopians, and caused all the priests to be massacred, and instituted himself a new religion.” Signor Rosellini found the name of this king on the door of the sanctuary of Dacker.ⲥⲟⲩⲧⲛ̀ (Ⲁⲙⲛⲧⲟⲧ ⲱⲛϩ, Ⲣⲏ-ⲱⲧⲡ) ⲥⲓⲣⲏ (Ⲉⲣⲕⲁⲙⲛ ⲱⲛϩ ϫⲧⲧ, Ⲓⲥⲏⲙⲁⲓ). “King Amentot (hand of Amun), the living, devoted to Phre (Son of the Sun), Erkamon, always living, beloved of Isis.”—Vol. ii. 321.
The discovery of the name is of the greatest importance; as the evidence of this lapidary inscription, that there was a kingcalled Ergamenes, or, to give him his proper name, Erkamenes, is strongly corroborative of the whole narrative of Diodorus. He could not have been an Egyptian king, for there is no mention in any of the lists of a king of that name. We may, therefore, with certainty conclude, that it is the Ethiopian monarch Erkamenes. Philæ was generally considered the boundary of Egypt, but we have the indubitable testimony of a long train of splendid monuments, from that island to Solib, that the rulers of Egypt, from the Pharaohs of the eighteenth dynasty until the time of the Cæsars, possessed at all events, at different intervals, that part of Ethiopia.
From there being there no Ethiopian edifices, but all Egyptian temples, from the first to the second cataract, it is probable that the Egyptians were generally in possession of that part of the valley of the Nile; but the name of this Ethiopian king having been found on this Ptolemaic edifice, can only be accounted for by his having been in possession of the country. The style of the architecture and sculpture of the temple of Dacker is certainly like that of the Ptolemies. I therefore do not conceive that the temple was built by Erkamenes, but perhaps that conqueror celebrated his victories by religious functions, a representation of which he had sculptured on the temple at the limit of his conquests.
[Hieroglyphs]
[Hieroglyphs]
[Hieroglyphs]
Besides Erkamenes, we have accounts of another Ethiopian monarch, whose name Signor Rosellini found on the temple of Deboud, in Lower Nubia, and which he conceives (I think very correctly), to be also of an Ethiopian king of about the same period.ⲥⲟⲩⲧⲛ̀ (Ⲣⲏ ⲛ̀ ⲱⲧⲡ, ⲥⲱⲧⲛ̀ ⲛ̀ⲛⲓⲧⲏⲣ) ⲥⲓⲣⲏ (Ⲁⲧⲣⲣⲁⲙⲛ, ⲱⲡϩ ϫⲧⲧ)“King (Son of Perfection, approved by the gods), Son of the Sun (Atarramon, always living.)” This, therefore, is an Ethiopian king, whose conquests extended to within a few miles of Philæ.
A Greek inscription at Kalabshy mentions the victories of Silco, king of all the Ethiopians, over the Blemmyes. No other Ethiopian names are found in Lower Nubia, except some prisoners represented on the walls of the temple of Rameses at Kalabshy.
Strabo[76]gives us a highly important narrative of an event that took place in his time. It is peculiarly interesting, as it accounts for the ruin of the towns and temples which once adorned that part of the valley of the Nile. “The Ethiopians,” says he, “taking advantage of Ælius Gallus having taken away the garrison of Syene, to prosecute his expedition into Arabia, by a sudden and unforeseen attack took possession of Syene, Elephanta, and Philæ; made the inhabitants prisoners, overthrew the statues of Cæsar Augustus; but Petronius, with 10,000 foot and 800 cavalry, attacked their army, composed of 30,000 men, and forced them to fly to Pselchis, an Ethiopian city: he sent ambassadors to them there, to demand what they had taken, and to know what reason they had to complain of the governors. They required three days to consider, and as, after that time, Petronius did not obtain satisfaction, he attacked them, forced them to give battle, and had no difficulty in putting to flight men ill disciplined and ill armed, having only large shields of unmanufactured ox-hide, hatchets, spears, and sabres. Some threw themselves into the town, others fled into the desert. Some gained a neighbouring town by swimming across the river; among the number were the generals of Candace, who reigned over the Ethiopians. This queen, whose courage was beyond her sex, was deprived of one eye.
“Petronius crossed the river upon rafts and boats, and made prisoners all those who were in the island, and sent them immediately to Alexandria; afterwards they attacked Pselchis, and took it by assault. From Pselchis, Petronius, crossing the downs ofsand where the army of Cambyses had been swallowed up by the winds, reached Premnis, a town in a strong situation, gained it at the first attack, and advanced afterwards on Napata, the capital of the kingdom of Candace, where her son was then residing. Candace occupied a neighbouring place, whence she sent to demand peace, offering to restore the prisoners who had been brought from Syene, and the statues which they had carried off; but Petronius, regardless of these propositions, attacked Napata, which the queen and her son had abandoned, razed the town, and led away the inhabitants captive.
“He returned with his booty, judging the road beyond to be too difficult. He took, however, the precaution to fortify Premnis better, leaving there a garrison of 400 men, with provisions for two years. Candace advanced, with a considerable force, against Premnis, but Petronius came to its relief, and succeeded in throwing himself into the town before the arrival of the queen, and provided various means of defence for the safety of the place. Candace sent ambassadors to Petronius, who ordered them to go to Cæsar (Augustus); and as they pretended not to know who Cæsar was, and which way they must go, he gave them an escort. These ambassadors arrived at Samos, where Cæsar then was. He granted all that they desired, and even freed them from the tribute which he had imposed upon them.”
We perceive from this account the superiority of the Roman arms. The discipline of those celebrated troops would have made them irresistible, whatever might have been the inferiority of their number, against such wretched soldiers as Strabo represents the Ethiopians: but Petronius, when at Napata, would scarcely have refrained from proceeding to Meroe, nor eventually would he have shut himself up in Premnis, whatever might have been the force of Candace, had it consisted of the undisciplined, ill-armed people he describes. Augustus does not seem to have despised them, since he concluded a peace on their own terms. In myaccountofthe arts of Meroe, I will mention the probable effects of this destructive invasion of Petronius. Pliny also mentions this expedition[77], and states that, after Pselchis and Premnis, he took also the cities of Aboccis, Phthuris, Cambusis, Attenan, and Stadisis, and afterwards Napata; but he adds, it was not only the Roman arms which made a wilderness of this part of Ethiopia, but the wars with Egypt, alternately ruling over, and subject to, that country.
The year of the expedition of Petronius has never been exactly ascertained[78], but according to Dion Cassius (lxiv. s. 7.), Augustus went into the East in the year of Rome 734. Therefore, as the ambassadors of the Ethiopians found him at Samos, on his way into Syria, the expedition of Petronius can only have taken place a very short time before that period, that is, about twenty years before Christ.
An event of the greatest importance is recorded in the Gospel, as having taken placeA.D.33. An eunuch, a man of great authority under Candace, who had the charge of all her treasure, was converted by Philip.[79]The time at which Philip met the eunuch was subsequent to that of Ergamenes, when, as we have seen, a taste for Greek literature was spread in Ethiopia; therefore, the Greek language was, without doubt, sufficiently known to enable them to read the Old Testament, which was then translated into that language. It is not extraordinary, that a man who may be supposed to have raised himself to his high station of chief eunuch, by superior talent, should have perceived the superiority of the Jewish religion to that of Amun, nor is it unreasonable to presume that many of the Jews visited Ethiopia, and contributed to his conversion. We find him, therefore, as a believer in the Jewish religion, undertaking a journey of nearly 2000 miles to worship at the holy temple of Jerusalem, and engaged, whenPhilip met him, in studying the promises held out to the chosen people. We have no reason, I think, to assume that, because the sacred writings have only recorded this solitary instance, there were not other Ethiopians who had embraced the Jewish religion. It is well known that, in the East, through every age, the chief eunuch has always been one of the most powerful officers at the court; and it is not unreasonable, I think, to presume that his influence, joined to the persuasive truth of the doctrines of Christianity, may have induced many to forsake the ancient worship of the country, which had then, perhaps, degenerated, as in Egypt, into gross polytheism. Unless we assign a reign of more than fifty years to the Candace of the Gospel, she cannot be the sovereign who reigned at the time of the expedition of Petronius; but Pliny informs us that several queens who reigned in Ethiopia assumed this appellation. Philip met the eunuch, riding in his chariot, on the road from Jerusalem to Gaza, which is a desert tract. Those deserts, which the traveller is now obliged to cross on the fatiguing camel, exposed to the hot sun and parching winds, the eunuch, it seems, rode over comfortably in his chariot. About the year 330, when Athanasius was Patriarch of Alexandria, according to Ludolf[80], Christianity was introduced into Abyssinia, by two youths, Frumentius and Ædisius, who were shipwrecked on the coast of the Red Sea; but it was not until the time of Theodosius that the Nubians were converted; and, according to the Arab writer, Sheref el Edrese,A.D.1153, they were still Christians.
I shall not attempt the laborious, and almost useless, task, of endeavouring to trace the history of this country from the time of the Romans until the present day. My object has been to lay before the reader the most important fragments of history connected with the kingdom of Meroe. The capital of Candace was Napata, andnot Meroe. The latter celebrated metropolis seems to have existed until the age of Ptolemy Philadelphus; and at the time of Nero, Pliny describes Napata as of no importance.Oppidum id parvum inter prædicta solum. After this sad decline of the glory of the Ethiopians, we find the wild tribes, whose power was formerly absorbed in the superior greatness of Meroe, now acting the principal part. The wars of the Blemmyes and the Nubians with each other, and against the Roman power, are the most important events afterwards transmitted to us; but, as these tribes have left no monuments of their civilisation, their names, victories, and defeats, have little connection with the history of Meroe. It might be interesting to trace the wasting away of that lamp of civilisation which had shone once so bright; but such an inquiry would exceed my limits, as well as the object prescribed to myself, which was, to show the once great political importance of the Ethiopians of Meroe. I have said, in my topographical description, that my examination of the existing monuments led me to adopt the opinion of those who believe the statement of Diodorus, that Meroe was the cradle of the arts. I shall, in the following chapters, bring forward additional arguments to prove that statement. The establishment of this fact will give an additional interest to that classical land, which we have seen to be the country of Memnon, Zerah, Tirhaka, Ergamenes, &c., and against which the efforts of Semiramis, Cambyses, and the Egyptian Pharaohs[81], were vainly directed.
REQUISITES FOR A STATE ENJOYING EXTENSIVE COMMERCE. — ADVANTAGEOUS POSITION OF MEROE. — PROBABLE EXTENT OF HER COMMERCE. — THE FACILITY AFFORDED TO ITS EXTENSION BY MEANS OF THE CAMEL. — COMMERCE OF ARABIA AND INDIA. — ABUNDANCE OF GOLD. — IRON AND GUM. — ETHIOPIAN TRIBUTE TO EGYPT. — DESCRIPTION OF A SPLENDID ETHIOPIAN PROCESSION AT THEBES. — COMMERCE OF THE INTERIOR. — CAUSES OF THE DECLINE OF MEROE. — DIMINUTION OF HER AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES. — EXHAUSTION OF MINES. — RIVALRY OF EGYPT. — WARS WITH EGYPT. — ARAB CONQUEST. — PRESENT COMMERCE.
Commerce of Meroe.—The history of nations, and particularly of cities, clearly evinces the extraordinary effects of commerce. Those countries which have attained to any high degree of power and prosperity have been, in a great measure, indebted for them to that source of wealth. A wise government, anxious for the welfare of its subjects, always affords the utmost encouragement and protection to commerce, guarding it against those accidents which endanger its security, and when, from unavoidable circumstances, one branch is closed, seeks to open other channels to its successful activity. In order that a state may carry on extensive commerce, it ought to possess an advantageous position, contiguous to other rich countries, with the opportunity of becoming an emporium for their commodities, and of supplying them with those in which they are deficient. She ought also to enjoy abundant internal resources, derived from agriculture, manufactures, and mines.
A slight examination of the map of this part of Africa will satisfy us that there could not have been a situation, on that immense continent, more admirably adapted for commercial intercoursethan Meroe. Placed at a short distance only from the conflux of the Astaboras and the Nile, she was connected, by the former, with that part of Ethiopia now called Abyssinia; and, by the latter, now denominated the Bahr el Azruk, or Blue River, with the provinces of Sennaar, Fazoukl, and, perhaps, with regions still further to the south. It is also highly probable that, by the Bahr el Abiad, or White River, the true Nile, she communicated extensively with vast districts in the interior of Africa. The distance from these rivers, particularly from the Astaboras, to the present ports of Massoua (the ancient Adule) and Souakim, on the Red Sea, whence she received, perhaps, the productions of Arabia and the Indies, was by no means great. Nature seems to have facilitated the intercourse by providing her with the ship of the desert—the camel. By its means, probably, the commerce of Meroe may have been widely diffused into the centre of Africa; to the countries now called Kordofan and Darfour, which are only at a short distance from the Nile; nor is it improbable that a powerful and enterprising nation, such as the Ethiopians then appear to have been, may have extended their caravan trade to the kingdoms of Soudan, Bornou, &c., and possibly even to the now impervious Timbuctoo.
It may be asked, if the profit which the merchants of Meroe could derive from such distant expeditions would repay the cost and hazard; but an examination of the expense of transporting merchandise on camels will remove that objection. In the estimate which I am about to make, of the expenses of sea and land carriage, the rates must, of course, be those of the present day; this, however, will be to the disadvantage of my argument, as navigation, at that remote period, was in a much more imperfect state, and consequently more tedious and expensive, than it now is. I shall select wool, as a bulky article, and, therefore, more difficult to transport by land. I shall suppose a vessel, laden with 1000 bags of wool, of 450 lbs. each, and that itsaverage passage was thirty days, for which the owners received a freight of 1d.per lb., which, I believe, is about the usual rate for a voyage of that length. Supposing, also, that the average sailing of the vessel, allowing for detentions from contrary winds, and for the time occupied in loading and reloading, be fifty miles per day, making thus 1500 miles. Now, the usual load for a camel is 500 lbs., sometimes 600 lbs., so that 450 lbs. is a very moderate calculation; and at the rate the merchandise of the Pasha is now carried down to Cairo, not more than sixty days would be necessary to accomplish the above distance. They charged me eighteen shillings for twenty days, averaging about twenty-five miles per day; therefore the expense of the sixty days, at present, would not exceed two pounds fourteen shillings; about sixteen shillings more than by water.
In ancient times the expense of labour and camels was not likely to differ materially from what it now is; but that of maritime conveyance must have been much larger. We know the number of men that were necessary to impel the boats, and their system of following all the sinuosities of the coasts. Hence the time taken to accomplish a voyage of any extent must have been very long. The period required by Solomon’s vessels to reach the country of Ophir is a proof of the dilatory, and consequently expensive, navigation in that age. As I have stated in my account of Dongolah, 2500 loads of gum, of 450 rotols each, are carried down to Cairo, that is, a distance of about 1800 miles, for 2l., including all expenses; being thirteen per cent. on the value.
This calculation proves, that the cost of land carriage, particularly for the short journeys to the Red Sea, Kordofan, and Darfour, would be only a slight inconvenience; and even the expense of a regular trade to Fezzan and Bornou, by the route which the Mamelukes took, would have been no very heavy burden on the articles. That on which I have chosen to make this calculation, was, as already observed, one of the most disadvantageousthat could have been selected. The expense of 18s.(and I, as a traveller, of course paid the highest price), on conveying, for a journey of twenty days, 500 pounds weight of rich Indian stuffs, or of Arabian spices, must have been quite trifling.
Meroe, therefore, enjoyed the advantage, not only of a direct water communication by the Nile, Bahr el Abiad, Bahr el Azruk, and the Astoboras, to an extent of several thousand miles of the vast continent of Africa, but also, by means of the ship of the desert, had an intercourse with her ports on the Red Sea, and could thence open a communication with Arabia, and through it, perhaps, with India. Thus, also, she could exchange her merchandise or the rich natural productions of the centre of Africa. The circumstance mentioned in my topographical description (page 200.), that in the reign of the fourth caliph after Mahomet, this country was overrun by a powerful tribe from Yemen, and not from the Hedjas, as was generally supposed, renders it very probable, that that part of Arabia in particular had been deeply engaged in the commerce of Meroe. The knowledge thus obtained of its former wealth and power, its then entirely decayed condition, and the facilities afforded by its ports to invaders, were likely to induce a nation, then in full power, and inflamed by religious zeal, to invade and lay waste that country to which it was formerly, perhaps, tributary, or even subject.
A glance at the map is sufficient to show, that the commerce of the Indies must have been much more easily carried on with Meroe than with Egypt; for, whether the Ethiopians navigated directly to India, or received the produce of that rich country, by the caravans and vessels of the Arabians; in either case, she possessed superior local advantages over Egypt. Her ports on the Red Sea were better, the distance far shorter, and the dangerous navigation of that sea in a great measure avoided.
Adule, supposed, by some, to be near the present Arkeko, latitude 15° 30′ N., is called, by Pliny (vi. 29.) the very great emporiumof the Troglodytes and the Ethiopians, and the commerce chiefly consisted in ivory, horns of the rhinoceros, hides of the hippopotamus, shells of the tortoise, sphinxes, and slaves.[82]According to Bruce, there are, at the entrance of the Arabian Gulf, the ruins of a place, from which, to Arabia Felix, the passage only requires a few hours. The direct commerce with Arabia, and sale of her manufactures in that populous peninsula, must also have been very great; but the commerce of Africa was, doubtless, the principal source of the power of Meroe.
The superfluity of gold, which Herodotus (in his account of the Ichthyophagi sent as ambassadors, or rather spies, by Cambyses to the king of Ethiopia), describes as being applied to such common purposes, that even the prisoners were bound in chains of that metal, may, perhaps, have been a Greek mode of hyperbolically expressing its great abundance. I believe the supply of this metal to have been drawn chiefly from the interior. Diodorus says (lib. i. 29.), and Strabo repeats the passage, without acknowledging his author, “that island contains mines of gold, silver, iron, copper, and great abundance of ebony, and various kinds of precious stone, και μέταλλα χρυσου τε και αργύρου, &c., but the search of the Pasha after them has been fruitless. She may have derived a certain portion from mines in her own territories, and even in the island, which are now exhausted; but, from the limited traces of such mines hitherto discovered, I conceive it more probable that she obtained that abundance of the precious metals, not only from the now exhausted mines in the Great Nubian desert[83](see pages23.and28.), but principally from the centre or the south ofAfrica. The Turkish governors now, when they make their expeditions into the Habeesh and the negro countries, frequently amass an immense quantity of gold; it is said, as much as 2000 or 3000 ounces; and before the conquest of the Pasha, I am informed that every peasant girl wore gold ornaments to a large amount. The inhabitants of the countries south of Sennaar are described to me as still possessing great abundance of gold, which must, in fact, be the case, for many merchants have told me that there is always plenty in the markets.
The exclusive commerce which Meroe must have long enjoyed with so considerable a portion of that vast continent, was quite sufficient to raise her to a great height of opulence. The countries of the interior, if not really conquered by her, would, at all events, gladly exchange their gold, and other natural productions, for her manufactures and merchandise, which, doubtless, far exceeded in quality what they made themselves, or could procure elsewhere, being the production of a people more advanced in civilisation and the arts; while they, isolated by immense deserts from the rest of the world, would be little visited, except by the caravans from the metropolis. Gold was, probably, not the only return these countries afforded to Meroe. Brown has given an account of the productions of Darfour, and, as I have said before, 2500 camel loads of gum are sent yearly from Kordofan to Cairo. Iron mines have been found both in Kordofan and Darfour. I have specimens of this metal from the latter country, which is current in the bazaars, like money.[84]I may here remark, that, not improbably, the Ethiopianstone, mentioned by Herodotus as employed to make incisions in the bodies, for the purpose of embalming and forming them into mummies, was iron procured from that country by the Egyptians, who had no mines of their own. Ivory is still found abundantly in Abyssinia, and also in the province of Fazoukl; and elephants are always found in the territory of the Bugara tribe, behind Kordofan. Probably Meroe received many other commodities, with which an imperfect knowledge of those remote regions prevents us from being acquainted; besides others, perhaps, which are no longer produced.
Herodotus (Thalia, 97.) says,—“The Ethiopians on the confines of Egypt, whom Cambyses subdued in his expedition, and those who inhabit the sacred island of Nysa, celebrate festivals to Bacchus. These Ethiopians and their neighbours bring, according to my memory, two half measures of pure gold, two hundred (φάλαγγας) long round pieces of ebony, five Ethiopian children, and twenty-large elephants’ teeth.” This passage reminds me of that magnificent procession in a tomb at Thebes, of the time of Thothmes III. Fifty figures are represented, exclusive of the Egyptians, painted red; six are black, and four of a dark brown, but apparently of the same country. These people, not having the Egyptian dress, are doubtless Ethiopian, and most of them are so called by the hieroglyphics. The splendid presents which they are presenting to the royal owner of the tomb, almost exactly correspond with the account just quoted from Herodotus.
They consist of ivory, ebony, a most beautiful collection of vases, and a variety of animals,—horses, cows, the giraffe, capricorn, leopards, cynocephali, greyhounds, &c. Among a gorgeous pile of offerings appear heaps of gold and silver, skins, precious wood, and indigo. In the same procession are also thirty-seven white people, with very nearly the features of Jews, although many, from the hieroglyphics, consider them to be Scythians. Some of the latter are leading a chariot and horses, an elephant, youngchildren, and one of them a bear; they are also carrying a variety of elegant vases. I conceive these presents, with the exception, perhaps, of the bear, to be chiefly from Ethiopia, and from the richness and elegance of the form of the vases, the abundance of gold and silver, and the curious manner in which the latter is wrought into the form of the heads of animals, we have the very strongest proofs of the exquisite taste, knowledge, and wealth of the Ethiopians: but as this procession is so extremely interesting, so intimately connected with Ethiopia, and is, at the same time, one of the most gorgeous and magnificent paintings that adorn the walls of Thebes, I have selected it from my Egyptian portfolio, conceiving that it will give great additional value to this work to publish it with all the colours, which still exist, almost quite fresh. The hieroglyphics are unfortunately very much defaced, but sufficient remain to distinguish in several instances the names of the people and that of the King, Thothmes III., who reigned about 1500 B.C.
PartsI.II.III.andIV.form the whole of this procession; they are drawn to a scale of two inches to a foot, so that the reader may join them together, if he thinks proper. I will give a detailed description of them according to the plates. The first figure inPart I.has in one hand an ornamented vase, containing perhaps dates or some other dried fruit, in the other, apparently, an ivory club, and a string of precious stones hanging from his arm. The second figure has a couple of feathers in one hand, which are evidently those of the ostrich, from the circumstance of the vase he carries in the other containing the eggs. The third and fourth in this row bear a tree. The fifth carries a bowl, apparently of dates, in one hand, and in the other a couple of ostrich feathers, and a cord to which a leopard is attached. The sixth man has a gold or gilded vase in his hand, and has also charge of a monkey. The seventh bears a log of ebony on his shoulder, and is also leading a capricorn, an animal which abounds near Mount Sinai, and also, I believe, in the Bahiouda desert. The eighth has alog of ebony on his shoulder. The ninth, tenth, and last, are negroes, which may be distinguished from their colour and features. They have blue skull caps[85]and cinctures, with blue and red borders around their waists. The two last are carrying elephants’ teeth, and one of them has a string of precious stones, and the other the skin of a leopard turned inside out. The other negro is carrying a log of ebony, and, as will be observed, the light-coloured veins in that wood are distinctly marked.