The Project Gutenberg EBook of Encyclopaedia Britannica, 11th Edition,
Volume 9, Slice 1, by Various

This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with
almost no restrictions whatsoever.  You may copy it, give it away or
re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included
with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org


Title: Encyclopaedia Britannica, 11th Edition, Volume 9, Slice 1
       "Edwardes" to "Ehrenbreitstein"

Author: Various

Release Date: June 17, 2010 [EBook #32860]

Language: English

Character set encoding: ASCII

*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK ENCYC. BRITANNICA, VOL 9 SL 1 ***




Produced by Marius Masi, Don Kretz and the Online
Distributed Proofreading Team at https://www.pgdp.net









Transcriber's notes:

(1) Hieroglyphic symbols are indicated by [HRG] and ancient letters by
      [SGN].

(2) Characters following a carat (^) were printed in superscript.

(3) Side-notes were relocated to function as titles of their respective
      paragraphs.

(4) The following typographical errors have been corrected:

    Article EGG: "The outermost, or third, layer of this shell often
      takes the form of a glaze, as of porcelain, as for example in the
      burnished egg of the ostrich ..." 'porcelain' amended from
      'procelain'.

    Article EGLINTON, EARLS OF: "This earl's successor was his
      grandson, Archibald William, the 13th earl (1812-1861), who was
      born at Palermo on the 29th of September 1812." 'on' amended from
      'in'.

    Article EGYPT: "While the worship of the gods 55 tended more and
      more to become a monopoly of the state and the priests ..."
      'monopoly' amended from 'monoply'.

    Article EGYPT: "... the home of the dead in the heavens was a
      fertile region not very different from Egypt itself, intersected by
      canals and abounding in corn and fruit ..." 'from' amended from
      'form'.

    Article EGYPT: "The celebrated Israel stele from this temple is his
      principal inscription. The rock shrines at Silsila are of small
      importance." 'is' amended from 'in'.




          ENCYCLOPAEDIA BRITANNICA

  A DICTIONARY OF ARTS, SCIENCES, LITERATURE
           AND GENERAL INFORMATION

              ELEVENTH EDITION


             VOLUME IX, SLICE I

        Edwardes to Ehrenbreitstein




ARTICLES IN THIS SLICE:


  EDWARDES, SIR HERBERT BENJAMIN     EGER (town of Austria)
  EDWARDS, AMELIA ANN BLANDFORD      EGER (town of Hungary)
  EDWARDS, BELA BATES                EGERIA
  EDWARDS, BRYAN                     EGERTON, SIR PHILIP DE MALPAS GREY
  EDWARDS, GEORGE                    EGG, AUGUSTUS LEOPOLD
  EDWARDS, HENRY THOMAS              EGG
  EDWARDS, JONATHAN                  EGGENBERG, HANS ULRICH VON
  EDWARDS, LEWIS                     EGGER, EMILE
  EDWARDS, RICHARD                   EGGLESTON, EDWARD
  EDWARDS, THOMAS CHARLES            EGHAM
  EDWARDSVILLE (Illinois, U.S.A.)    EGIN
  EDWARDSVILLE (Pennsylvania, U.S.A) EGLANTINE
  EDWIN (king of Northumbria)        EGLINTON, EARLS OF
  EDWIN, JOHN                        EGMONT, EARLS OF
  EDWY                               EGMONT LAMORAL
  EECKHOUT, GERBRAND VAN DEN         EGOISM
  EEL                                EGORIEVSK
  EFFENDI                            EGREMONT, EARLS OF.
  EFFIGIES, MONUMENTAL               EGREMONT
  EGAN, PIERCE                       EGRESS
  EGBO                               EGYPT
  EGEDE, HANS                        EHRENBERG, CHRISTIAN GOTTFRIED
  EGER, AQIBA                        EHRENBREITSTEIN




EDWARDES, SIR HERBERT BENJAMIN (1819-1868), English soldier-statesman in
India, was born at Frodesley in Shropshire on the 12th of November 1819.
His father was Benjamin Edwardes, rector of Frodesley, and his
grandfather Sir John Edwardes, baronet, eighth holder of a title
conferred on one of his ancestors by Charles I. in 1644. He was educated
at a private school and at King's College, London. Through the influence
of his uncle, Sir Henry Edwardes, he was nominated in 1840 to a
cadetship in the East India Company; and on his arrival in India, at the
beginning of 1841, he was posted as ensign in the 1st Bengal Fusiliers.
He remained with this regiment about five years, during which time he
mastered the lessons of his profession, obtained a good knowledge of
Hindustani, Hindi and Persian, and attracted attention by the political
and literary ability displayed in a series of letters which appeared in
the _Delhi Gazette_.

In November 1845, on the breaking out of the first Sikh War, Edwardes
was appointed aide-de-camp to Sir Hugh (afterwards Viscount) Gough, then
commander-in-chief in India. On the 18th of December he was severely
wounded at the battle of Mudki. He soon recovered, however, and fought
by the side of his chief at the decisive battle of Sobraon (February 10,
1846). He was soon afterwards appointed third assistant to the
commissioners of the trans-Sutlej territory; and in January 1847 was
named first assistant to Sir Henry Lawrence, the resident at Lahore.
Lawrence became his great exemplar and in later years he was accustomed
to attribute to the influence of this "father of his public life"
whatever of great or good he had himself achieved. He took part with
Lawrence in the suppression of a religious disturbance at Lahore in the
spring of 1846, and soon afterwards assisted him in reducing, by a rapid
movement to Jammu, the conspirator Imam-ud-din. In the following year a
more difficult task was assigned him--the conduct of an expedition to
Bannu, a district on the Waziri frontier, in which the people would not
tolerate the presence of a collector, and the revenue had consequently
fallen into arrear. By his rare tact and fertility of resource, Edwardes
succeeded in completely conquering the wild tribes of the valley without
firing a shot, a victory which he afterwards looked back upon with more
satisfaction than upon others which brought him more renown. His fiscal
arrangements were such as to obviate all difficulty of collection for
the future. In the spring of 1848, in consequence of the murder of Mr
vans Agnew and Lieutenant Anderson at Multan, by order of the diwan
Mulraj, and of the raising of the standard of revolt by the latter,
Lieutenant Edwardes was authorized to march against him. He set out
immediately with a small force, occupied Leiah on the left bank of the
Indus, was joined by Colonel van Cortlandt, and, although he could not
attack Multan, held the enemy at bay and gave a check at the critical
moment to their projects. He won a great victory over a greatly superior
Sikh force at Kinyeri (June 18), and received in acknowledgment of his
services the local rank of major. In the course of the operations which
followed near Multan, Edwardes lost his right hand by the explosion of a
pistol in his belt. On the arrival of a large force under General Whish
the siege of Multan was begun, but was suspended for several months in
consequence of the desertion of Shere Singh with his army and artillery.
Edwardes distinguished himself by the part he took in the final
operations, begun in December, which ended with the capture of the city
on the 4th of January 1849. For his services he received the thanks of
both houses of parliament, was promoted major by brevet, and created
C.B. by special statute of the order. The directors of the East India
Company conferred on him a gold medal and a good service pension of L100
per annum.

After the conclusion of peace Major Edwardes returned to England for the
benefit of his health, married during his stay there, and wrote and
published his fascinating account of the scenes in which he had been
engaged, under the title of _A Year on the Punjab Frontier in
1848-1849_. His countrymen gave him fitting welcome, and the university
of Oxford conferred on him the degree of D.C.L. In 1851 he returned to
India and resumed his civil duties in the Punjab under Sir Henry
Lawrence. In November 1853 he was entrusted with the responsible post of
commissioner of the Peshawar frontier, and this he held when the Mutiny
of 1857 broke out. It was a position of enormous difficulty, and
momentous consequences were involved in the way the crisis might be met.
Edwardes rose to the height of the occasion. He saw as if by inspiration
the facts and the needs, and by the prompt measures which he adopted he
rendered a service of incalculable importance, by effecting a
reconciliation with Afghanistan, and securing the neutrality of the amir
and the frontier tribes during the war. So effective was his procedure
for the safety of the border that he was able to raise a large force in
the Punjab and send it to co-operate in the siege and capture of Delhi.
In 1859 Edwardes once more went to England, his health so greatly
impaired by the continual strain of arduous work that it was doubtful
whether he could ever return to India. During his stay he was created
K.C.B., with the rank of brevet colonel; and the degree of LL.D. was
conferred upon him by the university of Cambridge. Early in 1862 he
again sailed for India, and was appointed commissioner of Umballa and
agent for the Cis-Sutlej states. He had been offered the governorship of
the Punjab, but on the ground of failing health had declined it. In
February 1865 he was compelled to finally resign his post and return to
England. A second good service pension was at once conferred on him; in
May 1866 he was created K.C. of the Star of India; and early in 1868 was
promoted major-general in the East Indian Army. He had been for some
time engaged on a life of Sir Henry Lawrence, and high expectations were
formed of the work; but he did not live to complete it, and after his
death it was put into the hands of Mr Herman Merivale. He died in London
on the 23rd of December 1868. Great in council and great in war, he was
singularly beloved by his friends, generous and unselfish to a high
degree, and a man of deep religious convictions.

  See _Memorials of the Life and Letters of Sir Herbert Benjamin
  Edwardes_, by his wife (2 vols., London, 1886); T. R. E. Holmes, _Four
  Soldiers_ (London, 1889); J. Ruskin, _Bibl. pastorum_, iv. "A Knight's
  Faith" (1885), passages from the life of Edwardes.




EDWARDS, AMELIA ANN BLANDFORD (1831-1892), English author and
Egyptologist, the daughter of one of Wellington's officers, was born in
London on the 7th of June 1831. At a very early age she displayed
considerable literary and artistic talent. She became a contributor to
various magazines and newspapers, and besides many miscellaneous works
she wrote eight novels, the most successful of which were _Debenham's
Vow_ (1870) and _Lord Brackenbury_ (1880). In the winter of 1873-1874
she visited Egypt, and was profoundly impressed by the new openings for
archaeological research. She learnt the hieroglyphic characters, and
made a considerable collection of Egyptian antiquities. In 1877 she
published _A Thousand Miles up the Nile_, with illustrations by herself.
Convinced that only by proper scientific investigations could the
wholesale destruction of Egyptian antiquities be avoided, she devoted
herself to arousing public opinion on the subject, and ultimately, in
1882, was largely instrumental in founding the Egypt Exploration Fund,
of which she became joint honorary secretary with Reginald Stuart Poole.
For the business of this Fund she abandoned her other literary work,
writing only on Egyptology. In 1889-1890 she went on a lecturing tour in
the United States. The substance of her lectures was published in volume
form in 1891 as _Pharaohs, Fellahs, and Explorers_. She died at
Weston-super-Mare, Somerset, on the 15th of April 1892, bequeathing her
valuable collection of Egyptian antiquities to University College,
London, together with a sum to found a chair of Egyptology. Miss Edwards
received, shortly before her death, a civil list pension from the
British government.




EDWARDS, BELA BATES (1802-1852), American man of letters, was born at
Southampton, Massachusetts, on the 4th of July 1802. He graduated at
Amherst College in 1824, was a tutor there in 1827-1828, graduated at
Andover Theological Seminary in 1830, and was licensed to preach. From
1828 to 1833 he was assistant secretary of the American Education
Society (organized in Boston in 1815 to assist students for the
ministry), and from 1828 to 1842 was editor of the society's organ,
which after 1831 was called the _American Quarterly Register_. He also
founded (in 1833) and edited the _American Quarterly Observer_; in
1836-1841 edited the _Biblical Repository_ (after 1837 called the
_American Biblical Repository_) with which the _Observer_ was merged in
1835; and was editor-in-chief of the _Bibliotheca Sacra_ from 1844 to
1851. In 1837 he became professor of Hebrew at Andover, and from 1848
until his death was associate professor of sacred literature there. He
died at Athens, Georgia, on the 20th of April 1852. Among his numerous
publications were _A Missionary Gazetteer_ (1832), _A Biography of Self
Taught Men_ (1832), a once widely known _Eclectic Reader_ (1835), a
translation, with Samuel Harvey Taylor (1807-1871), of Kuhner's
_Schulgrammatik der Griechischen Sprache_ and _Classical Studies_
(1844), essays in ancient literature and art written in collaboration
with Barnas Sears and C. C. Felton.

  Edwards' _Addresses and Sermons_, with a memoir by Rev. Edwards A.
  Park, were published in two volumes at Boston in 1853.




EDWARDS, BRYAN (1743-1800), English politician and historian, was born
at Westbury, Wiltshire, on the 21st of May 1743. His father died in
1756, when his maintenance and education were undertaken by his maternal
uncle, Zachary Bayly, a wealthy merchant of Jamaica. About 1759 Bryan
went to Jamaica, and joined his uncle, who engaged a private tutor to
complete his education, and when Bayly died his nephew inherited his
wealth, succeeding also in 1773 to the estate of another Jamaica
resident named Hume. Edwards soon became a leading member of the
colonial assembly of Jamaica, but in a few years he returned to England,
and in 1782 failed to secure a seat in parliament as member for
Chichester. He was again in Jamaica from 1787 to 1792, when he settled
in England as a West India merchant, making in 1795 another futile
attempt to enter parliament, on this occasion as the representative of
Southampton. In 1796, however, he became member of parliament for
Grampound, retaining his seat until his death at Southampton on the 15th
or 16th of July 1800. In general Edwards was a supporter of the slave
trade, and was described by William Wilberforce as a powerful opponent.
By his wife, Martha, daughter of Thomas Phipps of Westbury, he left an
only son, Hume.

In 1784 Edwards wrote _Thoughts on the late Proceedings of Government
respecting the Trade of the West India Islands with the United States of
America_, in which he attacked the restrictions placed by the government
upon trade with the United States. In 1793 he published in two volumes
his great work, _History, Civil and Commercial, of the British Colonies
in the West Indies_, and in 1797 published his _Historical Survey of the
French Colony in the Island of St Domingo_. In 1801 a new edition of
both these works with certain additions was published in three volumes
under the title of _History of the British Colonies in the West Indies_.
This has been translated into German and parts of it into French and
Spanish, and a fifth edition was issued in 1819. When Mungo Park
returned in 1796 from his celebrated journey in Africa, Edwards, who was
secretary of the Association for Promoting the Discovery of the Interior
Parts of Africa, drew up from Park's narrative an account of his
travels, which was published by the association in their _Proceedings_,
and when Park wrote an account of his journeys he availed himself of
Edwards' assistance. Edwards also wrote some poems and some other works
relating to the history of the West Indies.

  He left a short sketch of his life which was prefixed to the edition
  of the _History of the West Indies_, published in 1801.




EDWARDS, GEORGE (1693-1773), English naturalist, was born at Stratford,
Essex, on the 3rd of April 1693. In his early years he travelled
extensively over Europe, studying natural history, and gained some
reputation for his coloured drawings of animals, especially birds. In
1733, on the recommendation of Sir Hans Sloane, he was appointed
librarian to the Royal College of Physicians in London. In 1743 he
published the first volume of his _History of Birds_, the fourth volume
of which appeared in 1751, and three supplementary volumes, under the
title _Gleanings of Natural History_, were issued in 1758, 1760 and
1764. The two works contain engravings and descriptions of more than 600
subjects in natural history not before described or delineated. He
likewise added a general index in French and English, which was
afterwards supplied with Linnaean names by Linnaeus himself, with whom
he frequently corresponded. About 1764 he retired to Plaistow, Essex,
where he died on the 23rd of July 1773. He also wrote _Essays of Natural
History_ (1770) and _Elements of Fossilogy_ (1776).




EDWARDS, HENRY THOMAS (1837-1884), Welsh divine, was born on the 6th of
September 1837 at Llan ym Mawddwy, Merioneth, where his father was
vicar. He was educated at Westminster and at Jesus College, Oxford
(B.A., 1860), and after teaching for two years at Llandovery went to
Llangollen as his father's curate. He became vicar of Aberdare in 1866
and of Carnarvon in 1869. Here he began his lifelong controversy with
Nonconformity, especially as represented by the Rev. Evan Jones
(Calvinistic Methodist) and Rev. E. Herber Evans (Congregationalist). In
1870 he fought in vain for the principle of all-round denominationalism
in the national education system, and in the same year addressed a
famous letter to Mr Gladstone on "The Church of the Cymry," pointing out
that the success of Nonconformity in Wales was largely due to "the
withering effect of an alien episcopate." One immediate result of this
was the appointment of the Welshman Joshua Hughes (1807-1889) to the
vacant see of St Asaph. Edwards became dean of Bangor in 1876 and at
once set about restoring the cathedral, and he promoted a clerical
education society for supplying the diocese with educated Welsh-speaking
clergy. He was a popular preacher and an earnest patriot; his chief
defect was a lack of appreciation of the theological attainments of
Nonconformity, and a Welsh commentary on St Matthew, which he had worked
at for many years and published in two volumes in 1882, was severely
handled by a Bangor Calvinistic Methodist minister. Edwards suffered
from overwork and insomnia and a Mediterranean cruise in 1883 failed to
restore his health; and he died by his own hand on the 24th of May 1884
at Ruabon.

  See V. Morgan, _Welsh Religious Leaders in the Victorian Era_.




EDWARDS, JONATHAN (1703-1758), American theologian and philosopher, was
born on the 5th of October 1703 at East (now South) Windsor,
Connecticut. His earliest known ancestor was Richard Edwards, Welsh by
birth, a London clergyman in Elizabeth's reign. His father Timothy
Edwards (1669-1758), son of a prosperous merchant of Hartford, had
graduated at Harvard, was minister at East Windsor, and eked out his
salary by tutoring boys for college. His mother, a daughter of the Rev.
Solomon Stoddard, of Northampton, Mass., seems to have been a woman of
unusual mental gifts and independence of character. Jonathan, the only
son, was the fifth of eleven children. The boy was trained for college
by his father and by his elder sisters, who all received an excellent
education. When ten years old he wrote a semi-humorous tract on the
immateriality of the soul; he was interested in natural history, and at
the age of twelve wrote a remarkable essay on the habits of the "flying
spider." He entered Yale College in 1716, and in the following year
became acquainted with Locke's _Essay_, which influenced him profoundly.
During his college course he kept note books labelled "The Mind,"
"Natural Science" (containing a discussion of the atomic theory, &c.),
"The Scriptures" and "Miscellanies," had a grand plan for a work on
natural and mental philosophy, and drew up for himself rules for its
composition. Even before his graduation in September 1720 as
valedictorian and head of his class, he seems to have had a well
formulated philosophy. The two years after his graduation he spent in
New Haven studying theology. In 1722-1723 he was for eight months stated
supply of a small Presbyterian church in New York city, which invited
him to remain, but he declined the call, spent two months in study at
home, and then in 1724-1726 was one of the two tutors at Yale, earning
for himself the name of a "pillar tutor" by his steadfast loyalty to the
college and its orthodox teaching at the time when Yale's rector
(Cutler) and one of her tutors had gone over to the Episcopal Church.

The years 1720 to 1726 are partially recorded in his diary and in the
resolutions for his own conduct which he drew up at this time. He had
long been an eager seeker after salvation and was not fully satisfied as
to his own "conversion" until an experience in his last year in college,
when he lost his feeling that the election of some to salvation and of
others to eternal damnation was "a horrible doctrine," and reckoned it
"exceedingly pleasant, bright and sweet." He now took a great and new
joy in the beauties of nature, and delighted in the allegorical
interpretation of the Song of Solomon. Balancing these mystic joys is
the stern tone of his Resolutions, in which he is almost ascetic in his
eagerness to live earnestly and soberly, to waste no time, to maintain
the strictest temperance in eating and drinking. On the 15th of February
1727 he was ordained minister at Northampton and assistant to his
grandfather, Solomon Stoddard. He was a student minister, not a visiting
pastor, his rule being thirteen hours of study a day. In the same year
he married Sarah Pierrepont, then aged seventeen, daughter of James
Pierrepont (1659-1714), a founder of Yale, and through her mother
great-granddaughter of Thomas Hooker. Of her piety and almost nun-like
love of God and belief in His personal love for her, Edwards had known
when she was only thirteen, and had written of it with spiritual
enthusiasm; she was of a bright and cheerful disposition, a practical
housekeeper, a model wife and the mother of his twelve children. Solomon
Stoddard died on the 11th of February 1729, leaving to his grandson the
difficult task of the sole ministerial charge of one of the largest and
wealthiest congregations in the colony, and one proud of its morality,
its culture and its reputation.

In 1731 Edwards preached at Boston the "Public Lecture" afterwards
published under the title _God Glorified in Man's Dependence_. This was
his first public attack on Arminianism. The leading thought was God's
absolute sovereignty in the work of redemption: that while it behoved
God to create man holy, it was of His "good pleasure" and "mere and
arbitrary grace" that any man was now made holy, and that God might deny
this grace without any disparagement to any of His perfections. In 1733
a revival of religion began in Northampton, and reached such intensity
in the winter of 1734 and the following spring as to threaten the
business of the town. In six months nearly three hundred were admitted
to the church. The revival gave Edwards an opportunity of studying the
process of conversion in all its phases and varieties, and he recorded
his observations with psychological minuteness and discrimination in _A
Faithful Narrative of the Surprising Work of God in the Conversion of
Many Hundred Souls in Northampton_ (1737). A year later he published
_Discourses on Various Important Subjects_, the five sermons which had
proved most effective in the revival, and of these none, he tells us,
was so immediately effective as that on the _Justice of God in the
Damnation of Sinners_, from the text, "That every mouth may be stopped."
Another sermon, published in 1734, on the _Reality of Spiritual Light_
set forth what he regarded as the inner, moving principle of the
revival, the doctrine of a "special" grace in the immediate and
supernatural divine illumination of the soul. In the spring of 1735 the
movement began to subside and a reaction set in. But the relapse was
brief, and the Northampton revival, which had spread through the
Connecticut valley and whose fame had reached England and Scotland, was
followed in 1739-1740 by the Great Awakening, distinctively under the
leadership of Edwards. The movement met with no sympathy from the
orthodox leaders of the church. In 1741 Edwards published in its defence
_The Distinguishing Marks of a Work of the Spirit of God_, dealing
particularly with the phenomena most criticized, the swoonings, outcries
and convulsions. These "bodily effects," he insisted, were not
"distinguishing marks" of the work of the Spirit of God; but so bitter
was the feeling against the revival in the more strictly Puritan
churches that in 1742 he was forced to write a second apology, _Thoughts
on the Revival in New England_, his main argument being the great moral
improvement of the country. In the same pamphlet he defends an appeal to
the emotions, and advocates preaching terror when necessary, even to
children, who in God's sight "are young vipers ... if not Christ's." He
considers "bodily effects" incidentals to the real work of God, but his
own mystic devotion and the experiences of his wife during the Awakening
(which he gives in detail) make him think that the divine visitation
usually overpowers the body, a view in support of which he quotes
Scripture. In reply to Edwards, Charles Chauncy anonymously wrote _The
Late Religious Commotions in New England Considered_ (1743), urging
conduct as the sole test of conversion; and the general convention of
Congregational ministers in the Province of Massachusetts Bay protested
"against disorders in practice which have of late obtained in various
parts of the land." In spite of Edwards's able pamphlet, the impression
had become widespread that "bodily effects" were recognized by the
promoters of the Great Awakening as the true tests of conversion. To
offset this feeling Edwards[1] preached at Northampton during the years
1742 and 1743 a series of sermons published under the title of
_Religious Affections_ (1746), a restatement in a more philosophical and
general tone of his ideas as to "distinguishing marks." In 1747 he
joined the movement started in Scotland called the "concert in prayer,"
and in the same year published _An Humble Attempt to Promote Explicit
Agreement and Visible Union of God's People in Extraordinary Prayer for
the Revival of Religion and the Advancement of Christ's Kingdom on
Earth_. In 1749 he published a memoir of David Brainerd; the latter had
lived in his family for several months, had been constantly attended by
Edwards's daughter Jerusha, to whom he had been engaged to be married,
and had died at Northampton on the 7th of October 1747; and he had been
a case in point for the theories of conversion held by Edwards, who had
made elaborate notes of Brainerd's conversations and confessions.

In 1748 there had come a crisis in his relations with his congregation.
The Half-Way Covenant adopted by the synods of 1657 and 1662 had made
baptism alone the condition to the civil privileges of church
membership, but not of participation in the sacrament of the Supper.
Edwards's grandfather and predecessor, Solomon Stoddard, had been even
more liberal, holding that the Supper was a converting ordinance and
that baptism was a sufficient title to all the privileges of the church.
As early as 1744 Edwards, in his sermons on the Religious Affections,
had plainly intimated his dislike of this practice. In the same year he
had published in a church meeting the names of certain young people,
members of the church, who were suspected of reading improper books,[2]
and also the names of those who were to be called as witnesses in the
case. But witnesses and accused were not distinguished on this list, and
the congregation was in an uproar. A great many, fearing a scandal, now
opposed an investigation which all had previously favoured. Edwards's
preaching became unpopular; for four years no candidate presented
himself for admission to the church; and when one did in 1748, and was
met with Edwards's formal but mild and gentle tests, as expressed in the
_Distinguishing Marks_ and later in _Qualifications for Full Communion_
(1749) the candidate refused to submit to them; the church backed him
and the break was complete. Even permission to discuss his views in the
pulpit was refused him. The ecclesiastical council voted by 10 to 9 that
the pastoral relation be dissolved. The church by a vote of more than
200 to 23 ratified the action of the council, and finally a town meeting
voted that Edwards should not be allowed to occupy the Northampton
pulpit, though he did this on occasion as late as May 1755. He evinced
no rancour or spite; his "Farewell Sermon" was dignified and temperate;
nor is it to be ascribed to chagrin that in a letter to Scotland after
his dismissal he expresses his preference for Presbyterian to
Congregational church government. His position at the time was not
unpopular throughout New England, and it is needless to say that his
doctrine that the Lord's Supper is not a cause of regeneration and that
communicants should be professing Christians has since (very largely
through the efforts of his pupil Joseph Bellamy) become a standard of
New England Congregationalism.

Edwards with his large family was now thrown upon the world, but offers
of aid quickly came to him. A parish in Scotland could have been
procured, and he was called to a Virginia church. He declined both, to
become in 1750 pastor of the church in Stockbridge and a missionary to
the Housatonic Indians. To the Indians he preached through an
interpreter, and their interests he boldly and successfully defended by
attacking the whites who were using their official position among them
to increase their private fortunes. In Stockbridge he wrote the _Humble
Relation_, also called _Reply to Williams_ (1752), which was an answer
to Solomon Williams (1700-1776), a relative and a bitter opponent of
Edwards as to the qualifications for full communion; and he there
composed the treatises on which his reputation as a philosophical
theologian chiefly rests, the essay on _Original Sin_, the _Dissertation
concerning the Nature of True Virtue_, the _Dissertation concerning the
End for which God created the World_, and the great work on the Will,
written in four months and a half, and published in 1754 under the
title, _An Inquiry into the Modern Prevailing Notions Respecting that
Freedom of the Will which is supposed to be Essential to Moral Agency_.

In 1757, on the death of President Burr, who five years before had
married Edwards's daughter Esther, he reluctantly accepted the
presidency of the College of New Jersey (now Princeton University),
where he was installed on the 16th of February 1758. Almost immediately
afterwards he was inoculated for smallpox, which was raging in Princeton
and vicinity, and, always feeble, he died of the inoculation on the 28th
of March 1758. He was buried in the old cemetery at Princeton. He was
slender and fully six feet tall, and with his oval, gentle, almost
feminine face looked the scholar and the mystic.

  _The Edwardean System._--It is difficult to separate Edwards's
  philosophy from his theology, except as the former is contained in the
  early notes on the Mind, where he says that matter exists only in
  idea; that space is God; that minds only are real; that in
  metaphysical strictness there is no being but God; that entity is the
  greatest and only good; and that God as infinite entity, wherein the
  agreement of being with being is absolute, is the supreme excellency,
  the supreme good. It seems certain that these conclusions were
  independent of Berkeley and Malebranche, and were not drawn from
  Arthur Collier's _Clavis universalis_ (1713), with which they have
  much in common, but were suggested, in part at least, by Locke's
  doctrine of ideas, Newton's theory of colours, and Cudworth's
  Platonism, with all of which Edwards was early familiar. But they were
  never developed systematically, and the conception of the material
  universe here contended for does not again explicitly reappear in any
  of his writings. The fundamental metaphysical postulate that being and
  God are ultimately identical remained, however, the philosophical
  basis of all his thinking, and reverence for this being as the supreme
  good remained the fundamental disposition of his mind. That he did not
  interpret this idea in a Spinozistic sense was due to his more
  spiritual conception of "being" and to the reaction on his philosophy
  of his theology. The theological interest, indeed, came in the end to
  predominate, and philosophy to appear as an instrument for the defence
  of Calvinism. Perhaps the best criticism of Edwards's philosophy as a
  whole is that, instead of being elaborated on purely rational
  principles, it is mixed up with a system of theological conceptions
  with which it is never thoroughly combined, and that it is exposed to
  all the disturbing effects of theological controversy. Moreover, of
  one of his most central convictions, that of the sovereignty of God in
  election, he confesses that he could give no account.

  Edwards's reputation as a thinker is chiefly associated with his
  treatise on the Will, which is still sometimes called "the one large
  contribution that America has made to the deeper philosophic thought
  of the world." The aim of this treatise was to refute the doctrine of
  free-will, since he considered it the logical, as distinguished from
  the sentimental, ground of most of the Arminian objections to
  Calvinism. He defines the will as that by which the "mind chooses
  anything." To act voluntarily, he says, is to act electively. So far
  he and his opponents are agreed. But choice, he holds, is not
  arbitrary; it is determined in every case by "that motive which as it
  stands in the view of the mind is the strongest," and that motive is
  strongest which presents in the immediate object of volition the
  "greatest apparent good," that is, the greatest degree of
  agreeableness or pleasure. What this is in a given case depends on a
  multitude of circumstances, external and internal, all contributing to
  form the "cause" of which the voluntary act and its consequences are
  the "effect." Edwards contends that the connexion between cause and
  effect here is as "sure and perfect" as in the realm of physical
  nature and constitutes a "moral necessity." He reduces the opposite
  doctrine to three assumptions, all of which he shows to be untenable:
  (1) "a self-determining power in the will"; (2) "indifference,... that
  the mind previous to the act of volition (is) in equilibrio"; (3)
  "contingence ... as opposed to ... any fixed and certain connexion (of
  the volition) with some previous ground or reason for its existence."
  Although he denies liberty to the will in this sense--indeed, strictly
  speaking, neither liberty nor necessity, he says, is properly applied
  to the will, "for the will itself is not an agent that has a will"--he
  nevertheless insists that the subject willing is a free moral agent,
  and argues that without the determinate connexion between volition
  and motive which he asserts and the libertarians deny, moral agency
  would be impossible. Liberty, he holds, is simply freedom from
  constraint, "the power ... that any one has to do as he pleases." This
  power man possesses. And that the right or wrong of choice depends not
  on the cause of choice but on its nature, he illustrates by the
  example of Christ, whose acts were necessarily holy, yet truly
  virtuous, praiseworthy and rewardable. Even God Himself, Edwards here
  maintains, has no other liberty than this, to carry out without
  constraint His will, wisdom and inclination.

  There is no necessary connexion between Edwards's doctrine of the
  motivation of choice and the system of Calvinism with which it is
  congruent. Similar doctrines have more frequently perhaps been
  associated with theological scepticism. But for him the alternative
  was between Calvinism and Arminianism, simply because of the
  historical situation, and in the refutation of Arminianism on the
  assumptions common to both sides of the controversy, he must be
  considered completely successful. As a general argument his account of
  the determination of the will is defective, notably in his abstract
  conception of the will and in his inadequate, but suggestive,
  treatment of causation, in regard to which he anticipates in important
  respects the doctrine of Hume. Instead of making the motive to choice
  a factor within the concrete process of volition, he regards it as a
  cause antecedent to the exercise of a special mental faculty. Yet his
  conception of this faculty as functioning only in and through motive
  and character, inclination and desire, certainly carries us a long way
  beyond the abstraction in which his opponents stuck, that of a bare
  faculty without any assignable content. Modern psychology has
  strengthened the contention for a fixed connexion between motive and
  act by reference to subconscious and unconscious processes of which
  Edwards, who thought that nothing could affect the mind which was
  unperceived, little dreamed; at the same time, at least in some of its
  developments, especially in its freer use of genetic and organic
  conceptions, it has rendered much in the older forms of statement
  obsolete, and has given a new meaning to the idea of
  self-determination, which, as applied to an abstract power, Edwards
  rightly rejected as absurd.

  Edwards's controversy with the Arminians was continued in the essay on
  _Original Sin_, which was in the press at the time of his death. He
  here breaks with Augustine and the Westminster Confession by arguing,
  consistently with his theory of the Will, that Adam had no more
  freedom of will than we have, but had a special endowment, a
  supernatural gift of grace, which by rebellion against God was lost,
  and that this gift was withdrawn from his descendants, not because of
  any fictitious imputation of guilt, but because of their real
  participation in his guilt by actual identity with him in his
  transgression.

  The _Dissertation on the Nature of True Virtue_, posthumously
  published, is justly regarded as one of the most original works on
  ethics of the 18th century, and is the more remarkable as reproducing,
  with no essential modification, ideas on the subject written in the
  author's youth in the notes on the Mind. Virtue is conceived as the
  beauty of moral qualities. Now beauty, in Edwards's view, always
  consists in a harmonious relation in the elements involved, an
  agreement of being with being. He conceives, therefore, of virtue, or
  moral beauty, as consisting in the cordial agreement or consent to
  intelligent being. He defines it as benevolence (good-will), or rather
  as a disposition to benevolence, towards being in general. This
  disposition, he argues, has no regard primarily to beauty in the
  object, nor is it primarily based on gratitude. Its first object is
  being, "simply considered," and it is accordingly proportioned, other
  things being equal, to the object's "degree of existence." He admits,
  however, benevolent being as a second object, on the ground that such
  an object, having a like virtuous propensity, "is, as it were,
  enlarged, extends to, and in some sort comprehends being in general."
  In brief, since God is the "being of beings" and comprehends, in the
  fullest extent, benevolent consent to being in general, true virtue
  consists essentially in a supreme love to God. Thus the principle of
  virtue--Edwards has nothing to say of "morality"--is identical with
  the principle of religion. From this standpoint Edwards combats every
  lower view. He will not admit that there is any evidence of true
  virtue in the approbation of virtue and hatred of vice, in the
  workings of conscience or in the exercises of the natural affections;
  he thinks that these may all spring from self-love and the association
  of ideas, from "instinct" or from a "moral sense of a secondary kind"
  entirely different from "a sense or relish of the essential beauty of
  true virtue." Nor does he recognize the possibility of a natural
  development of true virtue out of the sentiments directed on the
  "private systems"; on the contrary, he sets the love of particular
  being, when not subordinated to being in general, in opposition to the
  latter and as equivalent to treating it with the greatest contempt.
  All that he allows is that the perception of natural beauty may, by
  its resemblance to the primary spiritual beauty, quicken the
  disposition to divine love in those who are already under the
  influence of a truly virtuous temper.

  Closely connected with the essay on Virtue is the boldly speculative
  _Dissertation on the End for which God Created the World_. As,
  according to the doctrine of virtue, God's virtue consists primarily
  in love to Himself, so His final end in creation is conceived to be,
  not as the Arminians held, the happiness of His creatures, but His
  own glory. Edwards supposes in the nature of God an original
  disposition to an "emanation" of His being, and it is the excellency
  of this divine being, particularly in the elect, which is, in his
  view, the final cause and motive of the world.

  Edwards makes no attempt to reconcile the pantheistic element in his
  philosophy with the individuality implied in moral government. He
  seems to waver between the opinion that finite individuals have no
  independent being and the opinion that they have it in an
  infinitesimal degree; and the conception of "degrees of existence" in
  the essay on Virtue is not developed to elucidate the point. His
  theological conception of God, at any rate, was not abstractly
  pantheistic, in spite of the abstractness of his language about
  "being," but frankly theistic and trinitarian. He held the doctrine of
  the trinitarian distinctions indeed to be a necessity of reason. His
  _Essay on the Trinity_, first printed in 1903, was long supposed to
  have been withheld from publication because of its containing Arian or
  Sabellian tendencies. It contains in fact nothing more questionable
  than an attempted deduction of the orthodox Nicene doctrine,
  unpalatable, however, to Edwards's immediate disciples, who were too
  little speculative to appreciate his statement of the subordination of
  the "persons" in the divine "oeconomy," and who openly derided the
  doctrine of the eternal generation of the Son as "eternal nonsense";
  and this perhaps was the original reason why the essay was not
  published.

  Though so typically a scholar and abstract thinker on the one hand and
  on the other a mystic, Edwards is best known to the present generation
  as a preacher of hell fire. The particular reason for this seems to
  lie in a single sermon preached at Enfield, Connecticut, in July 1741
  from the text, "Their foot shall slide in due time," and commonly
  known from its title, _Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God_. The
  occasion of this sermon is usually overlooked. It was preached to a
  congregation who were careless and loose in their lives at a time when
  "the neighbouring towns were in great distress for their souls." A
  contemporary account of it says that in spite of Edwards's academic
  style of preaching, the assembly was "deeply impressed and bowed down,
  with an awful conviction of their sin and danger. There was such a
  breathing of distress and weeping, that the preacher was obliged to
  speak to the people and desire silence, that he might be heard."
  Edwards preached other sermons of this type, but this one was the most
  extreme. The style of the imprecatory sermon, however, was no more
  peculiar to him than to his period. He was not a great preacher in the
  ordinary meaning of the word. His gestures were scanty, his voice was
  not powerful, but he was desperately in earnest, and he held his
  audience whether his sermon contained a picturesque and detailed
  description of the torments of the damned, or, as was often the case,
  spoke of the love and peace of God in the heart of man. He was an
  earnest, devout Christian, and a man of blameless life. His insight
  into the spiritual life was profound. Certainly the most able
  metaphysician and the most influential religious thinker of America,
  he must rank in theology, dialectics, mysticism and philosophy with
  Calvin and Fenelon, Augustine and Aquinas, Spinoza and Novalis; with
  Berkeley and Hume as the great English philosophers of the 18th
  century; and with Hamilton and Franklin as the three American thinkers
  of the same century of more than provincial importance.

  Edwards's main aim had been to revivify Calvinism, modifying it for
  the needs of the time, and to promote a warm and vital Christian
  piety. The tendency of his successors was--to state the matter
  roughly--to take some one of his theories and develop it to an
  extreme. Of his immediate followers Joseph Bellamy is distinctly
  Edwardean in the keen logic and in the spirit of his _True Religion
  Delineated_, but he breaks with his master in his theory of general
  (not limited) atonement. Samuel Hopkins laid even greater stress than
  Edwards on the theorem that virtue consists in disinterested
  benevolence; but he went counter to Edwards in holding that
  unconditional resignation to God's decrees, or more concretely,
  willingness to be damned for the glory of God, was the test of true
  regeneration; for Edwards, though often quoted as holding this
  doctrine, protested against it in the strongest terms. Hopkins,
  moreover, denied Edwards's identity theory of original sin, saying
  that our sin was a result of Adam's and not identical with it; and he
  went much further than Edwards in his objection to "means of grace,"
  claiming that the unregenerate were more and more guilty for continual
  rejection of the gospel if they were outwardly righteous and availed
  themselves of the means of grace. Stephen West (1735-1819), too,
  out-Edwardsed Edwards in his defence of the treatise on the _Freedom
  of the Will_, and John Smalley (1734-1820) developed the idea of a
  natural (not moral) inability on the part of man to obey God. Emmons,
  like Hopkins, considered both sin and holiness "exercises" of the
  will. Timothy Dwight (1752-1847) urged the use of the means of grace,
  thought Hopkins and Emmons pantheistic, and boldly disagreed with
  their theory of "exercises," reckoning virtue and sin as the result of
  moral choice or disposition, a position that was also upheld by Asa
  Burton (1752-1836), who thought that on regeneration the disposition
  of man got a new relish or "taste."

  JONATHAN EDWARDS[3] the younger (1745-1801), second son of the
  philosopher, born at Northampton, Massachusetts, on the 26th of May
  1745, also takes an important place among his followers. He lived in
  Stockbridge in 1751-1755 and spoke the language of the Housatonic
  Indians with ease, for six months studied among the Oneidas, graduated
  at Princeton in 1765, studied theology at Bethlehem, Connecticut,
  under Joseph Bellamy, was licensed to preach in 1766, was a tutor at
  Princeton in 1766-1769, and was pastor of the White Haven Church, New
  Haven, Connecticut, in 1769-1795, being then dismissed for the nominal
  reason that the church could not support him, but actually because of
  his opposition to the Half-Way Covenant as well as to slavery and the
  slave trade. He preached at Colebrook, Connecticut, in 1796-1799 and
  then became president of Union College, Schenectady, New York, where
  he died on the 1st of August 1801. His studies of the Indian dialects
  were scholarly and valuable. He edited his father's incomplete
  _History of the Work of Redemption_, wrote in answer to Stephen West,
  _A Dissertation Concerning Liberty and Necessity_ (1797), which
  defended his father's work on the Will by a rather strained
  interpretation, and in answer to Chauncy on universal salvation
  formulated what is known as the "Edwardean," New England or
  Governmental theory of the atonement in _The Necessity of the
  Atonement and its Consistency with Free Grace in Forgiveness_ (1785).
  His collected works were edited by his grandson Tryon Edwards in two
  volumes, with memoir (Andover, 1842). His place in the Edwardean
  theology is principally due to his defence against the Universalists
  of his father's doctrine of the atonement, namely, that Christ's
  death, being the equivalent of the eternal punishment of sinners,
  upheld the authority of the divine law, but did not pay any debt, and
  made the pardon of all men a possibility with God, but not a
  necessity.

  BIBLIOGRAPHY.--There have been various editions of Edwards's works.
  His pupil, Samuel Hopkins, in 1765 published two volumes from
  manuscript containing eighteen sermons and a memoir; the younger
  Jonathan Edwards with Dr Erskine published an edition in 4 volumes
  (1744 sqq.), and Samuel Austin in 1808 edited an edition in 8 volumes.
  In 1829 Sereno E. Dwight, a great-grandson of Edwards, published the
  _Life and Works_ in 10 volumes, the first volume containing the
  memoir, which is still the most complete and was the standard until
  the publication (Boston, 1889) of _Jonathan Edwards_, by A. V. G.
  Allen, who attempts to "distinguish what he (Edwards) meant to affirm
  from what he actually teaches." In 1865 the Rev. Alexander B. Grosart
  edited from original manuscripts _Selections from the Unpublished
  Writings of Jonathan Edwards of America_ (Edinburgh, 1865, printed for
  private circulation). This was the only part of a complete edition
  planned by Grosart that ever appeared. It contained the important
  Treatise on Grace, Annotations on the Bible, Directions for Judging of
  Persons' Experiences, and Sermons, the last for the most part merely
  in outline. E. C. Smyth published from a copy _Observations Concerning
  the Scripture Oeconomy of the Trinity and Covenant of Redemption_ (New
  York, 1880), a careful edition from the manuscript of the essay on the
  Flying Spider (in the _Andover Review_, January 1890) and "Some Early
  Writings of Jonathan Edwards," with specimens from the manuscripts (in
  _Proceedings of the American Antiquarian Society_, October, 1895). In
  1900 on the death of Prof. Edwards A. Park, the entire collection of
  Edwards's manuscripts loaned to him by Tryon Edwards was transferred
  to Yale University. Professor Park, like Mr Grosart before him, had
  been unable to accomplish the great task of editing this mass of
  manuscript. "A Study of the Manuscripts of Jonathan Edwards" was
  published by F. B. Dexter in the _Proceedings of the Massachusetts
  Historical Society_, series 2, vol. xv. (Boston, 1902), and in the
  same volume of the _Proceedings_ appeared "A Study of the Shorthand
  Writings of Jonathan Edwards," by W. P. Upham. The long sought for
  essay on the Trinity was edited (New York, 1903) with valuable
  introduction and appendices by G. P. Fisher under the title, _An
  Unpublished Essay of Edwards's on the Trinity_. The only other edition
  of Edwards (in whole or in part) of any importance is _Selected
  Sermons of Jonathan Edwards_ (New York, 1904), edited by H. N.
  Gardiner, with brief biographical sketch and annotations on seven
  sermons, one of which had not previously been published.

  For estimates of Edwards consult: _The Volume of the Edwards Family
  Meeting at Stockbridge, Massachusetts, September 6-7, A.D. 1870_
  (Boston, 1871); _Jonathan Edwards, a Retrospect, Being the Addresses
  Delivered in Connecticut with the Unveiling of a Memorial in the
  First Church of Christ in Northampton, Massachusetts, on the One
  Hundred and Fiftieth Anniversary of his Dismissal from the Pastorate
  of that Church_, edited by H. N. Gardiner (Boston, 1901); _Exercises
  Commemorating the Two Hundredth Anniversary of the Birth of Jonathan
  Edwards, held at Andover Theological Seminary, October 4-5, 1903_
  (Andover, 1904); and among the addresses delivered at Stockbridge in
  October 1903, John De Witt, "Jonathan Edwards: A Study," in the
  _Princeton Theological Review_ (January, 1904). Also H. C. King,
  "Edwards as Philosopher and Theologian," in _Hartford Theological
  Seminary Record_, vol. xiv. (1903), pp. 23-57; H. N. Gardiner, "The
  Early Idealism of Jonathan Edwards," in the _Philosophical Review_,
  vol. ix. (1900), pp. 573-596; E. C. Smyth, _American Journal of
  Theology_, vol. i. (1897), pp. 960-964; Samuel P. Hayes, "An
  Historical Study of the Edwardean Revivals," in _American Journal of
  Psychology_, vol. xiii. (1902), pp. 550 ff.; J. H. MacCracken,
  "Philosophical Idealism of Edwards" in _Philosophical Review_, vol.
  xi. (1902), pp. 26-42, suggesting that Edwards did not know Berkeley,
  but Collier, and the same author's _Jonathan Edwards' Idealismus_
  (Halle, 1899); F. J. E. Woodbridge, "Jonathan Edwards," in
  _Philosophical Review_, vol. xiii. (1904), pp. 393-408; W. H. Squires,
  _Jonathan Edwards und seine Willenslehre_ (Leipzig, 1901); Samuel
  Simpson, "Jonathan Edwards, A Historical Review," in _Hartford
  Seminary Record_, vol. xiv. (1903), pp. 3-22; and _The Edwardean, a
  Quarterly Devoted to the History of Thought in America_ (Clinton, New
  York, 1903-1904), edited by W. H. Squires, of which only four parts
  appeared, all devoted to Edwards and all written by Squires.
       (H. N. G.; R. WE.)


FOOTNOTES:

  [1] Edwards recognized the abuse of impulses and impressions, opposed
    itinerant and lay preachers, and defended a well-ordered and
    well-educated clergy.

  [2] These were probably not fiction like _Pamela_, as Sir Leslie
    Stephen suggested, for Edwards listed several of Richardson's novels
    for his own reading, and considered _Sir Charles Grandison_ a very
    moral and excellent work.

  [3] Besides the younger Jonathan many of Edwards's descendants were
    great, brilliant or versatile men. Among them were: his son
    Pierrepont (1750-1826), a brilliant but erratic member of the
    Connecticut bar, tolerant in religious matters and bitterly hated by
    stern Calvinists, a man whose personal morality resembled greatly
    that of Aaron Burr; his grandsons, William Edwards (1770-1851), an
    inventor of important leather rolling machinery; Aaron Burr the son
    of Esther Edwards; Timothy Dwight (1752-1817), son of Mary Edwards,
    and his brother Theodore Dwight, a Federalist politician, a member,
    the secretary and the historian of the Hartford Convention; his
    great-grandsons, Tryon Edwards (1809-1894) and Sereno Edwards Dwight,
    theologian, educationalist and author; and his great-great-grandsons,
    Theodore William Dwight, the jurist, and Timothy Dwight, second of
    that name to be president of Yale.




EDWARDS, LEWIS (1809-1887), Welsh Nonconformist divine, was born in the
parish of Llanbadarn Fawr, Cardiganshire, on the 27th of October 1809.
He was educated at Aberystwyth and at Llangeitho, and then himself kept
school in both these places. He had already begun to preach for the
Calvinistic Methodists when, in December 1830, he went to London to take
advantage of the newly-opened university. In 1832 he settled as minister
at Laugharne in Carmarthenshire, and the following year went to
Edinburgh, where a special resolution of the senate allowed him to
graduate at the end of his third session. He was now better able to
further his plans for providing a trained ministry for his church.
Previously, the success of the Methodist preachers had been due mainly
to their natural gifts. Edwards made his home at Bala, and there, in
1837, with David Charles, his brother-in-law, he opened a school, which
ultimately became the denominational college for north Wales. He died on
the 19th of July 1887.

Edwards may fairly be called one of the makers of modern Wales. Through
his hands there passed generation after generation of preachers, who
carried his influence to every corner of the principality. By fostering
competitive meetings and by his writings, especially in _Y Traethodydd_
("The Essayist"), a quarterly magazine which he founded in 1845 and
edited for ten years, he did much to inform and educate his countrymen
on literary and theological subjects. A new college was built at Bala in
1867, for which he raised L10,000. His chief publication was a
noteworthy book on _The Doctrine of the Atonement_, cast in the form of
a dialogue between master and pupil; the treatment is forensic, and
emphasis is laid on merit. It was due to him that the North and South
Wales Calvinistic Methodist Associations united to form an annual
General Assembly; he was its moderator in 1866 and again in 1876. He was
successful in bringing the various churches of the Presbyterian order
into closer touch with each other, and unwearying in his efforts to
promote education for his countrymen.

  See _Bywyd a Llythyrau y Parch_, (i.e. Life and Letters of the Rev.)
  _Lewis Edwards, D.D._, by his son T. C. Edwards.




EDWARDS, RICHARD (c. 1523-1566), English musician and playwright, was
born in Somersetshire, became a scholar of Corpus Christi College,
Oxford, in 1540, and took his M.A. degree in 1547. He was appointed in
1561 a gentleman of the chapel royal and master of the children, and
entered Lincoln's Inn in 1564, where at Christmas in that year he
produced a play which was acted by his choir boys. On the 3rd of
September 1566 his play, _Palamon and Arcite_, was performed before
Queen Elizabeth in the Hall of Christ Church, Oxford. Another play,
_Damon and Pithias_, tragic in subject but with scenes of vulgar farce,
entered at Stationers' Hall in 1567-8, appeared in 1571 and was
reprinted in 1582; it may be found in Dodsley's _Old Plays_, vol. i.,
and _Ancient British Drama_, vol. i. It is written in rhymed lines of
rude construction, varying in length and neglecting the _caesura_. A
number of the author's shorter pieces are preserved in the _Paradise of
Dainty Devices_, first published in 1575, and reprinted in the _British
Bibliographer_, vol. iii.; the best known are the lines on May, the
_Amantium Irae_, and the _Commendation of Music_, which has the honour
of furnishing a stanza to _Romeo and Juliet_. The _Historie of Damocles
and Dionise_ is assigned to him in the 1578 edition of the _Paradise_.
Sir John Hawkins credited him with the part song "In going to my lonely
bed"; the words are certainly his, and probably the music. In his own
day Edwards was highly esteemed. The fine poem, "The Soul's Knell," is
supposed to have been written by him when dying.

  See _Grove's Dict. of Music_ (new edition); the _Shakespeare Soc.
  Papers_, vol. ii. art. vi.; Ward, _English Dram. Literature_, vol. i.




EDWARDS, THOMAS CHARLES (1837-1900), Welsh Nonconformist divine and
educationist, was born at Bala, Merioneth, on the 22nd of September
1837, the son of Lewis Edwards (q.v.). His resolve to become a minister
was deepened by the revival of 1858-1859. After taking his degrees at
London (B.A. 1861, M.A. 1862), he matriculated at St Alban Hall, Oxford,
in October 1862, the university having just been opened to dissenters.
He obtained a scholarship at Lincoln College in 1864, and took a first
class in the school of Literae Humaniores in 1866. He was especially
influenced by Mark Pattison and Jowett, who counselled him to be true to
the church of his father, in which he had already been ordained. Early
in 1867 he became minister at Windsor Street, Liverpool, but left it to
become first principal of the University College of Wales at
Aberystwyth, which had been established through the efforts of Sir Hugh
Owen and other enthusiasts. The college was opened with a staff of three
professors and twenty-five students in October 1872, and for some years
its career was chequered enough. Edwards, however, proved a skilful
pilot, and his hold on the affection of the Welsh people enabled him to
raise the college to a high level of efficiency. When it was destroyed
by fire in 1885 he collected L25,000 to rebuild it; the remainder of the
necessary L40,000 being given by the government (L10,000) and by the
people of Aberystwyth (L5000). In 1891 he gave up what had been the main
work of his life to accept an undertaking that was even nearer his
heart, the principalship of the theological college at Bala. A stroke of
paralysis in 1894 fatally weakened him, but he continued at work till
his death on the 22nd of March 1900. The Calvinistic Methodist Church of
Wales bestowed on him every honour in their possession, and he received
the degree of D.D. from the universities of Edinburgh (1887) and Wales
(1898). His chief works were a _Commentary on 1 Corinthians_ (1885), the
_Epistle to the Hebrews_ ("Expositor's Bible" series, 1888), and _The
God-Man_ ("Davies Lecture," 1895).




EDWARDSVILLE, a city and the county-seat of Madison county, Illinois,
U.S.A., in the south-western part of the state, on Cahokia Creek, about
18 m. N.E. of St Louis. Pop. (1890) 3561; (1900) 4157 (573
foreign-born); (1910) 5014. Edwardsville is served by the Toledo, St
Louis & Western, the Wabash, the Litchfield & Madison, and the Illinois
Terminal railways, and is connected with St Louis by three electric
lines. It has a Carnegie library. The city's principal manufactures are
carriages, ploughs, brick, machinery, sanitary ware and plumber's goods.
Bituminous coal is extensively mined in the vicinity. Adjoining
Edwardsville is the co-operative village Leclaire (unincorporated), with
the factory of the N.O. Nelson Manufacturing Co., makers of plumber's
supplies, brass goods, sanitary fixtures, &c.; the village was founded
in 1890 by Nelson O. Nelson (b. 1844), and nearly all of the residents
are employed by the company of which he is the head; they share to a
certain extent in its profits, and are encouraged to own their own
homes. The company supports a school, Leclaire Academy, and has built a
club-house, bowling alleys, tennis-courts, base-ball grounds, &c. The
first settlement on the site of Edwardsville was made in 1812, and in
1815 the town was laid out and named in honour of Ninian Edwards
(1775-1833), the governor of the Illinois Territory (1809-1818), and
later United States senator (1818-1824) and governor of the state of
Illinois (1826-1830). Edwardsville was incorporated in 1819 and received
its present charter in 1872.




EDWARDSVILLE, a borough of Luzerne county, Pennsylvania, U.S.A., on the
north branch of the Susquehanna river, adjoining Kingston and close to
the north-western limits of Wilkes-Barre (on the opposite side of the
river), in the north-eastern part of the state; the official name of the
post office is Edwardsdale. Pop. (1890), 3284; (1900), 5165, of whom
2645 were foreign-born; (1910 census), 8407. It is served by the
electric line of the Wilkes-Barre & Wyoming Valley Traction Co. Coal
mining and brewing are the chief industries. Edwardsville was
incorporated in 1884.




EDWIN, AEDUINI or EDWINE (585-633), king of Northumbria, was the son of
Ella of Deira. On the seizure of Deira by AEthelfrith of Bernicia
(probably 605), Edwin was expelled and is said to have taken refuge with
Cadfan, king of Gwynedd. After the battle of Chester, in which
AEthelfrith defeated the Welsh, Edwin fled to Roedwald, the powerful
king of East Anglia, who after some wavering espoused his cause and
defeated and slew AEthelfrith at the river Idle in 617. Edwin thereupon
succeeded to the Northumbrian throne, driving out the sons of
AEthelfrith. There is little evidence of external activity on the part of
Edwin before 625. It is probable that the conquest of the Celtic kingdom
of Elmet, a district in the neighbourhood of the modern Leeds, ruled
over by a king named Cerdic (Ceredig) is to be referred to this period,
and this may have led to the later quarrel with Cadwallon, king of
Gwynedd. Edwin seems also to have annexed Lindsey to his kingdom by 625.
In this year he entered upon negotiations with Eadbald of Kent for a
marriage with his sister AEthelberg. It was made a condition that
Christianity should be tolerated in Northumbria, and accordingly
Paulinus was consecrated bishop by Justus in 625, and was sent to
Northumbria with AEthelberg. According to Bede, Edwin was favourably
disposed towards Christianity owing to a vision he had seen at the court
of Roedwald, and in 626 he allowed Eanfled, his daughter by AEthelberg,
to be baptized. On the day of the birth of his daughter, the king's life
had been attempted by Eomer, an emissary of Cwichelm, king of Wessex.
Preserved by the devotion of his thegn Lilla, Edwin vowed to become a
Christian if victorious over his treacherous enemy. He was successful in
the ensuing campaign, and abstained from the worship of the gods of his
race. A letter of Pope Boniface helped to decide him, and after
consulting his friends and counsellors, of whom the priest Coifi
afterwards took a prominent part in destroying the temple at Goodmanham,
he was baptized with his people and nobles at York, at Easter 627. In
this town he granted Paulinus a see, built a wooden church and began one
of stone. Besides York, Yeavering and Maelmin in Bernicia, and Catterick
in Deira, were the chief scenes of the work of Paulinus. It was the
influence of Edwin which led to the conversion of Eorpwald of East
Anglia. Bede notices the peaceful state of Britain at this time, and
relates that Edwin was preceded on his progresses by a kind of standard
like that borne before the Roman emperors. In 633 Cadwallon of North
Wales and Penda of Mercia rose against Edwin and slew him at Hatfield
near Doncaster. His kinsman Osric succeeded in Deira, and Eanfrith the
son of AEthelfrith in Bernicia. Bede tells us that Edwin had subdued the
islands of Anglesey and Man, and the _Annales Cambriae_ record that he
besieged Cadwallon (perhaps in 632) in the island of Glannauc (Puffin
Island). He was definitely recognized as overlord by all the other
Anglo-Saxon kings of his day except Eadbald of Kent.

  See Bede, _Hist. Eccl._ (ed. Plummer, Oxford, 1896), ii. 5, 9, 11, 12,
  13, 15, 16, 18, 20; Nennius (ed. San Marte, 1844), S 63; _Vita S.
  Oswaldi_, ix. Simeon of Durham (ed. Arnold, London, 1882-1885, vol. i.
  R.S.).     (F. G. M. B.)




EDWIN, JOHN (1749-1790), English actor, was born in London on the 10th
of August 1749, the son of a watchmaker. As a youth, he appeared in the
provinces, in minor parts; and at Bath in 1768 he formed a connexion
with a Mrs Walmsley, a milliner, who bore him a son, but whom he
afterwards deserted. His first London appearance was at the Haymarket in
1776 as Flaw in Samuel Foote's _The Cozeners_, but when George Colman
took over the theatre he was given better parts and became its leading
actor. In 1779 he was at Covent Garden, and played there or at the
Haymarket until his death on the 31st of October 1790. Ascribed to him
are _The Last Legacy of John Edwin_, 1780; _Edwin's Jests_ and _Edwin's
Pills to Purge Melancholy_.

His son, JOHN EDWIN (1768-1805), made a first appearance on the stage at
the Haymarket as Hengo in Beaumont and Fletcher's _Bonduca_ in 1778, and
from that time acted frequently with his father, and managed the private
theatricals organized by his intimate friend Lord Barrymore at Wargrave,
Berks. In 1791 he married Elizabeth Rebecca Richards, an actress already
well known in juvenile parts, and played at the Haymarket and elsewhere
thereafter with her. He died in Dublin on the 22nd of February 1805. His
widow joined the Drury Lane company (then playing, on account of the
fire of 1809, at the Lyceum), and took all the leading characters in the
comedies of the day. She died on the 3rd of August 1854.




EDWY (EADWIG), "THE FAIR" (c. 940-959), king of the English, was the
eldest son of King Edmund and AElfgifu, and succeeded his uncle Eadred
in 955, when he was little more than fifteen years old. He was crowned
at Kingston by Archbishop Odo, and his troubles began at the coronation
feast. He had retired to enjoy the company of the ladies AEthelgifu
(perhaps his foster-mother) and her daughter AElfgifu, whom the king
intended to marry. The nobles resented the king's withdrawal, and he was
induced by Dunstan and Cynesige, bishop of Lichfield, to return to the
feast. Edwy naturally resented this interference, and in 957 Dunstan was
driven into exile. By the year 956 AElfgifu had become the king's wife,
but in 958 Archbishop Odo of Canterbury secured their separation on the
ground of their being too closely akin. Edwy, to judge from the
disproportionately large numbers of charters issued during his reign,
seems to have been weakly lavish in the granting of privileges, and soon
the chief men of Mercia and Northumbria were disgusted by his partiality
for Wessex. The result was that in the year 957 his brother, the
AEtheling Edgar, was chosen as king by the Mercians and Northumbrians.
It is probable that no actual conflict took place, and in 959, on Edwy's
death, Edgar acceded peaceably to the combined kingdoms of Wessex,
Mercia and Northumbria.

  AUTHORITIES.--_Saxon Chronicle_ (ed. Earle and Plummer, Oxford), _sub
  ann._; _Memorials of St Dunstan_ (ed. Stubbs, Rolls Series); William
  of Malmesbury, _Gesta regum_ (ed. Stubbs, Rolls Series); Birch,
  _Cartularium Saxonicum_, vol. ii. Nos. 932-1046; Florence of
  Worcester.




EECKHOUT, GERBRAND VAN DEN (1621-1674), Dutch painter, born at Amsterdam
on the 19th of August 1621, entered early into the studio of Rembrandt.
Though a companion pupil to F. Bol and Govaert Flinck, he was inferior
to both in skill and in the extent of his practice; yet at an early
period he assumed Rembrandt's manner with such success that his pictures
were confounded with those of his master; and, even in modern days, the
"Resurrection of the Daughter of Jairus," in the Berlin museum, and the
"Presentation in the Temple," in the Dresden gallery, have been held to
represent worthily the style of Rembrandt. As evidence of the fidelity
of Eeckhout's imitation we may cite his "Presentation in the Temple," at
Berlin, which is executed after Rembrandt's print of 1630, and his
"Tobit with the Angel," at Brunswick, which is composed on the same
background as Rembrandt's "Philosopher in Thought." Eeckhout not merely
copies the subjects; he also takes the shapes, the figures, the Jewish
dress and the pictorial effects of his master. It is difficult to form
an exact judgment of Eeckhout's qualities at the outset of his career.
His earliest pieces are probably those in which he more faithfully
reproduced Rembrandt's peculiarities. Exclusively his is a tinge of
green in shadows marring the harmony of the work, a certain gaudiness of
jarring tints, uniform surface and a touch more quick than subtle.
Besides the pictures already mentioned we should class amongst early
productions on this account the "Woman taken in Adultery," at Amsterdam;
"Anna presenting her Son to the High Priest," in the Louvre; the
"Epiphany," at Turin; and the "Circumcision," at Cassel. Eeckhout
matriculated early in the Gild of Amsterdam. A likeness of a lady at a
dressing-table with a string of beads, at Vienna, bears the date of
1643, and proves that the master at this time possessed more imitative
skill than genuine mastery over nature. As he grew older he succeeded
best in portraits, a very fair example of which is that of the historian
Dappers (1669), in the Stadel collection. Eeckhout occasionally varied
his style so as to recall in later years the "small masters" of the
Dutch school. Waagen justly draws attention to his following of Terburg
in "Gambling Soldiers," at Stafford House, and a "Soldiers'
Merrymaking," in the collection of the marquess of Bute. A "Sportsman
with Hounds," probably executed in 1670, now in the Vander Hoo gallery,
and a "Group of Children with Goats" (1671), in the Hermitage, hardly
exhibit a trace of the artist's first education. Amongst the best of
Eeckhout's works "Christ in the Temple" (1662), at Munich, and the
"Haman and Mordecai" of 1665, at Luton House, occupy a good place.
Eeckhout died at Amsterdam on the 22nd of October 1674.




EEL. The common freshwater eel (Lat. _anguilla_; O. Eng. _oel_) belongs
to a group of soft-rayed fishes distinguished by the presence of an
opening to the air-bladder and the absence of the pelvic fins. With its
nearest relatives it forms the family _Muraenidae_, all of which are of
elongated cylindrical form. The peculiarities of the eel are the
rudimentary scales buried in the skin, the well-developed pectoral fins,
the rounded tail fin continuous with the dorsal and ventral fins. Only
one other species of the family occurs in British waters, namely, the
conger, which is usually much larger and lives in the sea. In the conger
the eyes are larger than in the eel, and the upper jaw overlaps the
lower, whereas in the eel the lower jaw projects beyond the upper. Both
species are voracious and predatory, and feed on almost any animal food
they can obtain, living or dead. The conger is especially fond of squid
or other Cephalopods, while the eel greedily devours carrion. The common
eel occurs in all the rivers and fresh waters of Europe, except those
draining towards the Arctic Ocean, the Black Sea and the Caspian Sea. It
also occurs on the Atlantic side of North America. The conger has a
wider range, extending from the western and southern shores of Britain
and Ireland to the East Indian Archipelago and Japan. It is common in
the Mediterranean.

The ovaries of the eel resemble somewhat those of the salmon in
structure, not forming closed sacs, as in the majority of Teleostei, but
consisting of laminae exposed to the body cavity. The laminae in which
the eggs are produced are very numerous, and are attached transversely
by their inner edges to a membranous band running nearly the whole
length of the body-cavity. The majority of the eels captured for market
are females with the ovaries in an immature condition. The male eel was
first discovered in 1873 by Syrski at Trieste, the testis being
described by him as a lobed elongated organ, in the same relative
position as the ovary in the female, surrounded by a smooth surface
without laminae. He did not find ripe spermatozoa. He discovered the
male by examining small specimens, all the larger being female. L.
Jacoby, a later observer, found no males exceeding 19 in. in length,
while the female may reach a length of 39 in. or more. Dr C. G. J.
Petersen, in a paper published in 1896, states that in Denmark two kinds
of eels are distinguished by the fishermen, namely, yellow eels and
silver eels. The silver eels are further distinguished by the shape of
the snout and the size of the eyes. The snout in front of the eyes is
not flat, as in the yellow eels, but high and compressed, and therefore
appears more pointed, while the eyes are much larger and directed
outwards. In both kinds there are males and females, but Petersen shows
that the yellow eels change into silver eels when they migrate to the
sea. The sexual organs in the silver eels are more developed than in the
yellow eels, and the former have almost or entirely ceased to take food.
The male silver eels are from 11-1/2 to 19 in. in length, the females
from 16-1/2 to about 39 in. It is evident, therefore, that if eels only
spawn once, they do not all reach the same size when they become
sexually mature. The male conger was first described in 1879 by Hermes,
who obtained a ripe specimen in the Berlin Aquarium. This specimen was
not quite 2-1/2 ft. in length, and of the numerous males which have been
identified at the Plymouth Laboratory, none exceeded this length. The
large numbers of conger above this size caught for the market are all
immature females. Female conger of 5 or 6 ft. in length and weighing
from 30 to 50 lb. are common enough, and occasionally they exceed these
limits. The largest recorded was 8 ft. 3 in. long, and weighed 128 lb.

There is every reason to believe that eels and conger spawn but once in
their lives, and die soon after they have discharged their generative
products. When kept in aquaria, both male and female conger are vigorous
and voracious. The males sooner or later cease to feed, and attain to
the sexually mature condition, emitting ripe milt when handled and
gently squeezed. They live in this condition five or six months, taking
no food and showing gradual wasting and disease of the bodily organs.
The eyes and skin become ulcerated, the sight is entirely lost, and the
bones become soft through loss of lime. The females also after a time
cease to feed, and live in a fasting condition for five or six months,
during which time the ovaries develop and reach great size and weight,
while the bones become soft and the teeth disappear. The female,
however, always dies in confinement before the ova are perfectly ripe
and before they are liberated from the ovarian tissue. The absence of
some necessary condition, perhaps merely of the pressure which exists at
the bottom of the sea, evidently prevents the complete development of
the ovary. The invariable death of the fish in the same almost ripe
condition leads to the conclusion that under normal conditions the fish
dies after the mature ova have been discharged. G. B. Grassi states that
he obtained ripe male eels, and ripe specimens of _Muraena_, another
genus of the family, in the whirlpools of the Strait of Messina. A ripe
female _Muraena_ has also been described at Zanzibar. Gravid female
eels, i.e. specimens with ovaries greatly enlarged, have been
occasionally obtained in fresh water, but there is no doubt that,
normally, sexual maturity is attained only in the sea.

Until recent years nothing was known from direct observation concerning
the reproduction of the common eel or any species of the family. It was
a well-known fact that large eels migrated towards the sea in autumn,
and that in the spring small transparent eels of 2 in. in length and
upwards were common on the shore under stones, and ascended rivers and
streams in vast swarms. It was reasonable, therefore, to infer that the
mature eels spawned in the sea, and that there the young were developed.

[Illustration: Leptocephali. (By permission of J. & A. Churchill.)]

A group of peculiar small fishes were, however, known which were called
Leptocephali, from the small proportional size of the head. The first of
these described was captured in 1763 near Holyhead, and became the type
of _L. Morrisii_, other specimens of which have been taken either near
the shore or at the surface of the sea. Other forms placed in the same
genus had been taken by surface fishing in the Mediterranean and in
tropical ocean currents. The chief peculiarities of Leptocephali, in
addition to the smallness of the head, are their ribbon-like shape and
their glassy transparency during life. The body is flattened from side
to side, and broad from the dorsal to the ventral edge. Like the eels,
they are destitute of pelvic fins and no generative organs have been
observed in them (see fig.).

In 1864 the American naturalist, T. N. Gill, published the conclusion
that _L. Morrisii_ was the young or larva of the conger, and
Leptocephali generally the young stages of species of _Muraenidae_. In
1886 this conclusion was confirmed from direct observation by Yves
Delage, who kept alive in a tank at Roscoff a specimen of _L. Morrisii_,
and saw it gradually transformed into a young conger. From 1887 to 1892
Professor Grassi and Dr Calandruccio carried on careful and successful
researches into the development of the Leptocephali at Catania, in
Sicily. The specimens were captured in considerable numbers in the
harbour, and the transformation of _L. Morrisii_ into young conger, and
of various other forms of Leptocephalus into other genera of
_Muraenidae_, such as _Muraena_, _Congromuraena_ and _Ophichthys_, was
observed. In 1894 the same authors published the announcement that
another species of Leptocephalus, namely, _L. brevirostris_, was the
larva of the common eel. This larval form was captured in numbers with
other Leptocephali in the strong currents of the Strait of Messina. In
the metamorphosis of all Leptocephali a great reduction in size occurs.
The _L. brevirostris_ reaches a length of 8 cm., or a little more than
2-1/2 in., while the perfectly-formed young eel is 2 in. long or a
little more.

The Italian naturalists have also satisfied themselves that certain
pelagic fish eggs originally described by Raffaele at Naples are the
eggs of _Muraenidae_, and that among them are the eggs of _Conger_ and
_Anguilla_. They believe that these eggs, although free in the water,
remain usually near the bottom at great depths, and that fertilization
takes place under similar conditions. No fish eggs of the kind to which
reference is here made have yet been obtained on the British coasts,
although conger and eels are so abundant there. Raffaele described and
figured the larva newly hatched from one of the eggs under
consideration, and it is evident that this larva is the earliest stage
of a Leptocephalus.

Although young eels, some of them more or less flat and transparent, are
common enough on the coasts of Great Britain and north-western Europe in
spring, neither eggs nor specimens of _Leptocephalus brevirostris_ have
yet been taken in the North Sea, English Channel or other shallow waters
in the neighbourhood of the British Islands, or in the Baltic. Marked
eels have been proved to migrate from the inmost part of the Baltic to
the Kattegat. Recently, however, search has been made for the larvae in
the more distant and deeper portions of the Atlantic Ocean. In May 1904
a true larval specimen was taken at the surface south-west of the Faeroe
Islands, and another was taken 40 m. north by west of Achill Head,
Ireland. In 1905 numbers were taken in deep water in the Atlantic. The
evidence at present available indicates that the spawning of mature eels
takes place beyond the 100 fathom line, and that the young eels which
reach the coast are already a year old. As eels, both young and old, are
able to live for a long time out of water and have the habit of
travelling at night over land in wet grass and in damp weather, there is
no difficulty in explaining their presence in wells, ponds or other
isolated bodies of fresh water at any distance from the sea.

  See "The Eel Question," _Report U.S. Commissioner of Fisheries for
  1879_ (Washington, 1882); J. T. Cunningham, "Reproduction and
  Development of the Conger," _Journ. Mar. Biol. Assn._ vol. ii.; C. G.
  J. Petersen, _Report Dan. Biol. Station_, v. (1894); G. B. Grassi,
  _Quart. Journ. Mic. Sci._ vol. xxxix. (1897).     (J. T. C.)




EFFENDI (a Turkish word, corrupted from the Gr. [Greek: authentes], a
lord or master), a title of respect, equivalent to the English "sir," in
the Turkish empire and some other eastern countries. It follows the
personal name, when that is used, and is generally given to members of
the learned professions, and to government officials who have no higher
rank, such as Bey, Pasha, &c. It may also indicate a definite office, as
_Hakim effendi_, chief physician to the sultan. The possessive form
_effendim_ (my master) is used by servants and in formal intercourse.




EFFIGIES, MONUMENTAL. An "effigy" (Lat. _effigies_, from _effingere_, to
fashion) is, in general, a material image or likeness of a person; and
the practice of hanging or burning people "in effigy," i.e. their
semblance only, preserves the more general sense of the word. Such
representations may be portraits, caricatures or models. But, apart from
general usages of the term (see e.g. Wax Figures), it is more
particularly applied in the history of art to a particular class of
sculptured figures, in the flat or the round, associated with Christian
sepulchral monuments, dating from the 12th century. The earliest of
these attempts at commemorative portraiture were executed in low relief
upon coffin-lids of stone or purbeck marble, some portions of the
designs for the most part being executed by means of incised lines, cut
upon the raised figure. Gradually, with the increased size and the
greater architectural dignity of monumental structures, effigies
attained to a high rank as works of art, so that before the close of the
13th century very noble examples of figures of this order are found to
have been executed in full relief; and, about the same period, similar
figures also began to be engraved, either upon monumental slabs of stone
or marble, or upon plates of metal, which were affixed to the surfaces
of slabs that were laid in the pavements of churches.

Engraved plates of this class, known as "Brasses" (see BRASSES,
MONUMENTAL), continued in favour until the era of the Reformation, and
in recent times their use has been revived. It seems probable that the
introduction and the prevalence of flat engraved memorials, in place of
commemorative effigies in relief, was due, in the first instance, to the
inconvenience resulting from increasing numbers of raised stones on the
pavement of churches; while the comparatively small cost of engraved
plates, their high artistic capabilities, and their durability, combined
to secure for them the popularity they unquestionably enjoyed. If
considerably less numerous than contemporary incised slabs and engraved
brasses, effigies sculptured in relief--with some exceptions in full
relief--continued for centuries to constitute the most important
features in many medieval monuments. In the 13th century, their origin
being apparently derived from the endeavour to combine a monumental
effigy with a monumental cross upon the same sepulchral stone (whether
in sculpture or by incised lines), parts only of the human figure
sometimes were represented, such as the head or bust, and occasionally
also the feet; in some of the early examples of this curious class the
cross symbol was not introduced, and after awhile half-length figures
became common.

Except in very rare instances, that most important element, genuine
face-portraiture, is not to be looked for, in even the finest sculptured
effigies, earlier than about the middle of the 15th century. In works of
the highest order of art, indeed, the memorials of personages of the
most exalted rank, effigies from an early period in their existence may
be considered occasionally to have been portraits properly so called;
and yet even in such works as these an approximately correct general
resemblance but too frequently appears to have been all that was
contemplated or desired. At the same time, in the earliest monumental
effigies we possess contemporary examples of vestments, costume,[1]
armour, weapons, royal and knightly insignia, and other personal
appointments and accessories, in all of which accurate fidelity has been
certainly observed with scrupulous care and minute exactness. Thus,
since the monumental effigies of England are second to none in artistic
merit, while they have been preserved in far greater numbers, and
generally in better condition than those in other countries, they
represent in unbroken continuity an unrivalled series of original
personal representations of successive generations, very many of them
being, in the most significant acceptation of that term, veritable
contemporaneous portraits.

Once esteemed to be simply objects of antiquarian curiosity, and either
altogether disregarded or too often subjected to injurious indignity,
the monumental effigies in England long awaited the formation of a just
estimate of their true character and their consequent worth in their
capacity as authorities for face-portraiture. In the original contract
for the construction of the monument at Warwick to Richard Beauchamp,
the fifth earl, who died in 1439, it is provided that an effigy of the
deceased noble should be executed in bronze gilt, with all possible
care, by the most skilful and experienced artists of the time; and the
details of the armour and the ornaments of the figure are specified with
minute precision. It is remarkable, however, that the effigy itself is
described only in the general and indefinite terms--"an image of a man
armed." There is no provision that the effigy should be "an image" of
the earl; and much less is anything said as to its being such a
"counterfeit presentment" of the features and person of the living man,
as the contemporaries of Shakespeare had learned to expect in what they
would accept as true portraiture. The effigy, almost as perfect as when
it left the sculptor's hands, still bears witness, as well to the
conscientious care with which the conditions of the contract were
fulfilled, as to the eminent ability of the artists employed. So
complete is the representation of the armour, that this effigy might be
considered actually to have been equipped in the earl's own favourite
suit of the finest Milan steel. The cast of the figure also was
evidently studied from what the earl had been when in life, and the
countenance is sufficiently marked and endowed with the unmistakable
attributes of personal character. Possibly such a resemblance may have
been the highest aim in the image-making of the period, somewhat before
the middle of the 15th century. Three-quarters of a century later, a
decided step towards fidelity in true portraiture is shown to have been
taken, when, in his will (1510 A.D.), Henry VII. spoke of the effigies
of himself and of his late queen, Elizabeth of York, to be executed for
their monument, as "an image of our figure and another of hers." The
existing effigies in the Beauchamp chapel and in Henry VII.'s chapel,
with the passages just quoted from the contract made by the executors of
the Lancastrian earl, strikingly illustrate the gradual development of
the idea of true personal portraiture in monumental effigies, during the
course of the 15th and at the commencement of the 16th century in
England.

Study of the royal effigies still preserved must commence in Worcester
Cathedral with that of King John. This earliest example of a series of
effigies of which the historical value has never yet been duly
appreciated is rude as a work of art, and yet there is on it the impress
of such individuality as demonstrates that the sculptor did his best to
represent the king. Singularly fine as achievements of the sculptor's
art are the effigies of Henry III., Queen Eleanor of Castile, and her
ill-fated son Edward II., the two former in Westminster Abbey, the last
in Gloucester cathedral; and of their fidelity also as portraits no
doubt can be entertained. In like manner the effigies of Edward III. and
his queen Philippa, and those of their grandson Richard II. and his
first consort, Anne of Bohemia (all at Westminster), and of their other
grandson, Henry of Lancaster, with his second consort, Joan of Navarre,
at Canterbury--all convince us that they are true portraits. Next follow
the effigies of Henry VII. and Elizabeth of York,--to be succeeded, and
the royal series to be completed, by the effigies of Queen Elizabeth and
Mary Stuart, all of them in Westminster Abbey. Very instructive would be
a close comparison between the two last-named works and the painted
portraits of the rival queens, especially in the case of Mary, the
pictures of whom differ so remarkably from one another.

As the 15th century advanced, the rank of the personage represented and
the character of the art that distinguishes any effigy goes far to
determine its portrait qualities. Still later, when more exact
face-portraiture had become a recognized element, sculptors must be
supposed to have aimed at the production of such resemblance as their
art would enable them to give to their works; and accordingly, when we
compare effigies with painted portraits of the same personages, we find
that they corroborate one another. The prevalence of portraiture in the
effigies of the 16th and 17th centuries, when their art generally
underwent a palpable decline, by no means raises all works of this
class, or indeed the majority of them, to the dignity of true portraits;
on the contrary, in these effigies, as in those of earlier periods, it
is the character of the art in each particular example that affects its
merit, value and authority as a portrait. In judging of these latter
effigies, however, we must estimate them by the standard of art of their
own era; and, as a general rule, the effigies that are the best as works
of art in their own class are the best also and the most faithful in
their portraiture. The earlier effigies, usually produced without any
express aim at exact portraiture, as we now employ that expression, have
nevertheless strong claims upon our veneration. Often their sculpture is
very noble; and even when they are rudest as works of art, there is
rarely lacking a rough grandeur about them, as exhibited in the fine
bold figure of Fair Rosamond's son, Earl William of the Long Sword,
which reposes in such dignified serenity in his own cathedral at
Salisbury. These effigies may not bring us closely face to face with
remote generations, but they do place before us true images of what the
men and women of those generations were.

Observant students of monumental effigies will not fail to appreciate
the singular felicity with which the medieval sculptors adjusted their
compositions to the recumbent position in which their "images"
necessarily had to be placed. Equally worthy of notice is the manner in
which many monumental effigies, particularly those of comparatively
early date, are found to have assumed an aspect neither living nor
lifeless, and yet impressively life-like. The sound judgment also, and
the good taste of those early sculptors, were signally exemplified in
their excluding, almost without exception, the more extravagant fashions
in the costume of their era from their monumental sculpture, and
introducing only the simpler but not less characteristic styles of dress
and appointments. Monumental effigies, as commonly understood, represent
recumbent figures, and the accessories of the effigies themselves have
been adjusted to that position. With the exceptions when they appear on
one side resting on the elbow (as in the case of Thomas Owen (d. 1598)
and Sir Thomas Heskett (d. 1605), both in Westminster Abbey), these
effigies lie on their backs, and as a general rule (except in the case
of episcopal figures represented in the act of benediction, or of
princes and warriors who sometimes hold a sceptre or a sword) their
hands are uplifted and conjoined as in supplication. The crossed-legged
attitude of numerous armed effigies of the era of mail-armour has been
supposed to imply the personages so represented to have been crusaders
or Knights of the Temple; but in either case the supposition is
unfounded and inconsistent with unquestionable facts. Much beautiful
feeling is conveyed by figures of ministering angels being introduced as
in the act of supporting and smoothing the pillows or cushions that are
placed in very many instances to give support to the heads of the
recumbent effigies. The animals at the feet of these effigies, which
frequently have an heraldic significance, enabled the sculptors, with
equal propriety and effectiveness, to overcome one of the special
difficulties inseparable from the recumbent position. In general,
monumental effigies were carved in stone or marble, or cast in bronze,
but occasionally they were of wood: such is the effigy of Robert
Curthose, son of William I. (d. 1135), whose altar tomb in Gloucester
cathedral was probably set up about 1320.

In addition to recumbent statues, upright figures must receive notice
here, especially those set in wall-monuments in churches mainly. These
usually consisted in half-length figures, seen full-face, placed in a
recess within an architectural setting more or less elaborate. They
belong mainly to the 16th and 17th centuries. Among the many examples in
old St Paul's cathedral (destroyed in the Great Fire of 1666) were those
of Dean Colet (d. 1519), William Aubrey (1595) and Alexander Nowell (d.
1601). In St Giles's, Cripplegate, is the similarly designed effigy of
John Speed (d. 1629); while that of John Stow (d. 1605) is a
full-length, seated figure. This, like the figure of Thomas Owen, is in
alabaster, but since its erection has always been described as
terra-cotta--a material which came into considerable favour for the
purpose of busts and half-lengths towards the end of the 16th century,
imported, of course, from abroad. Sometimes the stone monuments were
painted to resemble life, as in the monuments to Shakespeare and John
Combe (the latter now over-painted white), in Holy Trinity Church,
Stratford-on-Avon.

  BIBLIOGRAPHY.--Among the more noteworthy publications are the
  following: _Monumental Effigies in Great Britain_ (Norman Conquest to
  Henry VIII.), by C. A. Stothard, folio (London, 1876); _The Recumbent
  Monumental Effigies in Northamptonshire_, by A. Hartshorne (4to,
  London, 1867-1876); _Sepulchral Memorials_ (Northamptonshire), by W.
  H. Hyett (folio, London, 1817); _Ancient Sepulchral Effigies and
  Monumental Sculpture of Devon_, by W. H. H. Rogers (4to, Exeter,
  1877); _The Ancient Sepulchral Monuments of Essex_, ed. by C. M.
  Carlton (4to, Chelmsford, 1890); and other works dealing with the
  subject according to counties. Of particular value is the _Report of
  the Sepulchral Monuments Committee_ of the Society of Antiquaries,
  laboriously compiled at the request of the Office of Works, arranged
  (1) personally and chronologically, and (2) locally (1872).
       (C. B.; M. H. S.)


FOOTNOTE:

  [1] It is well known that the costume of effigies nearly always
    represented what was actually worn by the remains of the person
    commemorated, when prepared for interment and when lying in state;
    and, in like manner, the aspect of the lifeless countenance, even if
    not designedly reproduced by medieval "image" makers, may long have
    exercised a powerful influence upon their ideas of consistent
    monumental portraiture.




EGAN, PIERCE (1772-1849), English sporting writer, was born in London in
1772. He began life as sporting reporter for the newspapers, and was
soon recognized as the best of his day. In 1814 he wrote, set and
printed a book about the relations of the prince regent (afterwards
George IV.) and Miss Robinson, called _The Mistress of Royalty, or the
Loves of Florizel and Perdita_. But his best-known work is _Life in
London, or Days and Nights of Jerry Hawthorne and his Elegant Friend
Corinthian Tom_ (1821), a book describing the amusements of sporting
men, with illustrations by Cruikshank. This book took the popular fancy
and was one of Thackeray's early favourites (see his _Roundabout
Papers_). It was repeatedly imitated, and several dramatic versions were
produced in London. A sequel containing more of country sports and
misadventures probably suggested Dickens's _Pickwick Papers_. In 1824
_Pierce Egan's Life in London and Sporting Guide_ was started, a weekly
newspaper afterwards incorporated with _Bell's Life_. Among his numerous
other books are _Boxiana_ (1818), _Life of an Actor_ (1824), _Book of
Sports_ (1832), and the _Pilgrims of the Thames_ (1838). Egan died at
Pentonville on the 3rd of August 1849.

His son, Pierce Egan (1814-1880), illustrated his own and his father's
books, and wrote a score of novels of varying merit, of which _The Snake
in the Grass_ (1858) is perhaps the best.




EGBO, a secret society flourishing chiefly among the Efiks of the
Calabar district, West Africa. Egbo or Ekpe is a mysterious spirit who
lives in the jungle and is supposed to preside at the ceremonies of the
society. Only males can join, boys being initiated about the age of
puberty. Members are bound by oath of secrecy, and fees on entrance are
payable. The Egbo-men are ranked in seven or nine grades, for promotion
to each of which fresh initiation ceremonies, fees and oaths are
necessary. The society combines a kind of freemasonry with political and
law-enforcing aims. For instance any member wronged in an Egbo district,
that is one dominated by the society, has only to address an Egbo-man or
beat the Egbo drum in the Egbo-house, or "blow Egbo" as it is called,
i.e. sound the Egbo horn before the hut of the wrong-doer, and the whole
machinery of the society is put in force to see justice done. Formerly
the society earned as bad a name as most secret sects, from the
barbarous customs mingled with its rites; but the British authorities
have been able to make use of it in enforcing order and helping on
civilization. The Egbo-house, an oblong building like the nave of a
church, usually stands in the middle of the villages. The walls are of
clay elaborately painted inside and ornamented with clay figures in
relief. Inside are wooden images, sometimes of an obscene nature, to
which reverence is paid. Much social importance attaches to the highest
ranks of Egbo-men, and it is said that very large sums, sometimes more
than a thousand pounds, are paid to attain these dignities. At certain
festivals in the year the Egbo-men wear black wooden masks with horns
which it is death for any woman to look on.

  See Mary H. Kingsley, _West African Studies_ (1901); Rev. Robt. H.
  Nassau, _Fetichism in West Africa_ (1904); C. Partridge, _Cross River
  Natives_ (1905).




EGEDE, HANS (1686-1758), Norwegian missionary, was born in the vogtship
of Senjen, Norway, on the 31st of January 1686. He studied at the
university of Copenhagen, and in 1706 became pastor at Vaagen in the
Lofoten islands, but the study of the chronicles of the northmen having
awakened in him the desire to visit the colony of Northmen in Greenland,
and to convert them to Christianity, he resigned his charge in 1717; and
having, after great difficulty, obtained the sanction and help of the
Danish government in his enterprise, he set sail with three ships from
Bergen on the 3rd of May 1721, accompanied by his wife and children. He
landed on the west coast of Greenland on the 3rd of July, but found to
his dismay that the Northmen were entirely superseded by the Eskimo, in
whom he had no particular interest, and whose language he would be able
to master, if at all, only after years of study. But, though compelled
to endure for some years great privations, and at one time to see the
result of his labours almost annihilated by the ravages of small-pox, he
remained resolutely at his post. He founded the colony of Godthaab, and
soon gained the affections of the people. He converted many of them to
Christianity, and established a considerable commerce with Denmark.
Ill-health compelling him to return home in 1736, he was made principal
of a seminary at Copenhagen, in which workers were trained for the
Greenland mission; and from 1740 to 1747 he was superintendent of the
mission. He died on the 5th of November 1758. He is the author of a book
on the natural history of Greenland.

His work in Greenland was continued, on his retirement, by his son PAUL
EGEDE (1708-1789), who afterwards returned to Denmark and succeeded his
father as superintendent of the Greenland mission. Paul Egede also
became professor of theology in the mission seminary. He published a
Greenland-Danish-Latin dictionary (1750), Greenland grammar (1760) and
Greenland catechism (1756). In 1766 he completed the translation begun
by his father of the New Testament into the Greenland tongue; and in
1787 he translated Thomas a Kempis. In 1789 he published a journal of
his life in Greenland.




EGER, AQIBA (1761-1837), Jewish scholar, was for the last twenty-five
years of his life rabbi of Posen. He was a rigorous casuist of the old
school, and his chief works were legal notes on the Talmud and the code
of Qaro (q.v.). He believed that religious education was enough, and
thus opposed the party which favoured secular schools. He was a
determined foe of the reform movement, which began to make itself felt
in his time.




EGER (Czech, _Cheb_), a town of Bohemia, Austria, 148 m. W.N.W. of
Prague by rail. Pop. (1900) 23,665. It is situated on the river Eger, at
the foot of one of the spurs of the Fichtelgebirge, and lies in the
centre of a German district of about 40,000 inhabitants, who are
distinguished from the surrounding population by their costumes,
language, manners and customs. On the rock, to the N.W. of the town,
lies the Burg or Castle, built probably in the 12th century, and now in
ruins. It possesses a massive black tower, built of blocks of lava, and
in the courtyard is an interesting chapel, in Romanesque style with
fantastic ornamentations, which was finished in the 13th century. In the
banquet-room of this castle Wallenstein's officers Terzky, Kinsky, Illo
and Neumann were assassinated a few hours before Wallenstein himself was
murdered by Captain Devereux. The murder took place on the 25th of
February 1634 in the town-house, which was at that time the
burgomaster's house. The rooms occupied by Wallenstein have been
transformed since 1872 into a museum, which contains many historical
relics and antiquities of the town of Eger. The handsome and imposing St
Nicholas church was built in the 13th century and restored in 1892.
There is a considerable textile industry, together with the manufacture
of shoes, machinery and milling. Eger was the birthplace of the novelist
and playwright Braun von Braunthal (1802-1866). About 3 m. N.W. of Eger
is the well-known watering place of Franzensbad (q.v.).

The district of Eger was in 870 included in the new margraviate of East
Franconia, which belonged at first to the Babenbergs, but from 906 to
the counts of Vohburg, who took the title of margraves of Eger. By the
marriage, in 1149, of Adela of Vohburg with the emperor Frederick I.,
Eger came into the possession of the house of Swabia, and remained in
the hands of the emperors until the 13th century. In 1265 it was taken
by Ottakar II. of Bohemia, who retained it for eleven years. After being
repeatedly transferred from the one power to the other, according to the
preponderance of Bohemia or the empire, the town and territory were
finally incorporated with Bohemia in 1350, after the Bohemian king
became the emperor Charles IV. Several imperial privileges, however,
continued to be enjoyed by the town till 1849. It suffered severely
during the Hussite war, during the Swedish invasion in 1631 and 1647,
and in the War of the Austrian Succession in 1742.

  See Drivok, _Altere Geschichte der deutschen Reichstadt Eger und des
  Reichsgebietes Egerland_ (Leipzig, 1875).




EGER (Ger. _Erlau_, Med. Lat. _Agria_), a town of Hungary, capital of
the county of Heves, 90 m. E.N.E. of Budapest by rail. Pop. (1900)
24,650. It is beautifully situated in the valley of the river Eger, an
affluent of the Theiss, and on the eastern outskirts of the Matra
mountains. Eger is the see of an archbishopric, and owing to its
numerous ecclesiastical buildings has received the name of "the
Hungarian Rome." Amongst the principal buildings are the beautiful
cathedral in the Italian style, with a handsome dome 130 ft. high,
erected in 1831-1834 by the archbishop Ladislaus Pyrker (1772-1847); the
church of the Brothers of Mercy, opposite which is a handsome minaret,
115 ft. high, the remains of a mosque dating from the Turkish
occupation, other Roman Catholic churches, and an imposing Greek church.
The archiepiscopal palace; the lyceum, with a good library and an
astronomical observatory; the seminary for Roman priests; and the
town-hall are all noteworthy. On an eminence N.E. of the town, laid out
as a park, are the ruins of the old fortress, and a monument of Stephen
Dobo, the heroic defender of the town against the assaults of the Turks
in 1552. The chief occupation of the inhabitants is the cultivation of
the vineyards of the surrounding hills, which produce the red Erlauer
wine, one of the best in Hungary. To the S.W. of Eger, in the same
county of Heves, is situated the town of Gyongyos (pop. 15,878). It lies
on the south-western outskirts of the Matra mountains, and carries on a
brisk trade in the Erlauer wine, which is produced throughout the
district. The Hungarians defeated the Austrians at Gyongyos on the 3rd
of April 1849. To the S.W. of Gyongyos is situated the old town of
Hatvan (pop. 9698), which is now a busy railway junction, and possesses
several industrial establishments.

Eger is an old town, and owes its importance to the bishopric created by
King Stephen in 1010, which was one of the richest in the whole of
Hungary. In 1552 Eger resisted the repeated assaults of a large Turkish
force; in 1596, however, it was given up to the Turks by the Austrian
party in the garrison, and remained in their possession until 1687. It
was created an archbishopric in 1814. During the revolution of
1848-1849, Eger was remarkable for the patriotic spirit displayed by its
inhabitants; and it was here that the principal campaigns against the
Austrians were organized.




EGERIA, an ancient Italian goddess of springs. Two distinct localities
were regarded as sacred to her,--the grove of Diana Nemorensis at
Aricia, and a spring in the immediate neighbourhood of Rome at the Porta
Capena. She derives her chief importance from her legendary connexion
with King Numa, who had frequent interviews with her and consulted her
in regard to his religious legislation (Livy i. 19; Juvenal iii. 12).
These meetings took place on the spot where the sacred shield had fallen
from heaven, and here Numa dedicated a grove to the Camenae, like Egeria
deities of springs. After the death of Numa, Egeria was said to have
fled into the grove of Aricia, where she was changed into a spring for
having interrupted the rites of Diana by her lamentations (Ovid,
_Metam._ xv. 479). At Aricia there was also a Manius Egerius, a male
counterpart of Egeria. Her connexion with Diana Nemorensis, herself a
birth goddess, is confirmed by the fact that her aid was invoked by
pregnant women. She also possessed the gift of prophecy; and the
statement (Dion. Halic. ii. 60) that she was one of the Muses is due to
her connexion with the Camenae, whose worship was displaced by them.




EGERTON, SIR PHILIP DE MALPAS GREY, Bart. (1806-1881), English
palaeontologist, was born on the 13th of November 1806, the son of the
9th baronet. He was educated at Eton and Christ Church, Oxford, where he
graduated B.A. in 1828. While at college his interest in geology was
aroused by the lectures of W. Buckland, and by his acquaintance with
W.D. Conybeare. Subsequently when travelling in Switzerland with Lord
Cole (afterwards 3rd earl of Enniskillen) they were introduced to Prof.
L. Agassiz at Neufchatel, and determined to make a special study of
fossil fishes. During the course of fifty years they gradually gathered
together two of the largest and finest of private collections--that of
Sir Philip Grey Egerton being at Oulton Park, Tarporley, Cheshire. He
described the structure and affinities of numerous species in the
publications of the Geological Society of London, the _Geological
Magazine_ and the Decades of the Geological Survey; and in recognition
of his services the Wollaston medal was awarded to him in 1873 by the
Geological Society. He was elected F.R.S. in 1831, and was a trustee of
the British Museum. As a member of Parliament he represented the city of
Chester in 1830, the southern division of Cheshire from 1835 until 1868,
and the western division from 1868 to 1881. He died in London on the 6th
of April 1881. His collection of fossil fishes is now in the British
Museum.




EGG, AUGUSTUS LEOPOLD (1816-1863), English painter, was born on the 2nd
of May 1816 in London, where his father carried on business as a
gun-maker. He had some schooling at Bexley, and was not at first
intended for the artistic profession; but, developing a faculty in this
line, he entered in 1834 the drawing class of Mr Sass, and in 1836 the
school of the Royal Academy. His first exhibited picture appeared in
1837 at the Suffolk Street gallery. In 1838 he began exhibiting in the
Academy, his subject being a "Spanish Girl"; altogether he sent
twenty-seven works to this institution. In 1848 he became an associate
and in 1860 a full member of the Academy: he had considerable means,
apart from his profession. In 1857 he took a leading part in selecting
and arranging the modern paintings in the Art-Treasures Exhibition in
Manchester. His constitution being naturally frail, he went in 1853,
with Dickens and Wilkie Collins, to Italy for a short trip, and in 1863
he visited Algeria. Here he benefited so far as his chronic lung-disease
was concerned; but exposure to a cold wind while out riding brought on
an attack of asthma, from which he died on the 26th of March 1863 at
Algiers, near which city his remains were buried.

Egg was a gifted and well-trained painter of genre, chiefly in the way
of historical anecdote, or of compositions from the poets and novelists.
Among his principal pictures may be named: 1843, the "Introduction of
Sir Piercie Shafton and Halbert Glendinning" (from Scott's _Monastery_);
1846, "Buckingham Rebuffed"; 1848, "Queen Elizabeth discovers she is no
longer young"; 1850, "Peter the Great sees Catharine for the first
time"; 1854, "Charles I. raising the Standard at Nottingham" (a study);
1855, the "Life and Death of Buckingham"; 1857 and 1858, two subjects
from Thackeray's _Esmond_; 1858, "Past and Present, a triple picture of
a faithless wife"; 1859, the "Night before Naseby"; 1860, his last
exhibited work, the Dinner Scene from _The Taming of the Shrew_. The
Tate Gallery contains one of his earlier pictures, Patricio entertaining
two Ladies, from the _Diable boiteux_; it was painted in 1844.

Egg was rather below the middle height, with dark hair and a handsome
well-formed face; the head of Peter the Great (in the picture of Peter
and Catharine, which may be regarded as his best work, along with the
Life and Death of Buckingham) was studied, but of course considerably
modified, from his own countenance. He was manly, kind-hearted,
pleasant, and very genial and serviceable among brother-artists; social
and companionable, but holding mainly aloof from fashionable circles.
As an actor he had uncommon talent. He appeared among Dickens's company
of amateurs in 1852 in Lord Lytton's comedy _Not so Bad as we Seem_, and
afterwards in Wilkie Collins's _Frozen Deep_, playing the humorous part
of Job Want.




EGG (O.E. _aeg_, cf. Ger. _Ei_, Swed. _aegg_, and prob. Gr. [Greek:
oon], Lat. _ovum_), the female reproductive cell or ovum of animals,
which gives rise generally only after fertilization to the young. The
largest eggs are those of birds; and this because, to the minute
essential portion of the egg, or germ, from which the young bird grows,
there is added a large store of food-material--the yolk and white of the
egg--destined to nourish the growing embryo while the whole is enclosed
within a hard shell.

The relative sizes of eggs depend entirely on the amount of the
food-yolk thus enclosed with the germ; while the form and texture of the
outer envelope are determined by the nature of the environment to which
the egg is exposed. Where the food material is infinitesimal in quantity
the egg is either not extruded--the embryo being nourished by the
maternal tissues,--or it passes out of the parental body and gives rise
at once to a free-living organism or "larva" (see LARVAL FORMS), as in
the case of many lowly freshwater and marine animals. In such cases no
"egg" in the usual sense of the term is produced.

The number of eggs periodically produced by any given individual depends
on the risks of destruction to which they, and the young to which they
give rise, are exposed: not more than a single egg being annually laid
by some species, while with others the number may amount to millions.


_Birds' Eggs._--The egg of the bird affords, for general purposes, the
readiest example of the modifications imposed on eggs by the external
environment. Since it must be incubated by the warmth of the parent's
body, the outer envelope has taken the form of a hard shell for the
protection of the growing chick from pressure, while the dyes which
commonly colour the surface of this shell serve as a screen to hide it
from egg-eating animals.

Carbonate of lime forms the principal constituent of this shell; but in
addition phosphate of lime and magnesia are also present. In section,
this shell will be found to be made up of three more or less distinct
crystalline layers, traversed by vertical canals, whereby the shell is
made porous so as to admit air to the developing chick.

The outermost, or third, layer of this shell often takes the form of a
glaze, as of porcelain, as for example in the burnished egg of the
ostrich: or it may assume the character of a thick, chalky layer as in
some cuckoos (_Guira_, _Crotophaga ani_), cormorants, grebes and
flamingoes: while in some birds as in the auks, gulls and tinamous, this
outer layer is wanting; yet the tinamous have the most highly glazed
eggs of all birds, the second layer of the shell developing a surface
even more perfectly burnished than that formed by the outermost, third
layer in the ostrich.

While the eggs of some birds have the shell so thin as to be
translucent, e.g. kingfisher, others display considerable thickness, the
maximum being reached in the egg of the extinct _Aepyornis_.

Though in shape differing but little from that of the familiar hen's
egg, certain well-marked modifications of form are yet to be met with.
Thus the eggs of the plover are pear-shaped, of the sand-grouse more or
less cylindrical, of the owls and titmice spherical and of the grebes
biconical.

In the matter of coloration the eggs of birds present a remarkable
range. The pigments to which this coloration is due have been shown, by
means of their absorption spectra (Sorby, _Proc. Zool. Soc._, 1875), to
be seven in number. The first of these, oorhodeine, is brown-red in
tone, and rarely absent: the second and third, oocyanin, and banded
oocyanin, are of a beautiful blue, and though differing
spectroscopically give rise to the same product when oxidized: the
fourth and fifth are yellow, and rufous ooxanthine, the former combining
with oocyanin gives rise to the wonderful malachite green of the emu's
egg, while the latter occurs only in the eggs of tinamous: the sixth is
lichenoxanthine, a pigment not yet thoroughly known but present in the
shells of all eggs having a peculiar brick-red colour. Still less is
known of the seventh pigment which is, as yet, nameless. It is a
substance giving a banded absorption spectrum, and which, mixed with
other pigments, imparts an abnormally browner tint. The origin of these
pigments is yet uncertain, but it is probable that they are derived from
the haemoglobin or red colouring matter of the blood. This being so,
then the pigments of the egg-shell differ entirely in their nature from
those which colour the yolk or the feathers.

While many eggs are either colourless or of one uniform tint, the
majority have the surface broken up by spots or lines, or a combination
of both, of varying tints: the pigment being deposited as the egg passes
down the lower portion of the oviduct. That the egg during this passage
turns slowly on its long axis is shown by the fact that the spots and
lines have commonly a spiral direction; though some of the markings are
made during periods of rest, as is shown by their sharp outlines,
movement giving a blurred effect. Where the egg is pyriform, the large
end makes way for the smaller. Many eggs display, in addition to the
strongly marked spots, more or fewer fainter spots embedded in a deeper
layer of the shell, and hence such eggs are said to be "double-spotted,"
e.g. rails and plovers.

Among some species, as in birds of prey, the intensity of this
coloration is said to increase with age up to a certain point, when it
as gradually decreases. Frequently, especially where but two eggs are
laid (Newton), all the dye will be deposited, sometimes on the first,
sometimes on the last laid, leaving the other colourless. But although
of a number of eggs in a "clutch"--as the full complement of eggs in a
nest is called--no two are exactly alike, they commonly bear a very
close resemblance. Among certain species, however, which lay several
eggs, one of the number invariably differs markedly from the rest, as
for example in the eggs of the house-sparrow or in those of the
sparrow-hawk, where, of a clutch of six, two generally differ
conspicuously from the rest. Differing though these eggs do from the
rest of the clutch, all yet present the characters common to the
species. But the eggs of some birds, such as the Australian swamp quail,
_Synoecus australis_, present a remarkably wide range of variation in
the matter of coloration, no two clutches being alike, the extremes
ranging from pure white to eggs having a greenish ground colour and
rufous spots or blotches. But a still more interesting illustration of
variation equally marked is furnished by the chikor partridge (_Caccabis
chukar_), since here the variation appears to be correlated with the
geographical distribution of the species. Thus eggs taken in Greece are
for the most part cream-coloured and unspotted; those from the Grecian
Archipelago are generally spotted and blotched; while more to the
eastward spots are invariably present, and the blotches attain their
maximum development.

But in variability the eggs of the guillemot (_Lomvia troile_) exceed
all others: both in the hue of the ground colour and in the form of the
superimposed markings, these eggs exhibit a wonderful range for which no
adequate explanation has yet been given.

Individual peculiarities of coloration are commonly reproduced, not only
with this species but also in others, year after year.


  Significance of colour.

The coloration of the egg bears no sort of relation to the coloration of
the bird which lays it; but it bears on the other hand a more or less
direct relation to the nature of the environment during incubation.

White eggs may generally be regarded as representing the primitive type
of egg, since they agree in this particular with the eggs of reptiles.
And it will generally be found that eggs of this hue are deposited in
holes or in domed nests. So long indeed as nesting-places of this kind
are used will the eggs be white. And this because coloured eggs would be
invisible in dimly lighted chambers of this description, and therefore
constantly exposed to the risk of being broken by the sitting bird, or
rolling out of reach where the chamber was large enough to admit of
this, whereas white eggs are visible so long as they can be reached by
the faintest rays of light. Pigeons invariably lay white eggs; and while
some deposit them in holes others build an open nest, a mere platform
of sticks. These exceptions to the rule show that the depredations of
egg-eating animals are sufficiently guarded against by the overhanging
foliage, as well as by the great distance from the ground at which the
nest is built. Birds which have reverted to the more ancient custom of
nesting in holes after having developed pigmented eggs, have adopted the
device of covering the shell with a layer of chalky matter (e.g.
puffins), or, to put the case more correctly, they have been enabled to
maintain survival after their return to the more ancient mode of
nidification, because this reversion was accompanied by the tendency to
cover the pigmented surface of the shell with this light-reflecting
chalky incrustation.

Eggs which are deposited on the bare ground, or in other exposed
situations, are usually protectively coloured: that is to say, the hue
of the shell more or less completely harmonizes with the ground on which
the egg is placed. The eggs of the plover tribe afford the most striking
examples of this fact.

But the majority of birds deposit their eggs in a more or less
elaborately constructed nest, and in such cases the egg, so far from
being protectively coloured, often displays tints that would appear
calculated rather to attract the attention of egg-stealing animals;
bright blue or blue spotted with black being commonly met with. It may
be, however, that coloration of this kind is less conspicuous than is
generally supposed, but in any case the safety of the egg depends not so
much on its coloration as on the character of the nest, which, where
protective devices are necessary, must harmonize sufficiently with its
surroundings to escape observation from prowling egg-stealers of all
kinds.

The size of the egg depends partly on the number produced and partly on
the conditions determining the state of the young bird at hatching:
hence there is a great disparity in the relative sizes of the eggs of
different birds. Thus it will be found that young birds which emerge in
the world blind, naked and helpless are the product of relatively small
eggs, while on the contrary young hatched from relatively large eggs are
down-clad and active from birth.

The fact that the eggs must be brooded by the parent is also a
controlling factor in so far as number is concerned, for no more can be
hatched than can be covered by the sitting bird. Other factors, however,
less understood, also exercise a controlling influence in this matter.
Thus the ostrich lays from 12 to 16, the teal 15, the partridge 12-20,
while among many other species the number is strictly limited, as in the
case of the hornbills and guillemots, which lay but a single egg; the
apteryx, divers, petrels and pigeons never lay more than 2, while the
gulls and plovers never exceed 4. Tropical species are said to lay fewer
eggs than their representatives in temperate regions, and further
immature birds lay more and smaller eggs than when fully adult.

Partly owing to the uniformity of shape, size and texture of the shell,
the eggs of birds are by no means easy to distinguish, except in so far
as their family resemblances are concerned: that is to say, except in
particular cases, they cannot be specifically distinguished, and hence
they are of but little or no value for the purposes of classification.

Save only among the megapodes, all birds brood their eggs, the period of
incubation varying from 13 days, as in small passerine birds, to 8
weeks, as in the cassowary, though eggs of the rhea and of _Struthio_
hatch in from 5 to 6 weeks. But the megapodes deposit their eggs in
mounds of decaying vegetable matter or in sand in the neighbourhood of
hot springs, and there without further apparent care leave them. Where
the nestling is active from the moment of hatching the eggs have a
relatively longer incubation period than in cases where the nestlings
are for a long while helpless.


_Eggs of Mammals._--Only in the spiny ant-eater, or _Echidna_, and the
duck-billed platypus, or _Ornithorhynchus_, among the Mammalia, are the
eggs provided with a large store of yolk, enclosed within a shell, and
extruded to undergo development apart from the maternal tissues. In the
case of the echidna the eggs, two in number, are about as large as those
of a sparrow, similar in shape, and have a white, parchment-like shell.
After expulsion they are transferred by the beak of the mother to a
pouch resembling that of the marsupial kangaroos, and there they undergo
development. The _Ornithorhynchus_, on the other hand, lays from two to
four eggs, which in size and general appearance resemble those of the
echidna. They are, however, deposited in a loosely constructed nest at
the end of a long burrow and there brooded. In Marsupials, the eggs are
smaller than those of _Echidna_ and _Ornithorhynchus_, and they contain
a larger proportion of yolk than occurs in higher mammals.


_Eggs of Reptiles._--The eggs of reptiles are invariably provided with a
large amount of food yolk and enclosed with a firm test or shell, which
though generally parchment-like in texture may be calcareous as in
birds, as, for example, in many of the tortoises and turtles and in the
crocodiles.

Among reptiles the egg is always white or yellowish, while the number
laid often far exceeds that in the case of birds. The tuatara of New
Zealand, however, lays but ten--white hard-shelled, long and oval--at
intervals between November and January. The long intervals between the
appearance of the successive eggs is a characteristic feature of the
reptiles, but is met with among the birds only in the megapodes, which,
like the reptiles, do not "brood" their eggs.

Among the Chelonia the number of eggs varies from two to four in some of
the tortoises, to 200 in some of the turtles: while in the crocodiles
between 20 and 30 are produced, hard-shelled and white.

The eggs of the lizards are always white or yellowish, and generally
soft-shelled; but the geckos and the green lizard lay hard-shelled eggs.
Many of the soft-shelled eggs are remarkable for the fact that they
increase in size after extrusion, owing to the stretching of the
membranous shell by the growing embryo. In the matter of number lizards
are less prolific than many of the Chelonia, a dozen eggs being the
general number, though as many as thirty may be produced at a time, as
in the case of the common chameleon.

While as a general rule the eggs of lizards are laid in burrows or
buried, some are retained within the body of the parent until the young
are ready to emerge; or they may even hatch within the oviduct. This
occurs with some chameleons and some lizards, e.g. the slow-worm. The
common English lizard is also viviparous. Normally the young leaves the
egg immediately after its extrusion, but if by any chance this extrusion
is delayed they escape while yet in the oviduct.

The majority of the snakes lay eggs, but most of the vipers and the
aquatic snakes are viviparous, as also are a few terrestrial species.
The shell of the egg is always soft and parchment-like. As a rule the
number of eggs produced among the snakes is not large, twenty or thirty
being common, but some species of python lay as many as a hundred.
Generally, among the oviparous snakes the eggs are buried, but some
species of boas jealously guard them, enclosing them within the coils of
the body.


_Eggs of Amphibia._--Among the amphibia a greater variety obtains in the
matter of the investment of the egg, as well as in the number, size and
method of their disposal. The outer covering is formed by a toughening
of the surface of a thick gelatinous coat which surrounds the essential
parts of the egg. This coat in many species of salamander--using this
name in the wide sense--is produced into threads which serve either to
anchor the eggs singly or to bind them together in bunches.

Viviparity occurs both among the limbless and the tailed Amphibia, the
eggs hatching before they leave the oviduct or immediately after
extrusion. The number of young so produced is generally not large, but
the common salamander (_Salamandra maculosa_) may produce as many as
fifty at a birth, though fifteen is the more normal figure. When the
higher number is reached the young are relatively small and weak.

As a rule among the Amphibia the young leave the egg in the form of
larvae, generally known as "tadpoles"; but many species produce eggs
containing a sufficient amount of food material to enable the whole of
the larval phase to be completed before hatching.

Among the tailless Amphibia (frogs and toads) there are wide differences
in the number of eggs produced, while the methods by which these eggs
are disposed of present a marvellous variety.

As a rule vast quantities of eggs are shed by the female into the water
in the form of "spawn." In the common toad as many as 7000 eggs may be
extruded at a time. These leave the body in the form of two long
strings--one from each oviduct--of translucent globules, gelatinous in
texture, and enclosing a central sphere of yolk, the upper pole of which
is black. The spawn of the common frog differs from that of the toad in
that the eggs all adhere to form a huge jelly-like mass. But in many
species the number of eggs produced are few; and these may be
sufficiently stored with food-yolk to allow of the tadpole stage being
passed before hatching, as in frogs of the genus _Hylodes_. In many
cases the eggs are deposited out of the water and often in quite
remarkable ways.


_Eggs of Fishes._--The eggs of fishes present an extremely wide range of
form, and a no less extensive range in the matter of number. Both among
the cartilaginous and bony fishes viviparity occurs. Most of the sharks
and rays are viviparous, but in the oviparous species the eggs present
some interesting and peculiar forms. Large in size, the outer coat or
"shell" is in all cases horn-like and flexible, but differs greatly in
shape. Thus in the egg of the larger spotted dog-fish it is oblong in
shape, flattened from side to side, and has the angles produced into
long, slender tendrils. As the egg is laid the lower tendrils project
from the vent, and the mother rubs herself against some fixed body. The
tendrils soon catch fast in some slight projection, when the egg is
dragged forth there to remain till hatching takes place. A couple of
narrow slits at each corner of the upper end serve to admit fresh water
to the imprisoned embryo during the later stages of development; when
development is complete escape is made through the end of the shell. In
the rays or "skates," long spines take the place of tendrils, the egg
simply resting at the bottom of the sea. The empty egg-cases of the rays
are often found on the seashore, and are known as "Mermaids' purses."
The egg of the Port Jackson shark (_Cestracion_) is of enormous size,
pear-shaped, and provided with a spiral flange extending along the whole
length of the capsule. In the _Chimaera_ the egg is long, more or less
spindle-shaped, and produced on each side into a broad flange having a
fringed edge, so that the whole bears a close resemblance to a long
leaf, broad and notched at one end, pointed at the other. This likeness
to the seaweed among which it rests is doubtless a protective device,
akin to that of protectively coloured birds' eggs.

Among the bony fishes the eggs generally take the form of small spheres,
enclosed within a tough membrane or capsule. But they present many
important differences, being in some fishes heavy and remaining at the
bottom of the water, in other light and floating on the surface. While
in some species they are distributed separately, in others they adhere
together in masses. The eggs of the salmon, for example, are heavy, hard
and smooth, and deposited separately in a trough dug by the parent and
afterwards covered to prevent them from being carried away by the
stream. In the perch they are adhesive and form long band-like masses of
spawn adhering to water-plants. In the gobies the egg is spindle-shaped,
and attached by one end by means of a network of fibres, resembling
rootlets; while in the smelt the egg is loosely suspended by a membrane
formed by the peeling off of a part of the outer sheath of the capsule.
The eggs of the garfish (_Belone vulgaris_) and of the flying-fish of
the genus _Exocoetus_, attach themselves to foreign objects, or to one
another, by means of threads or cords developed at opposite poles of the
egg.

Among a number of fishes the eggs float at the surface of the sea, often
in enormous masses, when they are carried about at the mercy of tides
and currents. An idea of the size which such masses attain may be
gathered from the fact that the spawn of the angler-fish, _Lophius
piscatorius_, takes the form of a sheet from 2 to 3 ft. wide, and 30 ft.
long. Another remarkable feature of these floating eggs is their
transparency, inasmuch as they are extremely difficult to see, and hence
they probably escape the rapacious maws of spawn-eating animals. The cod
tribe and flat-fishes lay floating eggs of this description.

The maximum number of eggs laid by fishes varies greatly, some species
laying relatively few, others an enormous number. But in all cases the
number increases with the weight and age of the fish. Thus it has been
calculated that the number laid by the salmon is roughly about 1000 to
every pound weight of the fish, a 15 lb. salmon laying 15,000 eggs. The
sturgeon lays about 7,000,000; the herring 50,000; the turbot
14,311,000; the sole 134,000; the perch 280,000. Briefly, the number is
greatest where the risks of destruction are greatest.

The eggs of the degenerate fishes known as the lampreys and hag-fishes
are remarkable for the fact that in the latter they are large in size,
cylindrical in shape, and provided at each end with hooklets whereby
they adhere one to another; while in the lampreys they are extremely
small and embedded in a jelly.


_Molluscs._--Among the Mollusca, Crustacea and Insecta yolk-stored eggs
of very remarkable forms are commonly produced.

In variety, in this connexion, the Mollusca must perhaps be given the
first place. This diversity, indeed, is strikingly illustrated by the
eggs of the Cephalopoda. In the squids (_Loligo_), for example, the eggs
are enclosed in long cylindrical cases, of which there are several
hundreds, attached by one end to a common centre; the whole series
looking strangely like a rough mop-head. Each case, in such a cluster,
contains about 250 eggs, or about 40,000 in all. By way of contrast the
eggs of the true cuttle-fish (_Sepia_) are deposited separately, each
enclosed in a tough, black, pear-shaped capsule which is fastened by a
stalk to fronds of sea-weed or other object. They appear to be extruded
at short intervals, till the full complement is laid, the whole forming
a cluster looking like a bunch of grapes. The octopus differs yet again
in this matter, its eggs being very small, berry-like, and attached to a
stalk which runs through the centre of the mass.

The eggs of the univalve Mollusca are hardly less varied in the shapes
they take. In the common British _Purpura lapillus_ they resemble
delicate pink grains of rice set on stalks; in _Busycon_ they are
disk-shaped, and attached to a band nearly 3 ft. long. The eggs of the
shell-bearing slugs (_Testacella_) are large, and have the outer coat so
elastic that if dropped on a stone floor they will rebound several
inches; while some of the snails (_Bulimus_) lay eggs having a white
calcareous and slightly iridescent shell, in size and shape closely
resembling the egg of the pigeon. Some are even larger than the egg of
the wood-pigeon. The beautiful violet-snail (_Ianthina_)--a marine
species--carries its eggs on the under side of a gelatinous raft. No
less remarkable are the eggs of the whelk; since, like those of the
squids, they are not laid separately but enveloped in capsules, and
these to the number of many hundreds form the large, ball-like masses so
commonly met with on the seashore. When the eggs in these capsules
hatch, the crowd of embryos proceed to establish an internecine warfare,
devouring one another till only the strongest survives!

With the Mollusca, as with other groups of animals, where the eggs are
exposed to great risks they are small, produced in great numbers, and
give rise to larvae. This is well illustrated by the common oyster which
annually disperses about 60,000,000 eggs. But where the risk of
destruction is slight, the eggs are large and produce young differing
from the parent only in size, as in the case of the pigeon-like eggs of
_Bulimus_.


_Crustaceans._--Among the higher Crustacea, as a rule, the eggs are
carried by the female, attached to special appendages on the under side
of the body. But in some--Squillas--they are deposited in burrows.
Generally they are relatively small so that the young which emerge
therefrom differ markedly in appearance from the parents, but in
deep-sea and freshwater species the eggs are large, when the young, on
emerging, differ but little from the adults in appearance.


_Insects, &c._--The eggs of insects though minute, are also remarkable
for the great variety of form which they present, while they are
frequently objects of great beauty owing to the sculptured markings of
the shell. They are generally laid in clusters, either on the ground, on
the leaves of plants, or in the water. Some of the gnats (_Culex_) lay
them on the water. Cylindrical in shape they are packed closely
together, set on end, the whole mass forming a kind of floating raft.
Frequently, as in the case of the stick and leaf insect, the eggs are
enclosed in capsules of very elaborate shapes and highly ornamented.

As to the rest of the Invertebrata--above the Protozoa the eggs are laid
in water, or in damp places. In the former case they are as a rule
small, and give rise to larvae; while eggs hatched on land are sometimes
enclosed in capsules, "cocoons," as in the case of the earthworm, where
this capsule is filled with a milky white fluid, of a highly nutritious
character, on which the embryos feed.

Among some invertebrates two different kinds of eggs are laid by the
same individual. The water-flea, _Daphnia_ (a crustacean), lays two
kinds of eggs known as "summer" and "winter" eggs. The summer eggs are
carried by the female in a "brood-pouch" on the back. The "winter" eggs,
produced at the approach of winter, differ markedly in appearance from
the summer eggs, being larger, darker in colour, thicker shelled, and
enclosed in a capsule formed from the shell or carapace, of the parent's
body. "Winter eggs," however, may be produced in the height of summer.
While the "summer eggs" are unfertilized, the winter eggs are fertilized
by the male, and possess the remarkable power of lying dormant for
months or even years before they develop. The production of these two
kinds of eggs is a device to overcome the cold of winter, or the drying
up of the pools in which the species lives, during the heat of the
summer. The power of resistance which such eggs possess may be seen in
the fact that a sample of mud which had been kept dry for ten years
still contained living eggs. In deep water where neither drought nor
winter cold can seriously affect the _Daphnias_, they propagate all the
year round by unfertilized "summer" eggs.

  BIBLIOGRAPHY.--For further details on this subject the following
  authors should be consulted:--_Mammals_: F. E. Beddard, "Remarks on
  the Ovary of Echidna," _Proc. Roy. Phys. Soc. Edin._ vol. viii.
  (1885); W. H. Caldwell, "The Embryology of Monotremata and
  Marsupialia," _Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc._ vol. 178 (1887); E. B. Poulton,
  "The Structures connected with the Ovarian Ovum of the Marsupialia and
  Monotremata," _Quart. Journ. Micros. Sci._ vol. xxiv. (1884). _Birds,
  Systematic_:--H. Seebohm, _Coloured Figures of the Eggs of British
  Birds_ (1896); A. Newton, _Ootheca Wooleyana_ (1907); E. Oates, _Cat.
  Birds' Eggs Brit. Mus._ (appearing), vols. i.-iv. published.
  _General_:--A. Newton, _Dictionary of Birds_ (1896). _Colouring
  matter_:--Newbegin, _Colour in Nature_ (1898). _Reptiles and
  Amphibia_:--H. Gadow, "Reptiles," _Camb. Nat. Hist._ (1901); G. A.
  Boulenger, "The Tailless Batrachians of Europe," _Ray Soc._ (1896).
  _Fishes_:--Bridge and Boulenger, "Fishes, Ascidians, &c.," _Camb. Nat.
  Hist._ (1904); B. Dean, _Fishes Living and Fossil_ (1895); J. T.
  Cunningham, _Marketable Marine Fishes_ (1896). _Invertebrate_:--G. H.
  Carpenter, _Insects. Their Structure and Life_ (1899); L. C. Miall, _A
  History of Aquatic Insects_ (1895); T. R. R. Stebbing, _Crustacea_,
  Internat. Sci. series (1893); M. C. Cooke, "Mollusca," _Camb. Nat.
  Hist._ (1906). For further references to the above and other
  Invertebrate groups see various text-books on Entomology, Zoology.
       (W. P. P.)




EGGENBERG, HANS ULRICH VON, PRINCE (1568-1634), Austrian statesman, was
a son of Siegfried von Eggenberg (d. 1594), and began life as a soldier
in the Spanish service, becoming about 1596 a trusted servant of the
archduke of Styria, afterwards the emperor Ferdinand II. Having become a
Roman Catholic, he was soon the chancellor and chief adviser of
Ferdinand, whose election as emperor he helped to secure in 1619. He
directed the imperial policy during the earlier part of the Thirty
Years' War, and was in general a friend and supporter of Wallenstein,
and an opponent of Maximilian I., duke of Bavaria, and of Spain. He was
largely responsible for Wallenstein's return to the imperial service
early in 1632, and retired from public life just after the general's
murder in February 1634, dying at Laibach, on the 18th of October 1634.
Eggenberg's influence with Ferdinand was so marked that it was commonly
said that Austria rested upon three hills (_Berge_): Eggenberg,
Questenberg and Werdenberg. He was richly rewarded for his services to
the emperor. Having received many valuable estates in Bohemia and
elsewhere, he was made a prince of the Empire in 1623, and duke of
Krumau in 1625.

  See H. von Zwiedineck-Sudenhorst, _Hans Ulrich, Furst von Eggenberg_
  (Vienna, 1880); and F. Mares, _Beitrage zur Geschichte der Beziehungen
  des Fursten J. U. von Eggenberg zu Kaiser Ferdinand II und zu
  Waldstein_ (Prague, 1893).




EGGER, EMILE (1813-1885), French scholar, was born in Paris on the 18th
of July 1813. From 1840 till 1855 he was assistant professor, and from
1855 till his death professor of Greek literature in the Faculte; des
Lettres at Paris University. In 1854 he was elected a member of the
Academie des Inscriptions and in 1873 of the Conseil superieur de
l'instruction publique. He was a voluminous writer, a sound and
discerning scholar, and his influence was largely responsible for the
revival of the study of classical philology in France. His most
important works were _Essai sur l'histoire de la critique chez les
Grecs_ (1849), _Notions elementaires de grammaire comparee_ (1852),
_Apollonius Dyscole, essai sur l'histoire des theories grammalicales
dans l'antiquite_ (1854), _Memoires de litterature ancienne_ (1862),
_Memoires d'histoire ancienne et de philologie_ (1863), _Les Papyrus
grecs du Musee du Louvre et de la Bibliotheque Imperiale_ (1865),
_Etudes sur les traites publics chez les Grecs et les Romains_ (1866),
_L'Hellenisme en France_ (1869), _La Litterature grecque_ (1890). He was
also the author of _Observations et reflexions sur le developpement de
l'intelligence et du langage chez les enfants_ (1879). Egger died in
Paris on the 1st of September 1885.




EGGLESTON, EDWARD (1837-1902), American novelist and historian, was born
in Vevay, Indiana, on the 10th of December 1837, of Virginia stock.
Delicate health, by which he was more or less handicapped throughout his
life, prevented his going to college, but he was naturally a diligent
student. He was a Methodist circuit rider and pastor in Indiana and
Minnesota (1857-1866); associate editor (1866-1867) of _The Little
Corporal_, Chicago; editor of _The National Sunday School Teacher_,
Chicago (1867-1870); literary editor and later editor-in-chief of _The
Independent_, New York (1870-1871); and editor of _Hearth and Home_ in
1871-1872. He was pastor of the church of Christian Endeavour, Brooklyn,
in 1874-1879. From 1880 until his death on the 2nd of September 1902, at
his home on Lake George, New York, he devoted himself to literary work.
His fiction includes _Mr Blake's Walking Stick_ (1869), for children;
_The Hoosier Schoolmaster_ (1871); _The End of the World_ (1872); _The
Mystery of Metropolisville_ (1873); _The Circuit Rider_ (1874); _Roxy_
(1878); The _Hoosier Schoolboy_ (1883); _The Book of Queer Stories_
(1884), for children; _The Graysons_ (1888), an excellent novel; _The
Faith Doctor_ (1891); and _Duffels_ (1893), short stories. Most of his
stories portray the pioneer manners and dialect of the Central West, and
the _Hoosier Schoolmaster_ was one of the first examples of American
local realistic fiction; it was very popular, and was translated into
French, German and Danish. During the last third of his life Eggleston
laboured on a _History of Life in the United States_, but he lived to
finish only two volumes--_The Beginners of a Nation_ (1896) and _The
Transit of Civilization_ (1900). In addition he wrote several popular
compendiums of American history for schools and homes.

  See G. C. Eggleston, _The First of the Hoosiers_ (Philadelphia, 1903),
  and Meredith Nicholson, _The Hoosiers_ (1900).

His brother GEORGE CARY EGGLESTON (1839-   ), American journalist and
author, served in the Confederate army; was managing editor and later
editor-in-chief of _Hearth and Home_ (1871-1874); was literary editor of
the _New York Evening Post_ (1875-1881), literary editor and afterwards
editor-in-chief of the New York _Commercial Advertiser_ (1884-1889), and
editorial writer for _The World_ (New York) from 1889 to 1900. Most of
his books are stories for boys; others, and his best, are romances
dealing with life in the South especially in the Virginias and the
Carolinas--before and during the Civil War. Among his publications may
be mentioned: _A Rebel's Recollections_ (1874); _The Last of the
Flatboats_ (1900); _Camp Venture_ (1900); _A Carolina Cavalier_ (1901);
_Dorothy South_ (1902); _The Master of Warlock_ (1903); _Evelyn Byrd_
(1904); _A Daughter of the South_ (1905); _Blind Alleys_ (1906); _Love
is the Sum of it all_ (1907); _History of the Confederate War_ (1910);
and _Recollections of a Varied Life_ (1910).




EGHAM, a town in the Chertsey parliamentary division of Surrey, England,
on the Thames, 21 m. W.S.W. of London by the London & South Western
railway. Pop. (1901) 11,895. The church of St John the Baptist is a
reconstruction of 1817; it contains monuments by John Flaxman. Above the
right bank of the river a low elevation, Cooper's Hill, commands fine
views over the valley, and over Windsor Great Park to the west. On the
hill was the Royal Indian Civil Engineering College, commonly called
Cooper's Hill College, of which Sir George Tomkyns Chesney was the
originator and first president (1871). It educated men for the public
works, accounts, railways and telegraph departments of India, and
included a school of forestry; but it was decided, in the face of some
opposition, to close it in 1906, on the theory that it was unnecessary
for a college with such a specialized object to be maintained by the
government, in view of the readiness with which servants for these
departments could be recruited elsewhere. Part of the organization,
including the school of forestry, was transferred to Oxford University.
Cooper's Hill gives name to a famous poem of Sir John Denham (1642). A
large and handsome building houses the Royal Holloway College for Women
(1886), founded by Thomas Holloway; in the neighbourhood is the
sanatorium of the same founder (1885) for the treatment of mental
ailments, accommodating about 250 patients. The college for women,
surrounded by extensive grounds, commands a wide view from the wooded
slope on which it stands. The recreation hall, with its fine art
collection, is the most notable room in this handsome building, which
can receive 250 students. Within the parish, bordering the river, is the
field of Runnymede, which, with Magna Charta Island lying off it, is
famous in connexion with the signature of the charter by King John.
Virginia Water, a large and picturesque artificial lake to the south of
Windsor Great Park, is much frequented by visitors. It was formed under
the direction of the duke of Cumberland, about 1750, and was the work of
the brothers Thomas and Paul Sandby.




EGIN (Armenian _Agn_, "the spring"), an important town in the Mamuret
el-Aziz vilayet of Asiatic Turkey (altitude 3300 ft.). Pop. about
20,000, fairly equally divided between Armenian Christians and Moslems.
It is picturesquely situated in a theatre of lofty, abrupt rocks, on the
right bank of the western Euphrates, which is crossed by a wooden
bridge. The stone houses stand in terraced gardens and orchards, and the
streets are mere rock ladders. Egin was settled by Armenians who
emigrated from Van in the 11th century with Senekherim. On the 8th of
November 1895 and in the summer of 1896 many Armenians were massacred
here.     (D. G. H.)




EGLANTINE (E. Frisian, _egeltiere_; Fr. _aiglantier_), a plant-name of
which Dr R. C. A. Prior (_Popular Names of British Plants_, p. 70) says
that it "has been the subject of much discussion, both as to its exact
meaning and as to the shrub to which it properly belongs." The eglantine
of the herbalists was the sweet-brier, _Rosa rubiginosa_. The
signification of the word seems to be thorn-tree or thorn-bush, the
first two syllables probably representing the Anglo-Saxon _egla_,
_egle_, a prick or thorn, while the termination is the Dutch _tere_,
_taere_, a tree. Eglantine is frequently alluded to in the writings of
English poets, from Chaucer downwards. Milton, in _L'Allegro_, is
thought by the term "twisted eglantine" to denote the honeysuckle,
_Lonicera Periclymenum_, which is still known as eglantine in north-east
Yorkshire.




EGLINTON, EARLS OF. The title of earl of Eglinton has been held by the
famous Scottish family of Montgomerie since 1508. The attempts made to
trace the descent of this house to Roger of Montgomery, earl of
Shrewsbury (d. 1094), one of William the Conqueror's followers, will not
bear examination, and the sure pedigree of the family only begins with
Sir John Montgomerie, lord of Eaglesham, who fought at the battle of
Otterbourne in 1388 and died about 1398. His grandson, Sir Alexander
Montgomerie (d. c. 1460), was made a lord of the Scottish parliament
about 1445 as Lord Montgomerie, and Sir Alexander's great-grandson Hugh,
the 3rd lord (c. 1460-1545), was created earl of Eglinton, or Eglintoun,
in 1508. Hugh, who was a person of importance during the minority of
James V., was succeeded by his grandson Hugh (d. 1546), and then by the
latter's son Hugh (c. 1531-1585), who became 3rd earl of Eglinton. This
nobleman was a firm supporter of Mary queen of Scots, for whom he fought
at Langside, and of the Roman Catholic Church; his son and successor,
Hugh, was murdered in April 1586 by the Cunninghams, a family with which
his own had an hereditary blood feud. In 1612, by the death of Hugh, the
5th earl, the male line of the Montgomeries became extinct.

Having no children Earl Hugh had settled his title and estates on his
cousin, Sir Alexander Seton of Foulstruther (1588-1661), a younger son
of Robert Seton, 1st earl of Wintoun (c. 1550-1603), and his wife
Margaret, daughter of the 3rd earl of Eglinton. Alexander, who thus
became the 6th earl of Eglinton and took the name of Montgomerie, was
commonly called Greysteel; he was a prominent Covenanter and fought
against Charles I. at Marston Moor. Later, however, he supported the
cause of Charles II., and fell into the hands of Cromwell, who
imprisoned him. His fifth son, Robert Montgomerie (d. 1684), a soldier
of distinction, fought against Cromwell at Dunbar and at Worcester,
afterwards escaping from the Tower of London and serving in Denmark.
Robert's elder brother, Hugh, 7th earl of Eglinton (1613-1669), who also
fought against Cromwell, was the grandfather of Alexander, the 9th earl
(c. 1660-1729), who married, for his third wife, Susannah (1689-1780),
daughter of Sir Archibald Kennedy, Bart., of Culzean, a lady celebrated
for her wit and beauty. Alexander, the 10th earl (1723-1769), a son of
the 9th earl, was one of the first of the Scottish landowners to carry
out improvements on his estates. He was shot near Ardrossan by an excise
officer named Mungo Campbell on the 24th of October 1769. His brother
and successor, Archibald, the 11th earl (1726-1796), raised a regiment
of Highlanders with which he served in America during the Seven Years'
War. As he left no male issue he was succeeded in the earldom by his
kinsman Hugh Montgomerie (1739-1819), a descendant of the 6th earl, who
was created a peer of the United Kingdom as Baron Ardrossan in 1806.
Before succeeding to the earldom Hugh had served in the American war and
had been a member of parliament; after this event he began to rebuild
Eglinton castle on a magnificent scale and to construct a harbour at
Ardrossan.

This earl's successor was his grandson, Archibald William, the 13th earl
(1812-1861), who was born at Palermo on the 29th of September 1812. His
father was Archibald, Lord Montgomerie (1773-1814), the eldest son of
the 12th earl, and his mother was Mary (d. 1848), a daughter of the 11th
earl. Educated at Eton, the young earl's main object of interest for
some years was the turf; he kept a large racing stud and won success and
reputation in the sporting world. In 1839 his name became more widely
known in connexion with the famous tournament which took place at
Eglinton castle and is said to have cost him L30,000 or L40,000. This
was made the subject of much ridicule and was partly spoiled by the
unfavourable weather, the rain falling in torrents. Yet it was a real
tournament and the "knights" broke their spears in the orthodox way.
Prince Louis Napoleon (Napoleon III.) took part in it, and Lady Seymour,
a daughter of Thomas Sheridan and the wife of Lord Seymour, afterwards
12th duke of Somerset, was the queen of beauty. A list of the
challengers with an account of the jousts and the melee will be found in
the volume on the tournament written by John Richardson, with drawings
by J. H. Nixon. It is also described by Disraeli in _Endymion_. Eglinton
was a staunch Tory, and in February 1852 he became lord-lieutenant of
Ireland under the earl of Derby. He retired with the ministry in the
following December, having by his princely hospitality made himself one
of the most popular of Irish viceroys. When Derby returned to office in
February 1858 he was again appointed lord-lieutenant, and he discharged
the duties of this post until June 1859. In this year he was created
earl of Winton, an earldom which had been held by his kinsfolk, the
Setons, from 1600 until 1716, when George Seton, the 5th earl (c.
1678-1749), was deprived of his honours for high treason. The earl died
on the 4th of October 1861, and was succeeded by his eldest son
Archibald William (1841-1892). When this earl died in 1892 his younger
brother George Arnulph (b. 1848) became 15th earl of Eglinton and 3rd
earl of Winton.

  See Sir W. Fraser, _Memorials of the Montgomeries, earls of Eglinton_
  (1859).




EGMONT, EARLS OF. John Perceval, 1st earl of Egmont (1683-1748), Irish
politician, and partner with J. E. Oglethorpe in founding the American
colony of Georgia, was created earl in 1733. He claimed descent from the
Egmonts of Flanders, but his title was taken from the place in County
Cork where the family residence stood. Its name of Burton House, and
that of Burton manor which formed part of the family estates, were a
reminiscence of Burton in Somerset, where was the earlier English family
property of his great-great-grandfather Richard Perceval (1550-1620),
Burghley's secret agent, and author of a Spanish dictionary published in
1591, whose son Sir Philip Perceval (1605-1647) acquired the Irish
estates by judicious use of his opportunities as commissioner for land
titles and of his interest at court. Sir Philip's son John, grandfather
of the 1st earl, was made a baronet in 1661. The first earl of Egmont
(who had been made Baron Perceval in 1715, and Viscount Perceval in
1723) is chiefly important for his connexion with the colonization of
Georgia, and for his voluminous letters and writings on biography and
genealogy.

John Perceval, 2nd earl of Egmont (1711-1770), his eldest son, was an
active politician, first lord of the admiralty (1763-1766), and
political pamphleteer, and like his father an ardent genealogist. He was
twice married, and had eight sons and eight daughters. One of his
younger sons was Spencer Perceval, prime minister of England. His eldest
son succeeded as 3rd earl, and the eldest by his second marriage (with
Catherine Compton, baroness of Arden in Ireland) was in 1802 created
Baron Arden of the United Kingdom, a title which subsequently became
merged in the Egmont earldom.




EGMONT (EGMOND), LAMORAL, COUNT OF, prince of Gavre (1522-1568), was
born in Hainaut in 1522. He was the younger of the two sons of John IV.,
count of Egmont, by his wife Francoise of Luxemburg, princess of Gavre.
On the death of his elder brother Charles, about 1541, he succeeded to
his titles and estates. In this year he served his apprenticeship as a
soldier in the expedition of the emperor Charles V. to Algiers,
distinguishing himself in the command of a body of cavalry. In 1544 he
married Sabina, sister of the elector palatine Frederick III., and the
wedding was celebrated at Spires with great pomp in the presence of the
emperor and his brother Ferdinand, afterwards emperor. Created knight of
the Golden Fleece in 1546, he accompanied Philip of Spain in his tour
through the Netherland towns, and in 1554 he went to England at the head
of a special embassy to ask the hand of Mary of England for Philip, and
was afterwards present at the wedding ceremony at Winchester. In the
summer of 1557 Egmont was appointed commander of the Flemish cavalry in
the war between Spain and France; and it was by his vehement persuasion
that the battle of St Quentin was fought. The victory was determined by
the brilliant charge that he led against the French. The reputation
which he won at St Quentin was raised still higher in 1558, when he
encountered the French army under de Thermes at Gravelines, on its march
homewards after the invasion of Flanders, totally defeated it, and took
Marshal de Thermes prisoner. The battle was fought against the advice of
the duke of Alva, and the victory made Alva Egmont's enemy. But the
count now became the idol of his countrymen, who looked upon him as the
saviour of Flanders from the devastations of the French. He was
nominated by Philip stadtholder of Flanders and Artois. At the
conclusion of the war by the treaty of Cateau Cambresis, Egmont was one
of the four hostages selected by the king of France as pledges for its
execution.

The attempt made by King Philip to convert the Netherlands into a
Spanish dependency and to govern it by Spanish ministers excited the
resentment of Egmont and other leading members of the Netherlands
aristocracy. Between him and Cardinal Granvella, the all-powerful
minister of the regent Margaret of Parma, there was no love lost. As a
member of the council of state Egmont joined the prince of Orange in a
vigorous protest addressed to Philip (1561) against the autocratic
proceedings of the minister; and two years later he again protested in
conjunction with the prince of Orange and Count Horn. In the spring of
1564 Granvella left the Netherlands, and the malcontent nobles once more
took their places in the council of state. The resolve, however, of
Philip to enforce the decrees of the council of Trent throughout the
Netherlands once more aroused their resentment. Although himself a good
Catholic, Egmont had no wish to see the Spanish Inquisition established
in his native country. Orange, Egmont and others were convinced that the
enforcement of the decrees in the Netherlands was impossible, and, in
January 1665, Egmont accepted a special mission to Spain to make known
to Philip the state of affairs and the disposition of the people. At
Madrid the king gave him an ostentatiously cordial reception, and all
the courtiers vied with one another in lavishing professions of respect
upon him. They knew his vain and somewhat unstable character, and hoped
to win him over without conceding anything to the wishes of the
Netherlanders. The king gave him plenty of flatteries and promises, but
steadily evaded any serious discussion of the object of his mission, and
Egmont finally returned home without having accomplished anything. At
the same time Philip sent further instructions to the regent to abate
nothing of the severity of the persecution.

Egmont was naturally indignant at the treatment he had received, while
the terrors of the Inquisition were steadily rousing the people to a
state of frenzied excitement. In 1566 a confederacy of the lesser
nobility was formed (_Les Gueux_) whose principles were set out in a
document known as the Compromise. From this league Egmont held aloof; he
declined to take any step savouring of actual disloyalty to his
sovereign. He withdrew to his government of Flanders, and as stadtholder
took active measures for the persecution of heretics. But in the eyes of
Philip he had long been a marked man. The Spanish king had temporized
only until the moment arrived when he could crush opposition by force.
In the summer of 1567 the duke of Alva was despatched to the Netherlands
at the head of an army of veterans to supersede the regent Margaret and
restore order in the discontented provinces. Orange fled to Germany
after having vainly warned Egmont and Horn of the dangers that
threatened them. Alva was at pains to lull their suspicions, and then
suddenly seized them both and threw them in the castle of Ghent. Their
trial was a farce, for their fate had already been determined before
Alva left Spain. After some months of imprisonment they were removed to
Brussels, where sentence was pronounced upon them (June 4) by the
infamous Council of Blood erected by Alva. They were condemned to death
for high treason. It was in vain that the most earnest intercessions
were made in behalf of Egmont by the emperor Maximilian, by the knights
of the order of the Golden Fleece, by the states of Brabant, and by
several of the German princes. Vain, too, was the pathetic pleading of
his wife, who with her eleven children was reduced to want, and had
taken refuge in a convent. Egmont was beheaded at Brussels in the square
before the town hall on the day after his sentence had been publicly
pronounced (June 5, 1568). He met his fate with calm resignation; and in
the storm of terror and exasperation to which this tragedy gave rise
Egmont's failings were forgotten, and he and his fellow-victim to
Spanish tyranny were glorified in the popular imagination as martyrs of
Flemish freedom. From this memorable event, which Goethe made the theme
of his play _Egmont_ (1788), is usually dated the beginning of the
famous revolt of the Netherlands. In 1865 a monument to Counts Egmont
and Horn, by Fraiken, was erected on the spot where they were beheaded.

  BIBLIOGRAPHY.--T. Juste, _Le Comte d'Egmont et le comte de Hornes_
  (Brussels, 1862), _Les Pays-Bas sous Philippe II_, 1555-1565 (2 vols.,
  Brussels, 1855); J. L. Motley, _Rise of the Dutch Republic_, 1555-1584
  (3 vols., London, 1856); J. P. Blok, _History of the People of the
  Netherlands_ (tr. from Dutch), vol. iii. (New York, 1900); R. Fruin,
  _Het voorspel van den tastigjarigen oorlag_ (Amsterdam, 1866); E.
  Marx, _Studien zur Geschichte des niederlandischen Aufstandes_
  (Leipzig, 1902).     (G. E.)




EGOISM (from Gr. and Lat. _ego_, I, the 1st personal pronoun), a modern
philosophical term used generally, in opposition to "Altruism," for any
ethical system in which the happiness or the good of the individual is
the main criterion of moral action. Another form of the word, "Egotism,"
is really interchangeable, though in ordinary language it is often used
specially (and similarly "egoism," as in George Meredith's _Egoist_) to
describe the habit of magnifying one's self and one's achievements, or
regarding all things from a selfish point of view. Both these ideas
derive from the original meaning of _ego_, myself, as opposed to
everything which is outside myself. This antithesis of ego and non-ego,
self and not-self, may be understood in several senses according to the
connexion in which it is used. Thus the self may be held to include
one's family, property, business, and an indefinitely wider range of
persons or objects in which the individual's interest is for the moment
centred, i.e. everything which I can call "mine." In this, its widest,
sense "a man's Self is the sum total of all that he _can_ call his" (Wm.
James, _Principles of Psychology_, chap x.). This self may be divided up
in many ways according to the various forms in which it may be
expressed. Thus James (ibid.) classifies the various "selves" as the
material, the spiritual, the social and the "pure." Or again the self
may be narrowed down to a man's own person, consisting of an individual
mind and body. In the true philosophical sense, however, the conception
of the ego is still further narrowed down to the individual
consciousness as opposed to all that is outside it, i.e. can be its
object. This conception of the self belongs mainly to metaphysics and
involves the whole problem of the relation between subject and object,
the nature of reality, and the possibility of knowledge of self and of
object. The ordinary idea of the self as a physical entity, obviously
separate from others, takes no account of the problem as to how and in
what sense the individual is conscious of himself; what is the relation
between subject and object in the phenomenon of self-consciousness, in
which the mind reflects upon itself both past and present? The mind is
in this case both subject and object, or, as William James puts it, both
"I" and "me." The phenomenon has been described in various ways by
different thinkers. Thus Kant distinguished the two selves as rational
and empirical, just as he distinguished the two egos as the noumenal or
real and the phenomenal from the metaphysical standpoint. A similar
distinction is made by Herbart. Others have held that the self has a
complex content, the subject self being, as it were, a fuller expression
of the object-self (so Bradley); or again the subject self is the active
content of the mind, and the object self the passive content which for
the moment is exciting the attention. The most satisfactory and also the
most general view is that consciousness is complex and unanalysable.

The relation of the self to the not-self need not to be treated here
(see METAPHYSICS). It may, however, be pointed out that in so far as an
object is cognized by the mind, it becomes in a sense part of the
complex self-content. In this sense the individual is in himself his own
universe, his whole existence being, in other words, the sum total of
his psychic relations, and nothing else being _for him_ in existence at
all. A similar idea is prominent in many philosophico-religious systems
wherein the idea of God or the Infinite is, as it were, the union of the
ego and the non-ego, of subject and object. The self of man is regarded
as having limitations, whereas the Godhead is infinite and
all-inclusive. In many mystical Oriental religions the perfection of the
human self is absorption in the infinite, as a ripple dies away on the
surface of water. The problems of the self may be summed up as follows.
The psychologist investigates the ideal construction of the self, i.e.
the way in which the conception of the self arises, the different
aspects or contents of the self and the relation of the subject to the
object self. At this point the epistemologist takes up the question of
empirical knowledge and considers the kind of validity, if any, which it
can possess. What existence has the known object for the knowing
subject? The result of this inquiry is generally intellectual scepticism
in a greater or less degree, namely, that the object has no existence
for the knower except a relative one, i.e. in so far as it is "known"
(see RELATIVITY OF KNOWLEDGE). Finally the metaphysician, and in another
sphere the theologian, consider the nature of the pure or transcendental
self apart from its relations, i.e. the absolute self.

In ethics, egoistic doctrines disregard the ultimate problems of
selfhood, and assume the self to consist of a man's person and those
things in which he is or ought to be directly interested. The general
statement that such doctrines refer all moral action to criteria of the
individual's happiness, preservation, moral perfection, raises an
obvious difficulty. Egoism merely asserts that the self is all-important
in the application of moral principles, and does not in any way supply
the material of these principles. It is a purely formal direction, and
as such merely an adjunct to a substantive ethical criterion. A
practical theory of ethics seeks to establish a particular moral ideal;
if it is an absolute criterion, then the altruist would place first the
attainment of that ideal by others, while the egoist would seek it for
himself. The same is true of ethical theories which may be described as
material. Of the second type are those, e.g. of Hobbes and Spinoza,
which advocate self-preservation as the ideal, as contrasted with modern
evolutionist moralists who advocate race-preservation. Again, we may
contrast the early Greek hedonists, who bade each man seek the greatest
happiness (of whatever kind), with modern utilitarian and social
hedonists, who prefer the greatest good or the greatest happiness of the
greatest number. It is with hedonistic and other empirical theories that
egoism is generally associated. As a matter of fact, however, egoism has
been no less prominent in intuitional ethics. Thus the man who seeks
only or primarily his own moral perfection is an egoist par excellence.
Such are ascetics, hermits and the like, whose whole object is the
realization of their highest selves.

The distinction of egoistical and altruistic action is further
complicated by two facts. In the first place, many systems combine the
two. Thus Christian ethics may be said to insist equally on duty to self
and duty to others, while crudely egoistic systems become unworkable if
a man renders himself obnoxious to his fellows. On the other hand, every
deliberate action based on an avowedly altruistic principle necessarily
has a reference to the agent; if it is right that A should do a certain
action for the benefit of B, then it tends to the moral self-realization
of A that he should do it. Upon whatsoever principle the rightness of an
action depends, its performance is right _for the agent_. The
self-reference is inevitable in every action in so far as it is regarded
as voluntary and chosen as being of a particular moral quality.

It is this latter fact which has led many students of human character to
state that men do in fact aim at the gratification of their personal
desires and impulses. The laws of the state and the various rules of
conduct laid down by religion or morality are merely devices adopted for
general convenience. The most remarkable statement of this point of view
is that of Friedrich Nietzsche, who went so far as to denounce all forms
of self-denial as cowardice:--let every one who is strong seek to make
himself dominant at the expense of the weak.




EGORIEVSK, a town of Russia, in the government of Ryazan, 70 m. by rail
E.S.E. of Moscow, by a branch line (15 m.) connecting with the Moscow to
Ryazan main line. The cotton mills and other factories give occupation
to 6000 persons. Egorievsk has important fairs for grain, hides, &c.,
which are exported. Pop. (1897) 23,932.




EGREMONT, EARLS OF. In 1749 Algernon Seymour, 7th duke of Somerset, was
created earl of Egremont, and on his childless death in February 1750
this title passed by special remainder to his nephew, Sir Charles
Wyndham or Windham, Bart. (1710-1763), a son of Sir William Wyndham of
Orchard Wyndham, Somerset. Charles, who had succeeded to his father's
baronetcy in 1740, inherited Somerset's estates in Cumberland and
Sussex. He was a member of parliament from 1734 to 1750, and in October
1761 he was appointed secretary of state for the southern department in
succession to William Pitt. His term of office, during which he acted in
concert with his brother-in-law, George Grenville, was mainly occupied
with the declaration of war on Spain and with the negotiations for peace
with France and Spain, a peace the terms of which the earl seems to have
disliked. He was also to the fore during the proceedings against Wilkes,
and he died on the 21st of August 1763. Horace Walpole perhaps rates
Egremont's talents too low when he says he "had neither knowledge of
business, nor the smallest share of parliamentary abilities."

The 2nd earl's son and successor, George O'Brien Wyndham (1751-1837),
was more famous as a patron of art and an agriculturist than as a
politician, although he was not entirely indifferent to politics. For
some time the painter Turner lived at his Sussex residence, Petworth
House, and in addition to Turner, the painter Leslie, the sculptor
Flaxman and other talented artists received commissions from Egremont,
who filled his house with valuable works of art. Generous and
hospitable, blunt and eccentric, the earl was in his day a very
prominent figure in English society. Charles Greville says, "he was
immensely rich and his munificence was equal to his wealth"; and again
that in his time Petworth was "like a great inn." The earl died
unmarried on the 11th of November 1837, and on the death of his nephew
and successor, George Francis Wyndham, the 4th earl (1785-1845), the
earldom of Egremont became extinct. Petworth, however, and the large
estates had already passed to George Wyndham (1787-1869), a natural son
of the 3rd earl, who was created Baron Leconfield in 1859.




EGREMONT, a market town in the Egremont parliamentary division of
Cumberland, England, 5 m. S.S.E. of Whitehaven, on a joint line of the
London & North Western and Furness railways. Pop. of urban district
(1901) 5761. It is pleasantly situated in the valley of the Ehen. Ruins
of a castle command the town from an eminence. It was founded c. 1120 by
William de Meschines; it is moated, and retains a Norman doorway and
some of the original masonry, as well as fragments of later date. The
church of St Mary is a modern reconstruction embodying some of the
Norman features of the old church. Iron ore and limestone are raised in
the neighbourhood.

It seems impossible to find any history for Egremont until after the
Norman Conquest, when Henry I. gave the barony of Coupland to William de
Meschines, who erected a castle at Egremont around which the town grew
into importance. The barony afterwards passed by marriage to the
families of Lucy and Multon, and finally came to the Percys, earls of
Northumberland, from whom are descended the present lords of the manor
of Egremont. The earliest evidence that Egremont was a borough occurs in
a charter, granted by Richard de Lucy in the reign of King John, which
gave the burgesses right to choose their reeve, and set out the customs
owing to the lord of the manor, among which was that of providing twelve
armed men at his castle in the time of war. The borough was represented
by two members in the parliament of 1295, but in the following year was
disfranchised, on the petition of the burgesses, on account of the
expense of sending members. In 1267 Henry III. granted Thomas de Multon
a market every Wednesday at Egremont, and a fair every year on the eve,
day and morrow of the Nativity of the Virgin Mary. In the _Quo Warranto_
rolls he is found to have claimed by prescription another weekly market
on Saturday. The market rights were purchased from Lord Leconfield in
1885, and the market on Saturday is still held. Richard de Lucy's
charter shows that dyeing, weaving and fulling were carried on in the
town in his time.




EGRESS (Lat. _egressus_, going out), in astronomy, the end of the
apparent transit of a small body over the disk of a larger one;
especially of a transit of a satellite of Jupiter over the disk of that
planet. It designates the moment at which the smaller body is seen to
leave the limb of the other.




EGYPT, a country forming the N.E. extremity of Africa.[1] In the
following account a division is made into (I.) _Modern Egypt_, and (II.)
_Ancient Egypt_; but the history from the earliest times is given as a
separate section (III.).

  Section I. includes Geography, Economics, Government, Inhabitants,
  Finance and Army. Section II. is subdivided into:--(A) Exploration and
  Research; (B) The Country in Ancient Times; (C) Religion; (D) Language
  and Writing; (E) Art and Archaeology; (F) Chronology. Section III. is
  divided into three main periods:--(1) Ancient History; (2) the
  Mahommedan Period; (3) Modern History (from Mehemet Ali).


I. MODERN EGYPT

_Boundaries and Areas._--Egypt is bounded N. by the Mediterranean, S. by
the Anglo-Egyptian Sudan, N.E. by Palestine, E. by the Red Sea, W. by
Tripoli and the Sahara. The western frontier is ill-defined. The
boundary line between Tripoli and Egypt is usually taken to start from a
point in the Gulf of Sollum and to run S. by E. so as to leave the oasis
of Siwa to Egypt. South of Siwa the frontier, according to the Turkish
firman of 1841, bends eastward, approaching the cultivated Nile-land
near Wadi Halfa, i.e. the southern frontier. This southern frontier is
fixed by agreement between Great Britain and Egypt at the 22 deg. N. The
N.E. frontier is an almost direct line drawn from Taba, near the head of
the Gulf of Akaba, the eastern of the two gulfs into which the Red Sea
divides, to the Mediterranean at Rafa in 34 deg. 15' E. The peninsula of
Sinai, geographically part of Asia, is thus included in the Egyptian
dominions. The total area of the country is about 400,000 sq. m., or
more than three times the size of the British Isles. Of this area
14/15ths is desert. Canals, roads, date plantations, &c., cover 1900 sq.
m.; 2850 sq. m. are comprised in the surface of the Nile, marshes,
lakes, &c. A line corresponding with the 30 deg. N., drawn just S. of
Cairo, divides the country into Lower and Upper Egypt, natural
designations in common use, Lower Egypt being the Delta and Upper Egypt
the Nile valley. By the Arabs Lower Egypt is called Er-Rif, the
cultivated or fertile; Upper Egypt Es Sa'id, the happy or fortunate.
Another division of the country is into Lower, Middle and Upper Egypt,
Middle Egypt in this classification being the district between Cairo and
Assiut.

_General Character._--The distinguishing features of Egypt are the Nile
and the desert. But for the river there would be nothing to
differentiate the country from other parts of the Sahara. The Nile,
however, has transformed the land through which it passes. Piercing the
desert, and at its annual overflow depositing rich sediment brought from
the Abyssinian highlands, the river has created the Delta and the
fertile strip in Upper Egypt. This cultivable land is Egypt proper; to
it alone is applicable the ancient name--"the black land." The _Misr_ of
the Arabs is restricted to the same territory. Beyond the Nile valley
east and west stretch great deserts, containing here and there fertile
oases. The general appearance of the country is remarkably uniform. The
Delta is a level plain, richly cultivated, and varied alone by the lofty
dark-brown mounds of ancient cities, and the villages set in groves of
palm-trees, standing on mounds often, if not always, ancient. Groves of
palm-trees are occasionally seen besides those around the villages, but
other trees are rare. In Upper Egypt the Nile valley is very narrow and
is bounded by mountains of no great height. They form the edge of the
desert on either side of the valley, of which the bottom is level rock.
The mountains rarely take the form of peaks. Sometimes they approach the
river in bold promontories, and at others are divided by the dry beds of
ancient watercourses. The bright green of the fields, the reddish-brown
or dull green of the great river, contrasting with the bare yellow
rocks, seen beneath a brilliant sun and a deep-blue sky, present views
of great beauty. In form the landscape varies little and is not
remarkable; in colour its qualities are always splendid, and under a
general uniformity show a continual variety.

  _The Coast Region._--Egypt has a coast-line of over 600 m. on the
  Mediterranean and about 1200 m. on the Red Sea. The Mediterranean
  coast extends from the Gulf of Sollum on the west to Rafa on the east.
  From the gulf to the beginning of the Delta the coast is rock-bound,
  but slightly indented, and possesses no good harbourage. The cliffs
  attain in places a height of 1000 ft. They are the termination of a
  stony plateau, containing several small oases, which southward joins
  the more arid and uninhabitable wastes of the Libyan Desert. The Delta
  coast-line, composed of sandhills and, occasionally, limestone rocks,
  is low, with cape-like projections at the Nile mouths formed by the
  river silt. Two bays are thus formed, the western being the famous Bay
  of Aboukir. It is bounded W. by a point near the ancient Canopic
  mouth, eastward by the Rosetta mouth. Beyond the Delta eastward the
  coast is again barren and without harbours. It rises gradually
  southward, merging into the plateau of the Sinai peninsula. The Red
  Sea coast is everywhere mountainous. The mountains are the northern
  continuation of the Abyssinian table-land, and some of the peaks are
  over 6000 ft. above the sea. The highest peaks, going from north to
  south, are Jebels Gharib, Dukhan, Es Shayib, Fatira, Abu Tiur, Zubara
  and Hammada (Hamata). The coast has a general N.N.W. and S.S.E. trend,
  and, save for the two gulfs into which it is divided by the massif of
  Sinai, is not deeply indented. Where the frontier between Egypt and
  the Sudan reaches the sea is Ras Elba (see further RED SEA).

  _The Nile Valley_ (see also NILE).--Entering Egypt proper, a little
  north of the Second Cataract, the Nile flows through a valley in
  sandstone beds of Cretaceous age as far as 25 deg. N., and throughout
  this part of its course the valley is extremely narrow, rarely
  exceeding 2 m. in width. At two points, namely, Kalabsha--the valley
  here being only 170 yds. wide and the river over 100 ft. deep--and
  Assuan (First Cataract), the course of the river is interrupted by
  outcrops of granites and other crystalline rocks, which have been
  uncovered by the erosion of the overlying sandstone, and to-day form
  the mass of islands, with numerous small rapids, which are described
  not very accurately as cataracts; no good evidence exists in support
  of the view that they are the remains of a massive barrier, broken
  down and carried away by some sudden convulsion. From 25 deg. N.
  northwards for 518 m. the valley is of the "rift-valley" type, a level
  depression in a limestone plateau, enclosed usually by steep cliffs,
  except where the tributary valleys drained into the main valley in
  early times, when there was a larger rainfall, and now carry off the
  occasional rainstorms that burst on the desert. The cliffs are highest
  between Esna and Kena, where they reach 1800 ft. above sea-level. The
  average width of the cultivated land is about 10 m., of which the
  greater part lies on the left (western) bank of the river; and outside
  this is a belt, varying from a few hundred yards to 3 or 4 m., of
  stony and sandy ground, reaching up to the foot of the limestone
  cliffs, which rise in places to as much as 1000 ft. above the valley.
  This continues as far as 29 deg. N., after which the hills that close
  in the valley become lower, and the higher plateaus lie at a distance
  of 10 or 15 m. back in the desert.

  _The Fayum._--The fertile province of the Fayum, west of the Nile and
  separated from it by some 6 m. of desert, seems to owe its existence
  to movements similar to those which determined the valley itself.
  Lying in a basin sloping in a series of terraces from an altitude of
  65 ft. above sea-level in the east to about 140 ft. _below_ sea-level
  on the north-west, at the margin of the Birket-el-Kerun, this province
  is wholly irrigated by a canalized channel, the Bahr Yusuf, which,
  leaving the Nile at Derut esh Sherif in Upper Egypt, follows the
  western margin of the cultivation in the Nile valley, and at length
  enters the Fayum through a gap in the desert hills by the XIIth
  Dynasty pyramids of Lahun and Hawara (see FAYUM).

  _The Delta._--About 30 deg. N., where the city of Cairo stands, the
  hills which have hitherto run parallel with the Nile turn W.N.W. and
  E.N.E., and the triangular area between them is wholly deltaic. The
  Delta measures 100 m. from S. to N., having a width of 155 m. on the
  shore of the Mediterranean between Alexandria on the west and Port
  Said on the east. The low sandy shore of the Delta, slowly increasing
  by the annual deposit of silt by the river, is mostly a barren area of
  sand-hills and salty waste land. This is the region of the lagoons and
  marshes immediately behind the coast-line. Southwards the quality of
  the soil rapidly improves, and becomes the most fertile part of Egypt.
  This area is watered by the Damietta and the Rosetta branches of the
  Nile, and by a network of canals. The soil of the Delta is a dark grey
  fine sandy soil, becoming at times almost a stiff clay by reason of
  the fineness of its particles, which consist almost wholly of
  extremely small grains of quartz with a few other minerals, and often
  numerous flakes of mica. This deposit varies in thickness, as a rule,
  from 55 to 70 ft., at which depth it is underlain by a series of
  coarse and fine yellow quartz sands, with occasional pebbles, or even
  banks of gravel, while here and there thin beds of clay occur. These
  sand-beds are sharply distinguished by their colour from the overlying
  Nile deposit, and are of considerable thickness. A boring made in 1886
  for the Royal Society at Zagazig attained a depth of 375 ft. without
  reaching rock, and another, subsequently sunk near Lake Aboukir (close
  to Alexandria), reached a depth of 405 ft. with the same result.
  Numerous other borings to depths of 100 to 200 ft. have given similar
  results, showing the Nile deposit to rest generally on these yellow
  sands, which provide a constant though not a very large supply of good
  water; near the northern limits of the Delta this cannot, however, be
  depended on, since the well water at these depths has proved on
  several occasions to be salt. The surface of the Delta is a wide
  alluvial plain sloping gently towards the sea, and having an altitude
  of 29 ft. above it at its southern extremity. Its limits east and west
  are determined by the higher ground of the deserts, to which the
  silt-laden waters of the Nile in flood time cannot reach. This silt
  consists largely of alumina (about 48%) and calcium carbonate (18%)
  with smaller quantities of silica, oxide of iron and carbon. Although
  the Nile water is abundantly charged with alluvium, the annual deposit
  by the river, except under extraordinary circumstances, is smaller
  than might be supposed. The mean ordinary rate of the increase of the
  soil of Egypt is calculated as about 4-1/2 in. in a century.

  _The Lakes._--The lagoons or lakes of the Delta, going from west to
  east, are Mareotis (Mariut), Edku, Burlus and Menzala. The land
  separating them from the Mediterranean is nowhere more than 10 m.
  wide. East of the Damietta mouth of the Nile this strip is in places
  not more than 200 yds. broad. All the lakes are shallow and the water
  in them salt or brackish. Mareotis, which bounds Alexandria on the
  south side, varies considerably in area according to the rise or fall
  of the Nile; when the Nile is low there is a wide expanse of marsh,
  when at its highest the lake covers about 100 sq. m. In ancient times
  Mareotis was navigable and was joined by various canals to the Nile.
  The country around was cultivated and produced the famous Mareotic
  wine. The canals being neglected, the lake decreased in size, though
  it was still of considerable area in the 15th and 16th centuries, and
  was then noted for the value of its fisheries. When the French army
  occupied Egypt in 1798, Mareotis was found to be largely a sandy
  plain. In April 1801 the British army besieging Alexandria cut through
  the land between Aboukir and the lake, admitting the waters of the sea
  into the ancient bed of Mareotis and laying under water a large area
  then in cultivation. This precedent was twice imitated, first by the
  Turks in 1803 and a second time by the British in 1807. Mareotis has
  no outlet, and the water is kept at a uniform level by means of
  powerful pumps which neutralize the effect of the Nile flood. A
  western arm has been cut off from the lake by a dyke, and in this arm
  a thick crust of salt is formed each year after the evaporation of the
  flood water. Near the shores of the lake wild flowers grow in rich
  profusion. Like all the Delta lakes, Mareotis abounds in wild-fowl.
  North-east of Mareotis was Lake Aboukir, a small sheet of water, now
  dry, lying S.W. of Aboukir Bay. East of this reclaimed marsh and
  reaching to within 4 m. of the Rosetta branch of the Nile, lies Edku,
  22 m. long and in places 16 wide, with an opening, supposed to be the
  ancient Canopic mouth of the Nile, into Aboukir Bay. Burlus begins a
  little eastward of the Rosetta channel, and stretches bow-shaped for
  64 m. Its greatest width is about 16 m. Adjoining it S.E. is an
  expanse of sandy marsh. Several canals or canalized channels enter the
  lake. Opposite the spot where the Bahr-mit Yezir enters is an opening
  into the Mediterranean. Canal and opening indicate the course of the
  ancient Sebennytic branch of the Nile. Burlus is noted for its
  water-melons, which are yellow within and come into season after those
  grown on the banks of the Nile.

  Menzala greatly exceeds the other Delta lakes in size, covering over
  780 sq. m. It extends from very near the Damietta branch of the Nile
  to Port Said. It receives the waters of the canalized channels which
  were once the Tanitic, Mendesian and Pelusiac branches. The northern
  shore is separated from the sea by an extremely narrow strip of land,
  across which, when the Mediterranean is stormy and the lake full, the
  waters meet. Its average length is about 40 m., and its average
  breadth about 15. The depth is greater than that of the other lakes,
  and the water is salt, though mixed with fresh. It contains a large
  number of islands, and the whole lake abounds in reeds of various
  kinds. Of the islands Tennis (anciently Tennesus) contains ruins of
  the Roman period. The lake supports a considerable population of
  fishermen, who dwell in villages on the shore and islands and live
  upon the fish of the lake. The reeds are cover for waterfowl of
  various kinds, which the traveller sees in great numbers, and wild
  boars are found in the marshes to the south. The Suez Canal runs in a
  straight line for 20 m. along the eastern edge of the lake. That part
  of the lake east of where the canal was excavated is now marshy plain,
  and the Tanitic and Pelusiac mouths of the Nile are dry. East of
  Menzala is the site of Serbonis, another dried-up lake, which had the
  general characteristics of the Delta lagoons. In the Isthmus of Suez
  are Lake Timsa and the Great and Little Bitter Lakes, occupying part
  of the ancient bed of the Red Sea. All three were dry or marshy
  depressions previously to the cutting of the Suez Canal, at which time
  the waters of the Mediterranean and Red Sea were let into them (see
  SUEZ CANAL).

  A chain of natron lakes (seven in number) lies in a valley in the
  western desert, 70 to 90 m. W.N.W. of Cairo. In the Fayum province
  farther south is the Birket-el-Kerun, a lake, lying below the level of
  the Nile, some 30 m. long and 5 wide at its broadest part. Kerun is
  all that is left of the Lake of Moeris, an ancient artificial sheet of
  water which played an important part in the irrigation schemes of the
  Pharaohs. The water of el-Kerun is brackish, though derived from the
  Nile, which has at all seasons a much higher level. It is bounded on
  the north by the Libyan Desert, above which rises a bold range of
  mountains; and it has a strange and picturesque wildness. Near the
  lake are several sites of ancient towns, and the temple called
  Kasr-Karun, dating from Roman times, distinguishes the most important
  of these. South-west of the Fayum is the Wadi Rayan, a large and deep
  depression, utilizable in modern schemes for re-creating the Lake of
  Moeris (q.v.).

  [Illustration: Nile Delta.]

  _The Desert Plateaus._--From the southern borders of Egypt to the
  Delta in the north, the desert plateaus extend on either side of the
  Nile valley. The eastern region, between the Nile and the Red Sea,
  varies in width from 90 to 350 m. and is known in its northern part as
  the Arabian Desert. The western region has no natural barrier for many
  hundreds of miles; it is part of the vast Sahara. On its eastern edge,
  a few miles west of Cairo, stand the great pyramids (q.v.) of Gizeh or
  Giza. North of Assuan it is called the Libyan Desert. In the north the
  desert plateaus are comparatively low, but from Cairo southwards they
  rise to 1000 and even 1500 ft. above sea-level. Formed mostly of
  horizontal strata of varying hardness, they present a series of
  terraces of minor plateaus, rising one above the other, and
  intersected by small ravines worn by the occasional rainstorms which
  burst in their neighbourhood. The weathering of this desert area is
  probably fairly rapid, and the agents at work are principally the
  rapid heating and cooling of the rocks by day and night, and the
  erosive action of sand-laden wind on the softer layers; these, aided
  by the occasional rain, are ceaselessly at work, and produce the
  successive plateaus, dotted with small isolated hills and cut up by
  valleys (wadis) which occasionally become deep ravines, thus forming
  the principal type of scenery of these deserts. From this it will be
  seen that the desert in Egypt is mainly a rock desert, where the
  surface is formed of disintegrated rock, the finer particles of which
  have been carried away by the wind; and east of the Nile this is
  almost exclusively the case. Here the desert meets the line of
  mountains which runs parallel to the Red Sea and the Gulf of Suez. In
  the western desert, however, those large sand accumulations which are
  usually associated with a desert are met with. They occur as lines of
  dunes formed of rounded grains of quartz, and lie in the direction of
  the prevalent wind, usually being of small breadth as compared with
  their length; but in certain areas, such as that lying S.W. and W. of
  the oases of Farafra and Dakhla, these lines of dunes, lying parallel
  to each other and about half a mile apart, cover immense areas,
  rendering them absolutely impassable except in a direction parallel
  to the lines themselves. East of the oases of Baharia and Farafra is a
  very striking line of these sand dunes; rarely more than 3 miles wide,
  it extends almost continuously from Moghara in the north, passing
  along the west side of Kharga Oasis to a point near the Nile in the
  neighbourhood of Abu Simbel--having thus a length of nearly 550 m. In
  the northern part of this desert the dunes lie about N.W.-S.E., but
  farther south incline more towards the meridian, becoming at last very
  nearly north and south.

  _Oases._--In the western desert lie the five large oases of Egypt,
  namely, Siwa, Baharia, Farafra, Dakhla and Kharga or Great Oasis,
  occupying depressions in the plateau or, in the case of the last
  three, large indentations in the face of limestone escarpments which
  form the western versant of the Nile valley hills. Their fertility is
  due to a plentiful supply of water furnished by a sandstone bed 300 to
  500 ft. below the surface, whence the water rises through natural
  fissures or artificial boreholes to the surface, and sometimes to
  several feet above it. These oases were known and occupied by the
  Egyptians as early as 1600 B.C., and Kharga (q.v.) rose to special
  importance at the time of the Persian occupation. Here, near the town
  of Kharga, the ancient Hebi, is a temple of Ammon built by Darius I.,
  and in the same oasis are other ruins of the period of the Ptolemies
  and Caesars. The oasis of Siwa (Jupiter Ammon) is about 150 m. S. of
  the Mediterranean at the Gulf of Sollum and about 300 m. W. of the
  Nile (see SIWA). The other four oases lie parallel to and distant 100
  to 150 m. from the Nile, between 25 deg. and 29 deg. N., Baharia being
  the most northerly and Kharga the most southerly.

  Besides the oases the desert is remarkable for two other valleys. The
  first is that of the natron lakes already mentioned. It contains four
  monasteries, the remains of the famous anchorite settlement of
  Nitriae. South of the Wadi Natron, and parallel to it, is a sterile
  valley called the Bahr-bela-Ma, or "River without Water."

  _The Sinai Peninsula._--The triangular-shaped Sinai peninsula has its
  base on the Mediterranean, the northern part being an arid plateau,
  the desert of Tih. The apex is occupied by a massif of crystalline
  rocks. The principal peaks rise over 8500 ft. Owing to the slight
  rainfall, and the rapid weathering of the rocks by the great range of
  temperature, these hills rise steeply from the valleys at their feet
  as almost bare rock, supporting hardly any vegetation. In some of the
  valleys wells or rock-pools filled by rain occur, and furnish
  drinking-water to the few Arabs who wander in these hills (see also
  SINAI).

  [_Geology._--Just as the Nile valley forms the chief geographical
  feature of Egypt, so the geology of the country is intimately related
  to it. The north and south direction of the river has been largely
  determined by faults, though the geologists of the Egyptian Survey are
  finding that the influence of faulting in determining physical outline
  has, in some cases, been overestimated. The oldest rocks, consisting
  of crystalline schists with numerous intrusions of granite, porphyry
  and diorite, occupy the eastern portion of the country between the
  Nile south of Assuan and the Red Sea. The intrusive rocks predominate
  over the schists in extent of area covered. They furnished the chief
  material for the ancient monuments. At Assuan (Syene) the well-known
  syenite of Werner occurs. It is, however, a hornblende granite and
  does not possess the mineralogical composition of the syenites of
  modern petrology. Between Thebes and Khartum the western banks of the
  Nile are composed of Nubian Sandstone, which extends westward from the
  river to the edge of the great Libyan Desert, where it forms the bed
  rock. The age of this sandstone has given rise to much dispute. The
  upper part certainly belongs to the Cretaceous formation; the lower
  part has been considered to be of Karroo age by some geologists, while
  others regard the whole formation to be of Cretaceous age. In the
  Kharga Oasis the upper portion consists of variously coloured
  unfossiliferous clays with intercalated bands of sandstone containing
  fossil silicified woods (_Nicolia Aegyptiaca_ and _Araucarioxylon
  Aegypticum_). They are conformably overlain by clays and limestones
  with _Exogyra Overwegi_ belonging to the Lower Danian, and these by
  clays and white chalk with _Ananchytes ovata_ of the Upper Danian. In
  many instances the Tertiary formation, which occurs between Esna and
  Cairo, unconformably overlies the Cretaceous, the Lower Eocene being
  absent. The fluvio-marine deposits of the Upper Eocene and Oligocene
  formations contain an interesting mammalian fauna, proving that the
  African continent formed a centre of radiation for the mammalia in
  early Tertiary times. _Arsinoitherium_ is the precursor of the horned
  Ungulata; while _Moeritherium_ and _Palaeomastodon_ undoubtedly
  include the oldest known elephants. Miocene strata are absent in the
  southern Tertiary areas, but are present at Moghara and in the north.
  Marine Pliocene strata occur to the south of the pyramids of Giza and
  in the Fayum province, where, in addition, some gravel terraces, at a
  height of 500 ft. above sea-level, are attributed to the Pliocene
  period. The Lake of Moeris, as a large body of fresh water, appears to
  have come into existence in Pleistocene times. It is represented now
  by the brackish-water lake of the Birket-el-Kerun. The superficial
  sands of the deserts and the Nile mud form the chief recent
  formations. The Nile deposits its mud over the valley before reaching
  the sea, and consequently the Delta receives little additional
  material. At Memphis the alluvial deposits are over 50 ft. thick. The
  superficial sands of the desert region, derived in large part from the
  disintegration of the Nubian Sandstone, occupy the most extensive
  areas in the Libyan Desert. The other desert regions of Egypt are
  elevated stony plateaus, which are diversified by extensively
  excavated valleys and oases, and in which sand frequently plays quite
  a subordinate part. These regions present magnificent examples of dry
  erosion by wind-borne sand, which acts as a powerful sand blast
  etching away the rocks and producing most beautiful sculpturing. The
  rate of denudation in exposed positions is exceedingly rapid; while
  spots sheltered from the sand blast suffer a minimum of erosion, as
  shown by the preservation of ancient inscriptions. Many of the
  Egyptian rocks in the desert areas and at the cataracts are coated
  with a highly polished film, of almost microscopic thinness,
  consisting chiefly of oxides of iron and manganese with salts of
  magnesia and lime. It is supposed to be due to a chemical change
  within the rock and not to deposition on the surface.]

  _Minerals._--Egypt possesses considerable mineral wealth. In ancient
  times gold and precious stones were mined in the Red Sea hills. During
  the Moslem period mining was abandoned, and it was not until the
  beginning of the 20th century that renewed efforts were made to
  develop the mining industry. The salt obtained from Lake Mareotis at
  Meks, a western suburb of Alexandria, supplies the salt needed for the
  country, except a small quantity used for curing fish at Lake Menzala;
  while the lakes in the Wadi Natron, 45 m. N.W. of the pyramids of
  Giza, furnish carbonate of soda in large quantities. Alum is found in
  the western oases. Nitrates and phosphates are also found in various
  parts of the desert and are used as manures. The turquoise mines of
  Sinai, in the Wadi Maghara, are worked regularly by the Arabs of the
  peninsula, who sell the stones in Suez; while there are emerald mines
  at Jebel Zubara, south of Kosseir. Petroleum occurs at Jebel Zeit, on
  the west shore of the Gulf of Suez. Considerable veins of haematite of
  good quality occur both in the Red Sea hills and in Sinai. At Jebel
  ed-Dukhan are porphyry quarries, extensively worked under the Romans,
  and at Jebel el-Fatira are granite quarries. At El-Hammamat, on the
  old way from Coptos to Philoteras Portus, are the breccia verde
  quarries, worked from very early times, and having interesting
  hieroglyphic inscriptions. At the various mines, and on the routes to
  them and to the Red Sea, are some small temples and stations, ranging
  from the Pharaonic to the Roman period. The quarries of Syene (Assuan)
  are famous for extremely hard and durable red granite (syenite), and
  have been worked since the days of the earliest Pharaohs. Large
  quantities of this syenite were used in building the Assuan dam
  (1898-1902). The cliffs bordering the Nile are largely quarried for
  limestone and sandstone.

  Gold-mining recommenced in 1905 at Um Rus, a short distance inland
  from the Red Sea and some 50 m. S. of Kosseir, where milling
  operations were started in March of that year. Another mine opened in
  1905 was that of Um Garaiat, E.N.E. of Korosko, and 65 m. distant from
  the Nile.

  _Climate._--Part of Upper Egypt is within the tropics, but the greater
  part of the country is north of the Tropic of Cancer. Except a narrow
  belt on the north along the Mediterranean shore, Egypt lies in an
  almost rainless area, where the temperature is high by day and sinks
  quickly at night in consequence of the rapid radiation under the
  cloudless sky. The mean temperature at Alexandria and Port Said varies
  between 57 deg. F. in January and 81 deg. F. in July; while at Cairo,
  where the proximity of the desert begins to be felt, it is 53 deg. F.
  in January, rising to 84 deg. F. in July. January is the coldest
  month, when occasionally in the Nile valley, and more frequently in
  the open desert, the temperature sinks to 32 deg. F., or even a degree
  or two below. The mean maximum temperatures are 99 deg. F. for
  Alexandria and 110 deg. F. for Cairo. Farther south the range of
  temperature becomes greater as pure desert conditions are reached.
  Thus at Assuan the mean maximum is 118 deg. F., the mean minimum 42
  deg. F. At Wadi Halfa the figures in each case are one degree lower.

  The relative humidity varies greatly. At Assuan the mean value for the
  year is only 38%, that for the summer being 29%, and for the winter
  51%; while for Wadi Halfa the mean is 32%, and 20% and 42% are the
  mean values for summer and winter respectively. A white fog, dense and
  cold, sometimes rises from the Nile in the morning, but it is of short
  duration and rare occurrence. In Alexandria and on all the
  Mediterranean coast of Egypt rain falls abundantly in the winter
  months, amounting to 8 in. in the year; but southwards it rapidly
  decreases, and south of 31 deg. N. little rain falls.

  Records at Cairo show that the rainfall is very irregular, and is
  furnished by occasional storms rather than by any regular rainy
  season; still, most falls in the winter months, especially December
  and January, while, on the other hand, none has been recorded in June
  and July. The average annual rainfall does not exceed 1.50 in. In the
  open desert rain falls even more rarely, but it is by no means
  unknown, and from time to time heavy storms burst, causing sudden
  floods in the narrow ravines, and drowning both men and animals. These
  are more common in the mountainous region of the Sinai peninsula,
  where they are much dreaded by the Arabs. Snow is unknown in the Nile
  valley, but on the mountains of Sinai and the Red Sea hills it is not
  uncommon, and a temperature of 18 deg. F. at an altitude of 2000 ft.
  has been recorded in January.

  The atmospheric pressure varies between a maximum in January and a
  minimum in July, the mean difference being about 0.29 in. In a series
  of records extending over 14 years the mean pressure varied between
  29.84 and 29.90 in.

  The most striking meteorological factor in Egypt is the persistence of
  the north wind throughout the year, without which the climate would be
  very trying. It is this "Etesian" wind which enables sailing boats
  constantly to ascend the Nile, against its strong and rapid current.
  In December, January and February, at Cairo, the north wind slightly
  predominates, though those from the south and west often nearly equal
  it, but after this the north blows almost continuously for the rest of
  the year. In May and June the prevailing direction is north and
  north-north-east, and for July, August, September and October north
  and north-west. From the few observations that exist, it seems that
  farther south the southern winter winds decrease rapidly, becoming
  westerly, until at Assuan and Wadi Haifa the northerly winds are
  almost invariable throughout the year. The _khamsin_, hot sand-laden
  winds of the spring months, come invariably from the south. They are
  preceded by a rapid fall of the barometer for about a day, until a
  gradient from south to north is formed, then the wind commences to
  blow, at first gently, from the south-east; rapidly increasing in
  violence, it shifts through south to south-west, finally dropping
  about sunset. The same thing is repeated on the second and sometimes
  the third day, by which time the wind has worked round to the north
  again. During a khamsin the temperature is high and the air extremely
  dry, while the dust and sand carried by the wind form a thick yellow
  fog obscuring the sun. Another remarkable phenomenon is the _zobaa_, a
  lofty whirlwind of sand resembling a pillar, which moves with great
  velocity. The southern winds of the summer months which occur in the
  low latitudes north of the equator are not felt much north of Khartum.

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

  _Flora._--Egypt possesses neither forests nor woods and, as
  practically the whole of the country which will support vegetation is
  devoted to agriculture, the flora is limited. The most important tree
  is the date-palm, which grows all over Egypt and in the oases. The
  lower branches being regularly cut, this tree grows high and assumes a
  much more elegant form than in its natural state. The dom-palm is
  first seen a little north of 26 deg. N., and extends southwards. The
  vine grows well, and in ancient times was largely cultivated for wine;
  oranges, lemons and pomegranates also abound. Mulberry trees are
  common in Lower Egypt. The sunt tree (_Acacia nilotica_) grows
  everywhere, as well as the tamarisk and the sycamore. In the deserts
  halfa grass and several kinds of thorn bushes grow; and wherever rain
  or springs have moistened the ground, numerous wild flowers thrive.
  This is especially the case where there is also shade to protect them
  from the midday sun, as in some of the narrow ravines in the eastern
  desert and in the palm groves of the oases, where various ferns and
  flowers grow luxuriantly round the springs. Among many trees which
  have been imported, the "lebbek" (_Albizzia lebbek_), a thick-foliaged
  mimosa, thrives especially, and has been very largely employed. The
  weeping-willow, myrtle, elm, cypress and eucalyptus are also used in
  the gardens and plantations.

  The most common of the fruits are dates, of which there are nearly
  thirty varieties, which are sold half-ripe, ripe, dried, and pressed
  in their fresh moist state in mats or skins. The pressed dates of Siwa
  are among the most esteemed. The Fayum is celebrated for its grapes,
  and chiefly supplies the market of Cairo. The most common grape is
  white, of which there is a small kind far superior to the ordinary
  sort. The black grapes are large, but comparatively tasteless. The
  vines are trailed on trelliswork, and form agreeable avenues in the
  gardens of Cairo. The best-known fruits, besides dates and grapes, are
  figs, sycamore-figs and pomegranates, apricots and peaches, oranges
  and citrons, lemons and limes, bananas, which are believed to be of
  the fruits of Paradise (being always in season), different kinds of
  melons (including some of aromatic flavour, and the refreshing
  water-melon), mulberries, Indian figs or prickly pears, the fruit of
  the lotus and olives. Among the more usual cultivated flowers are the
  rose (which has ever been a favourite among the Arabs), the jasmine,
  narcissus, lily, oleander, chrysanthemum, convolvulus, geranium,
  dahlia, basil, the henna plant (_Lawsonia alba_, or Egyptian privet,
  which is said to be a flower of Paradise), the helianthus and the
  violet. Of wild flowers the most common are yellow daisies, poppies,
  irises, asphodels and ranunculuses. The _Poinsettia pulcherrima_ is a
  bushy tree with leaves of brilliant red.

  Many kinds of reeds are found in Egypt, though they were formerly much
  more common. The famous byblus or papyrus no longer exists in the
  country, but other kinds of _cyperi_ are found. The lotus, greatly
  prized for its flowers by the ancient inhabitants, is still found in
  the Delta, though never in the Nile itself. There are two varieties of
  this water-lily, one with white flowers, the other with blue.

  _Fauna._--The chief quadrupeds are all domestic animals. Of these the
  camel and the ass are the most common. The ass, often a tall and
  handsome creature, is indigenous. When the camel was first introduced
  into Egypt is uncertain--it is not pictured on the ancient monuments.
  Neither is the buffalo, which with the sheep is very numerous in
  Egypt. The horses are of indifferent breed, apparently of a type much
  inferior to that possessed by the ancient Egyptians. Wild animals are
  few. The principal are the hyena, jackal and fox. The wild boar is
  found in the Delta. Wolves are rare. Numerous gazelles inhabit the
  deserts. The ibex is found in the Sinaitic peninsula and the hills
  between the Nile and the Red Sea, and the mouflon, or maned sheep, is
  occasionally seen in the same regions. The desert hare is abundant in
  parts of the Fayum, and a wild cat, or lynx, frequents the marshy
  regions of the Delta. The ichneumon (Pharaoh's rat) is common and
  often tame; the coney and jerboa are found in the eastern mountains.
  Bats are very numerous. The crocodile is no longer found in Egypt, nor
  the hippopotamus, in ancient days a frequenter of the Nile. The common
  or pariah dog is generally of sandy colour; in Upper Egypt there is a
  breed of wiry rough-haired black dogs, noted for their fierceness.
  Among reptiles are several kinds of venomous snakes--the horned viper,
  the hooded snake and the echis. Lizards of many kinds are found,
  including the monitor. There are many varieties of beetle, including a
  number of species representing the scarabaeus of the ancients. Locusts
  are comparatively rare. The scorpion, whose sting is sometimes fatal,
  is common. There are many large and poisonous spiders and flies; fleas
  and mosquitoes abound. Fish are plentiful in the Nile, both scaled and
  without scales. The scaly fish include members of the carp and perch
  kind. The _bayad_, a scaleless fish commonly eaten, reaches sometimes
  3-1/2 ft. in length. A somewhat rare fish is the _Polypterus_, which
  has thick bony scales and 16 to 18 long dorsal fins. The _Tetrodon_,
  or ball fish, is found in the Red Sea, as well as in the Nile.

  Some 300 species of birds are found in Egypt, and one of the most
  striking features of a journey up the Nile is the abundance of bird
  life. Many of the species are sedentary, others are winter visitants,
  while others again simply pass through Egypt on their way to or from
  warmer or colder regions. Birds of prey are very numerous, including
  several varieties of eagles--the osprey, the spotted, the golden and
  the imperial. Of vultures the black and white Egyptian variety
  (_Neophron percnopterus_) is most common. The griffon and the black
  vulture are also frequently seen. There are many kinds of kites,
  falcons and hawks, kestrel being numerous. The long-legged buzzard is
  found throughout Egypt, as are owls. The so-called Egyptian eagle owl
  (_Bubo ascalaphus_) is rather rare, but the barn owl is common. The
  kingfisher is found beside every watercourse, a black and white
  species (_Ceryle rudis_) being much more numerous than the common
  kingfisher. Pigeons and hoopoes abound in every village. There are
  various kinds of plovers--the black-headed species (_Pluvianus
  Aegyptius_) is most numerous in Upper Egypt; the golden plover and the
  white-tailed species are found chiefly in the Delta. The spurwing is
  supposed to be the bird mentioned by Herodotus as eating the parasites
  covering the inside of the mouth of the crocodile. Of game-birds the
  most plentiful are sandgrouse, quail (a bird of passage) and snipe.
  Red-legged and other partridges are found in the eastern desert and
  the Sinai hills. Of aquatic birds there is a great variety. Three
  species of pelican exist, including the large Dalmatian pelican.
  Storks, cranes, herons and spoonbills are common. The sacred ibis is
  not found in Egypt, but the buff-backed heron, the constant companion
  of the buffalo, is usually called an ibis. The glossy ibis is
  occasionally seen. The flamingo, common in the lakes of Lower Egypt,
  is not found on the Nile. Geese, duck and teal are abundant. The most
  common goose is the white-fronted variety; the Egyptian goose is more
  rare. Both varieties are depicted on the ancient monuments; the
  white-fronted goose being commonly shown. Several birds of gorgeous
  plumage come north into Egypt in the spring, among others the golden
  oriole, the sun-bird, the roller and the blue-cheeked bee-eater.

  _Egypt as a Health Resort._--The country is largely resorted to during
  the winter months by Europeans in search of health as well as
  pleasure. Upper Egypt is healthier than Lower Egypt, where, especially
  near the coast, malarial fevers and diseases of the respiratory organs
  are not uncommon. The least healthy time of the year is the latter
  part of autumn, when the inundated soil is drying. In the desert, at a
  very short distance from the cultivable land, the climate is uniformly
  dry and unvaryingly healthy. The most suitable places for the
  residence of invalids are Helwan, where there are natural mineral
  springs, in the desert, 14 m. S. of Cairo, and Luxor and Assuan in
  Upper Egypt.

  The diseases from which Egyptians suffer are very largely the result
  of insanitary surroundings. In this respect a great improvement has
  taken place since the British occupation in 1882. Plague, formerly one
  of the great scourges of the country, seems to have been stamped out,
  the last visitation having been in 1844, but cholera epidemics
  occasionally occur.[2] Cholera rarely extends south of Cairo. In 1848
  it is believed that over 200,000 persons died from cholera, but later
  epidemics have been much less fatal. Smallpox is not uncommon, and
  skin diseases are numerous, but the two most prevalent diseases among
  the Egyptians are dysentery and ophthalmia. The objection entertained
  by many natives to entering hospitals or to altering their traditional
  methods of "cure" renders these diseases much more malignant and fatal
  than they would be in other circumstances. The government, however,
  enforces certain health regulations, and the sanitary service is under
  the direction of a European official.

_Chief Towns._--Cairo (q.v.) the capital, a city of Arab foundation, is
built on the east bank of the Nile, about 12 m, above the point where
the river divides, and in reference to its situation at the head of the
Delta has been called by the Arabs "the diamond stud in the handle of
the fan of Egypt." It has a population (1907) of 654,476 and is the
largest city in Africa. Next in importance of the cities of Egypt and
the chief seaport is Alexandria (q.v.), pop. (with Ramleh) 370,009, on
the shore of the Mediterranean at the western end of the Delta. Port
Said (q.v.), pop. 49,884, at the eastern end of the Delta, and at the
north entrance to the Suez Canal, is the second seaport. Between
Alexandria and Port Said are the towns of Rosetta (q.v.), pop. 16,810,
and Damietta (q.v.), pop. 29,354, each built a few miles above the mouth
of the branch of the Nile of the same name. In the middle ages, when
Alexandria was in decay, these two towns were busy ports; with the
revival of Alexandria under Mehemet Ali and the foundation of Port Said
(c. 1860), their trade declined. The other ports of Egypt are Suez
(q.v.), pop. 18,347, at the south entrance of the canal, Kosseir (794)
on the Red Sea, the seat of the trade carried on between Upper Egypt and
Arabia, Mersa Matruh, near the Tripolitan frontier, and El-Arish, pop.
5897, on the Mediterranean, near the frontier of Palestine, and a
halting-place on the caravan route from Egypt to Syria. In the interior
of the Delta are many flourishing towns, the largest being Tanta, pop.
54,437, which occupies a central position. Damanhur (38,752) lies on the
railway between Tanta and Alexandria; Mansura (40,279) is on the
Damietta branch of the Nile, to the N.E. of Tanta; Zagazig (34,999) is
the largest town in the Delta east of the Damietta branch; Bilbeis
(13,485) lies N.N.E. of Cairo, on the edge of the desert and in the
ancient Land of Goshen. Ismailia (10,373) is situated midway on the Suez
Canal. All these towns, which depend largely on the cotton industry, are
separately noticed.

Other towns in Lower Egypt are: Mehallet el-Kubra, pop. 47,955, 16 m. by
rail N.E. of Tanta, with manufactories of silk and cottons; Salihia
(6100), E.N.E. of and terminus of a railway from Zagazig, on the edge of
the desert south of Lake Menzala, and the starting-point of the caravans
to Syria; Mataria (15,142) on Lake Menzala and headquarters of the
fishing industry; Zifta (15,850) on the Damietta branch and the site of
a barrage; Samanud (14,408), also on the Damietta branch, noted for its
pottery, and Fua (14,515), where large quantities of tarbushes are made,
on the Rosetta branch. Shibin el-Kom (21,576), 16 m. S. of Tanta, is a
cotton centre, and Menuf (22,316), 8 m. S.W. of Shibin, in the fork
between the branches of the Nile, is the chief town of a rich
agricultural district. There are many other towns in the Delta with
populations between 10,000 and 20,000.

In Upper Egypt the chief towns are nearly all in the narrow valley of
the Nile. The exceptions are the towns in the oases comparatively
unimportant, and those in the Fayum province. The capital of the Fayum,
Medinet el-Fayum, has a population (1907) of 37,320. The chief towns on
the Nile, taking them in their order in ascending the river from Cairo,
are Beni Suef, Minia, Assiut, Akhmim, Suhag, Girga, Kena, Luxor, Esna,
Edfu, Assuan and Korosko. Beni Suef (23,357) is 77 m. from Cairo by
rail. It is on the west bank of the river, is the capital of a _mudiria_
and a centre for the manufacture of woollen goods. Minia (27,221) is 77
m. by rail farther south. It is also the capital of a mudiria, has a
considerable European colony, possesses a large sugar factory and some
cotton mills. It is the starting-point of a road to the Baharia oasis.
Assiut (q.v.), pop. 39,442, is 235 m. S. of Cairo by rail, and is the
most important commercial centre in Upper Egypt. At this point a barrage
is built across the river. Suhag (17,514) is 56 m. by rail S. of Assiut
and is the headquarters of Girga mudiria. The ancient and celebrated
Coptic monasteries El Abiad (the white) and El Ahmar (the red) are 3 to
4 m. W. and N.W. respectively of Suhag. A few miles above Suhag, on the
opposite (east) side of the Nile is Akhmim (q.v.) or Ekhmim (23,795),
where silk and cotton goods are made. Girga (q.v.), pop. 19,893, is 22
m. S. by rail of Suhag, and on the same (the west) side of the river. It
is noted for its pottery. Kena (q.v.), pop. 20,069, is on the east bank
of the Nile, 145 m. by rail from Assiut. It is the chief seat of the
manufacture of the porous earthenware water-bottles used all over Egypt.
Luxor (q.v.), pop. (with Karnak) 25,229, marks the site of Thebes. It is
418 m. from Cairo, and here the gauge of the railway is altered from
broad to narrow. Esna (q.v.), pop. 19,103, is another place where
pottery is made in large quantities. It is on the west bank of the Nile,
36 m. by rail S. of Luxor. Edfu (q.v.), pop. 19,262, is also on the west
side of the river, 30 m. farther south. It is chiefly famous for its
ancient temple. Assuan (q.v.), pop. 12,618, is at the foot of the First
Cataract and 551 m. S. of Cairo by rail. Three miles farther south, at
Shellal, the Egyptian railway terminates. Korosko, 118 m. by river above
Assuan, is a small place notable as the northern terminus of the caravan
route from the Sudan across the Nubian desert. Since the building of the
railway--which starts 96 m. higher up, at Wadi Halfa--to Khartum, this
route is little used, and Korosko has lost what importance it had.

_Ancient Cities and Monuments._--Many of the modern cities of Egypt are
built on the sites of ancient cities, and they generally contain some
monuments of the time of the Pharaohs, Greeks or Romans. The sites of
other ancient cities now in complete ruin may be indicated. Memphis, the
Pharaonic capital, was on the west bank of the Nile, some 14 m. above
Cairo, and Heliopolis lay some 5 m. N.N.E. of Cairo. The pyramids of
Giza or Gizeh, on the edge of the desert, 8 m. west of Cairo, are the
largest of the many pyramids and other monuments, including the famous
Sphinx, built in the neighbourhood of Memphis. The site of Thebes has
already been indicated. Syene stood near to where the town of Assuan now
is; opposite, on an island in the Nile, are scanty ruins of the city of
Elephantine, and a little above, on another island, is the temple of
Philae. The ancient Coptos (Keft) is represented by the village of Kuft,
between Luxor and Kena. A few miles north of Kena is Dendera, with a
famous temple. The ruins of Abydos, one of the oldest places in Egypt,
are 8 m. S.W. of Balliana, a small town in Girga mudiria. The ruined
temples of Abu Simbel are on the west side of the Nile, 56 m. above
Korosko. On the Red Sea, south of Kosseir, are the ruins of Myos Hormos
and Berenice. Of the ancient cities in the Delta there are remains,
among others, of Sais, Iseum, Tanis, Bubastis, Onion, Sebennytus,
Pithom, Pelusium, and of the Greek cities Naucratis and Daphnae. There
are, besides the more ancient cities and monuments, a number of Coptic
towns, monasteries and churches in almost every part of Egypt, dating
from the early centuries of Christianity. The monasteries, or _ders_,
are generally fort-like buildings and are often built in the desert.
Tombs of Mahommedan saints are also numerous, and are often placed on
the summit of the cliffs overlooking the Nile. The traveller in Egypt
thus views, side by side with the activities of the present day, where
occident and orient meet and clash, memorials of every race and
civilization which has flourished in the valley of the Nile.

_Trade Routes and Communications._--Its geographical position gives
Egypt command of one of the most important trade routes in the world. It
is, as it were, the fort which commands the way from Europe to the East.
This has been the case from time immemorial, and the provision, in 1869,
of direct maritime communication between the Mediterranean and the Red
Sea, by the completion of the Suez Canal, ensured for the Egyptian route
the supremacy in sea-borne traffic to Asia, which the discovery of the
passage to India by way of the Cape of Good Hope had menaced for three
and a half centuries. The Suez Canal is 87 m. long, 66 actual canal and
21 lakes. It has sufficient depth to allow vessels drawing 27 ft. of
water to pass through. It is administered by a company whose
headquarters are in Paris, and no part of its revenue reaches the
Egyptian exchequer (see SUEZ CANAL). Besides the many steamship lines
which use the Suez Canal, other steamers run direct from European ports
to Alexandria. There is also a direct mail service between Suez and Port
Sudan.

  The chief means of internal communication are, in the Delta the
  railways, in Upper Egypt the railway and the river. The railways are
  of two kinds: (1) those state-owned and state-worked, (2) agricultural
  light railways owned and worked by private companies. Railway
  construction dates from 1852, when the line from Alexandria to Cairo
  was begun, by order of Abbas I. The state railways, unless otherwise
  indicated, have a gauge of 4 ft. 8-1/2 in. The main system is
  extremely simple. Trunk lines from Alexandria (via Damanhur and Tanta)
  and from Port Said (via Ismailia) traverse the Delta and join at
  Cairo. From Cairo the railway is continued south up the valley of the
  Nile and close to the river. At first it follows the west bank,
  crossing the stream at Nag Hamadi, 354 m. from Cairo, by an iron
  bridge 437 yds. long. Thence it continues on the east bank to Luxor,
  where the broad gauge ceases. From Luxor the line continues on the
  standard African gauge (3 ft. 6 in.) to Shellal, 3 m. above Assuan and
  685 m. from Alexandria. This main line service is supplemented by a
  steamer service on the Nile from Shellal to Wadi Halfa, on the
  northern frontier of the Anglo-Egyptian Sudan, whence there is direct
  railway communication with Khartum and the Red Sea (see SUDAN).

  Branch lines connect Cairo and Alexandria with Suez and with almost
  every town in the Delta. From Cairo to Suez via Ismailia is a distance
  of 160 m. Before the Suez Canal was opened passengers and goods were
  taken to Suez from Cairo by a railway 84 m. long which ran across the
  desert. This line, now disused, had itself superseded the "overland
  route" organized by Lieut. Thomas Waghorn, R.N., c. 1830, for the
  conveyance of passengers and mails to India. In Upper Egypt a line, 40
  m. long, runs west from Wasta, a station 56 m. S. of Cairo, to Abuksa
  in the Fayum mudiria. Another railway goes from Kharga Junction, a
  station on the main line 24 m. S. of Girga, to the oasis of Kharga.
  These lines are privately owned.

  In the Delta the light railways supplement the ordinary lines and
  connect the villages with the towns and seaports. There are over 700
  m. of these lines. The railway development of Egypt has not been very
  rapid. In 1880 944 m. of state lines were open; in 1900 the figure was
  1393, and in 1905, 1688. For several years before 1904 the
  administration of the railways was carried on by an international or
  mixed board for the security of foreign creditors. In the year named
  the railways came directly under the control of the Egyptian
  government, which during the next four years spent LE.3,000,000 on
  improving and developing the lines. In the five years 1902-1906 the
  capital value of the state railways increased from LE.20,383,000 to
  LE.23,200,000 and the net earnings from LE.1,059,000 to LE. 1,475,000.
  The number of passengers carried in the same period rose from 12-1/2
  to over 22 millions, and the weight of goods from slightly under
  3,000,000 to nearly 6,750,000 tons. In 1906 the light railways carried
  nearly a million tons of goods and over 6,800,000 passengers.

  Westward from Alexandria a railway, begun in 1904 by the khedive,
  Abbas II., runs parallel with the coast, and is intended to be
  continued to Tripoli. The line forms the eastern end of the great
  railway system which will eventually extend from Tangier to
  Alexandria.

  The Nile is navigable throughout its course in Egypt, and is largely
  used as a means of cheap transit of heavy goods. Lock and bridge tolls
  were abolished in 1899 and 1901 respectively. As a result, river
  traffic greatly increased. Above Cairo the Nile is the favourite
  tourist route, while between Shellal (Assuan) and the Sudan frontier
  it is the only means of communication. Among the craft using the river
  the dahabiya is a characteristic native sailing vessel, somewhat
  resembling a house-boat. From the Nile, caravan routes lead westward
  to the various oases and eastward to the Red Sea, the shortest (120
  m.) and most used of the eastern routes being that from Kena to
  Kosseir. Roads suitable for wheeled vehicles are found in Lower Egypt,
  but the majority of the tracks are bridle-paths, goods being conveyed
  on the backs of donkeys, mules and camels.

  _Posts and Telegraphs._--The Egyptian postal system is highly
  organized and efficient, and in striking contrast with its condition
  in 1870, when there were but nineteen post-offices in the country. All
  the branches of business transacted in European post-offices are
  carried on by the Egyptian service, Egypt being a member of the Postal
  Union. It was the first foreign country to establish a penny postage
  with Great Britain, the reduction from 2-1/2d. being made in 1905. The
  inland letters and packages carried yearly exceed 20,000,000 and
  foreign letters (30% to England) number over 4,000,000. Over
  L17,000,000 passes yearly through the post. A feature of the service
  are the travelling post-offices, of which there are some 200.

  All the important towns are connected by telegraph, the telegraphs
  being state-owned and worked by the railway administration. Egypt is
  also connected by cables and land-lines with the outside world. One
  land-line connects at El-Arish with the line through Syria and Asia
  Minor to Constantinople. Another line connects at Wadi Halfa with the
  Sudan system, affording direct telegraphic communication via Khartum
  and Gondokoro with Uganda and Mombasa. The Eastern Telegraph Company,
  by concessions, have telegraph lines across Egypt from Alexandria via
  Cairo to Suez, and from Port Said to Suez, connecting their cables to
  Europe and the East. The principal cables are from Alexandria to
  Malta, Gibraltar and England; from Alexandria to Crete and Brindisi;
  from Suez to Aden, Bombay, China and Australia.

  The telephone is largely used in the big towns, and there is a trunk
  telephone line connecting Alexandria and Cairo.

  _Standard Time._--The standard time adopted in Egypt is that of the
  longitude of Alexandria, 30 deg. E., i.e. two hours earlier than
  Greenwich time. It thus corresponds with the standard time of British
  South Africa.

_Agriculture and Land Tenure._--The chief industry of Egypt is
agriculture. The proportions of the industry depend upon the area of
land capable of cultivation. This again depends upon the fertilizing
sediment brought down by the Nile and the measure in which lands beyond
the natural reach of the flood water can be rendered productive by
irrigation. By means of canals, "basins," dams and barrages, the Nile
flood is now utilized to a greater extent than ever before (see
IRRIGATION: _Egypt_). The result has been a great increase in the area
of cultivated or cultivable land.

At the time of the French occupation of Egypt in 1798, it was found that
the cultivable soil covered 4,429,400 acres, but the quantity actually
under cultivation did not exceed 3,520,000 acres, or six-elevenths of
the entire surface. Under improved conditions the area of cultivated
land, or land in process of reclamation, had risen in 1906 to 5,750,000
acres, while another 500,000 acres of waste land awaited reclamation.

Throughout Egypt the cultivable soil does not present any very great
difference, being always the deposit of the river; it contains, however,
more sand near the river than at a distance from it. Towards the
Mediterranean its quality is injured by the salt with which the air is
impregnated, and therefore it is not so favourable to vegetation. Of the
cultivated land, some three-fourths is held, theoretically, in life
tenancy. The state, as ultimate proprietor, imposes a tax which is the
equivalent of rent. These lands are _Kharaji_ lands, in distinction from
the _Ushuri_ or tithe-paying lands. The _Ushuri_ lands were originally
granted in fee, and are subject to a quit-rent. All tenants are under
obligation to guard or repair the banks of the Nile in times of flood,
or in any case of sudden emergency. Only to this extent does the
_corvee_ now prevail. The land-tax is proportionate, i.e. land under
perennial irrigation pays higher taxes than land not so irrigated (see
below, _Finance_). The unit of land is the _feddan_, which equals 1.03
acre. Out of 1,153,759 proprietors of land in 1905, 1,005,705 owned less
than 5 _feddans_. The number of proprietors owning over 50 _feddans_ was
12,475. The acreage held by the first class was 1,264,084, that by the
second class, 2,356,602. Over 1,600,000 _feddans_ were held in holdings
of from 5 to 50 _feddans_. The state domains cover over 240,000
_feddans_, and about 600,000 _feddans_ are owned by foreigners. The
policy of the government is to maintain the small proprietors, and to do
nothing tending to oust the native in favour of European landowners.

The kind of crops cultivated depends largely on whether the land is
under perennial, flood or "basin" irrigation. Perennial irrigation is
possible where there are canals which can be supplied with water all the
year round from the Nile. This condition exists throughout the Delta and
Middle Egypt, but only in parts of Upper Egypt. Altogether some
4,000,000 acres are under perennial irrigation. In these regions two and
sometimes three crops can be harvested yearly. In places where perennial
irrigation is impossible, the land is divided by rectangular dikes into
"basins." Into these basins--which vary in area from 600 to 50,000
acres--water is led by shallow canals when the Nile is in flood. The
water is let in about the middle of August and the basins are begun to
be emptied about the 1st of October. The land under basin irrigation
covers about 1,750,000 acres. In the basins only one crop can be grown
in the year. This basin system is of immemorial use in Egypt, and it was
not until the time of Mehemet Ali (c. 1820) that perennial irrigation
began. High land near the banks of the Nile which cannot be reached by
canals is irrigated by raising water from the Nile by steam-pumps,
water-wheels (_sakias_) worked by buffaloes, or water-lifts (_shadufs_)
worked by hand. There are several thousand steam-pumps and over 100,000
_sakias_ or _shadufs_ in Egypt. The _fellah_ divides his land into
little square plots by ridges of earth, and from the small canal which
serves his holding he lets the water into each plot as needed. The same
system obtains on large estates (see further IRRIGATION: _Egypt_).
There are three agricultural seasons: (1) summer (_sefi_), 1st of April
to 31st of July, when crops are grown only on land under perennial
irrigation; (2) flood (_Nili_), 1st of August to 30th of November; and
(3) winter (_shetwi_), 1st of December to 31st of March. Cotton, sugar
and rice are the chief summer crops; wheat, barley, flax and vegetables
are chiefly winter crops; maize, millet and "flood" rice are _Nili_
crops; millet and vegetables are also, but in a less degree, summer
crops. The approximate areas under cultivation in the various seasons
are, in summer, 2,050,000 acres; in flood, 1,500,000 acres; in winter,
4,300,000 acres. The double-cropped area is over 2,000,000 acres.
Although on the large farms iron ploughs, and threshing and
grain-cleaning machines, have been introduced, the small cultivator
prefers the simple native plough made of wood. Corn is threshed by a
_norag_, a machine resembling a chair, which moves on small iron wheels
or thin circular plates fixed to axle-trees, and is drawn in a circle by
oxen.

  _Crops._--Egypt is third among the cotton-producing countries of the
  world. Its production per acre is the greatest of any country but,
  owing to the restricted area available, the bulk raised is not more
  than one-tenth of that of the United States and about half that of
  India. Some 1,600,000 acres of land, five-sixths being in Lower Egypt,
  are devoted to cotton growing. The climate of Lower Egypt being very
  suitable to the growth of the plant, the cotton produced there is of
  excellent quality. The seed is sown at the end of February or
  beginning of March and the crop is picked in September and October.
  The cotton crop increased from 1,700,000 _kantars_[3] in 1878 to
  4,100,000 in 1890, had reached 5,434,000 in 1900, and was 6,750,000 in
  1905. Its average value, 1897-1905, was over L14,000,000 a year. The
  cotton exported was valued in 1907 at LE.23,598,000, in 1908 at
  LE.17,091,612.

  While cotton is grown chiefly in the Delta, the sugar plantations,
  which cover about 100,000 acres, are mainly in Upper Egypt. The canes
  are planted in March and are cut in the following January or February.
  Although since 1884 the production of sugar has largely increased,
  there has not been a corresponding increase in its value, owing to the
  low price obtained in the markets of the world. Beetroot is also grown
  to a limited extent for the manufacture of sugar. The sugar exported
  varied in annual value in the period 1884-1905 from L400,000 to
  L765,000.

  A coarse and strong tobacco was formerly extensively grown, but its
  cultivation was prohibited in 1890. Flax and hemp are grown in a few
  places.

  Maize in Lower Egypt and millet (of which there are several varieties)
  in Upper Egypt are largely grown for home consumption, these grains
  forming a staple food of the peasantry. The stalk of the maize is also
  a very useful article. It is used in the building of the houses of the
  fellahin, as fuel, and, when green, as food for cattle. Wheat and
  barley are important crops, and some 2,000,000 acres are sown with
  them yearly. The barley in general is not of good quality, but the
  desert or "Mariut" barley, grown by the Bedouins in the coast region
  west of Alexandria, is highly prized for the making of beer. Beans and
  lentils are extensively sown, and form an important article of export.
  The annual value of the crops is over L3,000,000. Rice is largely
  grown in the northern part of the Delta, where the soil is very wet.
  Two kinds are cultivated: _Sultani_, a summer crop, and _Sabaini_, a
  flood crop. _Sabaini_ is a favourite food of the fellahin, while
  _Sultani_ rice is largely exported. In the absence of grass, the chief
  green food for cattle and horses is clover, grown largely in the basin
  lands of Upper Egypt. To a less extent vetches are grown for the same
  purpose.

  _Vegetables and Fruit._--Vegetables grow readily, and their
  cultivation is an important part of the work of the fellahin. The
  onion is grown in great quantities along the Nile banks in Upper
  Egypt, largely for export. Among other vegetables commonly raised are
  tomatoes (the bulk of which are exported), potatoes (of poor quality),
  leeks, marrows, cucumbers, cauliflowers, lettuce, asparagus and
  spinach.

  The common fruits are the date, orange, citron, fig, grape, apricot,
  peach and banana. Olives, melons, mulberries and strawberries are also
  grown, though not in very large numbers. The olive tree flourishes
  only in the Fayum and the oases. The Fayum also possesses extensive
  vineyards. The date is a valuable economic asset. There are some
  6,000,000 date-palms in the country, 4,000,000 being in Upper Egypt.
  The fruit is one of the chief foods of the people. The value of the
  crop is about L1,500,000 a year.

  _Roses and Dyes._--There are fields of roses in the Fayum, which
  supply the market with rose-water. Of plants used for dyeing, the
  principal are bastard saffron, madder, woad and the indigo plant. The
  leaves of the henna plant are used to impart a bright red colour to
  the palms of the hands, the soles of the feet, and the nails of both
  hands and feet, of women and children, the hair of old ladies and the
  tails of horses. Indigo is very extensively employed to dye the
  shirts of the natives of the poorer classes; and is, when very dark,
  the colour of mourning; therefore, women at funerals, and generally
  after a death, smear themselves with it.

  _Domestic Animals._--The Egyptians are not particularly a pastoral
  people, though the wealth of the Bedouin in the Eastern or Arabian
  Desert consists in their camels, horses, sheep and goats. In the Nile
  valley the chief domestic animals are the camel, donkey, mule, ox,
  buffalo, sheep and goat. Horses are comparatively few, and are seldom
  seen outside the large towns, the camel and donkey being the principal
  beasts of burden. The cattle are short-horned, rather small and well
  formed. They are quiet in disposition, and much valued for
  agricultural labour by the people, who therefore very rarely slaughter
  them for meat. Buffaloes of an uncouth appearance and of a dark slaty
  colour, strikingly contrasting with the neat cattle, abound in Egypt.
  They are very docile, and the little children of the villagers often
  ride them to or from the river. The buffaloes are largely employed for
  turning the _sakias_. Sheep (of which the greater number are black)
  and goats are abundant, and mutton is the ordinary butcher's meat. The
  wool is coarse and short. Swine are very rarely kept, and then almost
  wholly for the European inhabitants, the Copts generally abstaining
  from eating their meat. Poultry is plentiful and eggs form a
  considerable item in the exports. Pigeons are kept in every village
  and their flesh is a common article of food.

  _Fishing._--The chief fishing-ground is Lake Menzala, where some 4000
  persons are engaged in the industry, but fish abound in the Nile also,
  and are caught in large quantities along the coast of the Delta. The
  salting and curing of the fish is done chiefly at Mataria, on Lake
  Menzala, and at Damietta. Dried and salted fish eggs, called
  _batarekh_, command a ready market. The average annual value of the
  fisheries is about L200,000.

  _Canals._--The irrigation canals, which are also navigable by small
  craft, are of especial importance in a country where the rainfall is
  very slight. The Delta is intersected by numerous canals which derive
  their supply from four main channels. The Rayya Behera, known in its
  lower courses first as the Khatatba and afterwards as the Rosetta
  canal, follows the west bank of the Rosetta branch of the Nile and has
  numerous offshoots. The most important is the Mahmudia (50 m. long),
  which connects Alexandria with the Rosetta branch, taking a similar
  direction to that of the ancient canal which it succeeded. This canal
  supplies Alexandria with fresh water.

  The Rayya Menufia, or Menuf canal, connects the two branches of the
  Nile and supplies water to the large number of canals in the central
  part of the Delta. Following the right (eastern) bank of the Damietta
  branch is the Rayya Tewfiki, known below Benha as the Mansuria, and
  below Mansura as the Fareskur, canal. This canal has many branches.
  Farther east are other canals, of which the most remarkable occupy in
  part the beds of the Tanitic and Pelusiac branches. That following the
  old Tanitic channel is called the canal of Al-Mo'izz, the first
  Fatimite caliph who ruled in Egypt, having been dug by his orders, and
  the latter bears the name of the canal of Abu-l-Muneggi, a Jew who
  executed this work, under the caliph Al-Amir, in order to water the
  province called the Sharkia. From this circumstance this canal is also
  known as the Sharkawia. From a town on its bank it is called in its
  lower course the Shibini canal. The superfluous water from all the
  Delta canals is drained off by _bahrs_ (rivers) into the coast lakes.
  The Ismailia or Fresh-water canal branches from the Nile at Cairo and
  follows, in the main, the course of the canal which anciently joined
  the Nile and the Red Sea. It dates from Pharaonic times, having been
  begun by "Sesostris," continued by Necho II. and by Darius Hystaspes,
  and at length finished by Ptolemy Philadelphus. This canal, having
  fallen into disrepair, was restored in the 7th century A.D. by the
  Arabs who conquered Egypt, but appears not long afterwards to have
  again become unserviceable. The existing canal was dug in 1863 to
  supply fresh water to the towns on the Suez Canal. Although designed
  for irrigation purposes, the Delta canals are also used for the
  transport of passengers and goods.

  In Upper Egypt the most important canals are the Ibrahimia and the
  Bahr Yusuf (the River of Joseph). They are both on the west side of
  the Nile. The Ibrahimia takes its water from the Nile at Assiut, and
  runs south to below Beni Suef. It now supplies the Bahr Yusuf, which
  runs parallel with and west of the Ibrahimia, until it diverges to
  supply the Fayum--a distance of some 350 m. It leaves the Ibrahimia at
  Derut near its original point of departure from the Nile. Although the
  Joseph whence it takes its name is the celebrated Saladin, it is
  related that he merely repaired it, and it is not doubted to be of a
  much earlier period. Most probably it was executed under the Pharaohs.
  By some authorities it is believed to be a natural channel canalized.
  Besides supplying the canals of the Fayum with summer water, it fills
  many of the "basins" of Upper Egypt with water in flood time.

_Manufactures and Native Industries._--Although essentially an
agricultural country, Egypt possesses several manufactures. In connexion
with the cotton industry there are a few mills where calico is made or
oil crushed, and ginning-mills are numerous. In Upper Egypt there are a
number of factories for sugar-crushing and refining, and one or two
towns of the Delta possess rice mills. Flour mills are found in every
part of the country, the maize and other grains being ground for home
consumption. Soap-making and leather-tanning are carried on, and there
are breweries at Alexandria and Cairo. The manufacture of tobacco into
cigarettes, carried on largely at Alexandria and Cairo, is another
important industry. Native industries include the weaving of silk,
woollen, linen and cotton goods, the hand-woven silk shawls and
draperies being often rich and elegant. The silk looms are chiefly at
Mehallet el-Kubra, Cairo and Damietta. The Egyptians are noted for the
making of pottery of the commoner kinds, especially water-jars. There is
at Cairo and in other towns a considerable industry in ornamental wood
and metal work, inlaying with ivory and pearl, brass trays, copper
vessels, gold and silver ornaments, &c. At Cairo and in the Fayum, attar
of roses and other perfumes are manufactured. Boat-building is an
important trade.

  _Commerce._--The trade of Egypt has developed enormously since the
  British occupation in 1882 ensured to all classes of the community the
  enjoyment of the profit of their labour. The total value of the
  exterior trade increased in the 20 years 1882 to 1902 from L19,000,000
  to L32,400,000. The wealth of Egypt lying in the cultivation of its
  soil, almost all the exports are agricultural produce, while the
  imports are mostly manufactured goods, minerals and hardware. The
  chief exports in order of importance are: raw cotton, cotton seed,
  sugar, beans, cigarettes, onions, rice and gum-arabic. The gum is not
  of native produce, being in transit from the Sudan. Of less importance
  are the exports of hides and skins, eggs, wheat and other grains,
  wool, quails, lentils, dates and Sudan produce in transit. The
  principal articles imported are: cotton goods and other textiles,
  coal, iron and steel, timber, tobacco, machinery, flour, alcoholic
  liquors, petroleum, fruits, coffee and live animals. There is an _ad
  valorem_ duty of 8% on imports and of about 1% on exports. Tobacco and
  precious stones and metals pay heavier duties. The tobacco is imported
  chiefly from Turkey and Greece, is made into cigarettes in Egypt, and
  in this form exported to the value of about L500,000 yearly.

  In comparison with cotton, all other exports are of minor account. The
  cotton exported, of which Great Britain takes more than half, is worth
  over three-fourths of the total value of goods sent abroad. Next to
  cotton, sugar is the most important article exported. A large
  proportion of the sugar manufactured is, however, consumed in the
  country and does not figure in the trade returns. Of the imports the
  largest single item is cotton goods, nearly all being sent from
  England. Woollen goods come chiefly from England, Austria and Germany,
  silk goods from France. Large quantities of ready-made clothes and
  fezes are imported from Austria. Iron and steel goods, machinery,
  locomotives, &c., come chiefly from England, Belgium and Germany, coal
  from England, live stock from Turkey and the Red Sea ports, coffee
  from Brazil, timber from Russia, Turkey and Sweden.

  A British consular report (No. 3121, annual series), issued in 1904,
  shows that in the period 1887-1902 the import trade of Egypt nearly
  doubled. In the same period the proportion of imports from the United
  Kingdom fell from 39.63 to 36.76%. Though the percentage decreased,
  the value of imports from Great Britain increased in the same period
  from L2,500,000 to L4,500,000. In addition to imports from the United
  Kingdom, British possessions took 6.0% of the import trade. Next to
  Great Britain, Turkey had the largest share of the import trade, but
  it had declined in the sixteen years from 19 to 15%. France about 10%,
  and Austria 6.72%, came next, but their import trade was declining,
  while that of Germany had risen from less than 1 to over 3%, and
  Belgium imports from 1.74 to 4.27%.

  In the same period (1887-1902) Egyptian exports to Great Britain
  decreased from 63.25 to 52.30%, Germany and the United States showing
  each an increase of over 6.0%. Exports to Germany had increased from
  0.13 to 6.75%, to the United States from 0.26 to 6.70%. Exports to
  France had remained practically stationary at 8.0%; those to Austria
  had dropped from 6.3% to 4.0%, to Russia from 9.11 to 8.43%.

  For the quinquennial period 1901-1905, the average annual value of the
  exterior trade was:--imports L17,787,296; exports L18,811,588; total
  L36,598,884. In 1907 the total value of the merchandise imported and
  exported, exclusive of transit, re-exportation and specie, was
  LE.54,134,000--constituting a record trade return. The value of the
  imports was LE.26,121,000, of the exports LE.28,013,000.

  _Shipping._--More than 90% of the external trade passes through the
  port of Alexandria. Port Said, which in consequence of its position at
  the northern entrance of the Suez Canal has more frequent and regular
  communication with Europe, is increasing in importance and is the port
  where mails and passengers are landed. Over 3000 ships enter and clear
  harbour at Alexandria every year. The total tonnage entering the port
  increased in the five years 1901-1905 from 2,555,259 to 3,591,281. In
  the same period the percentage of British shipping, which before 1900
  was nearly 50, varied from 40 to 45. No other nation had more than 12%
  of the tonnage, Italy, France, Austria and Turkey each having 9 to
  12%. The tonnage of German ships increased in the five years mentioned
  from 3 to 7%. In number of steamships entering the harbour Great
  Britain is first, with some 800 yearly, or about 50% of all steamers
  entering. The sailing boats entering the harbour are almost entirely
  Turkish. They are vessels of small tonnage.

  The transit trade with the East, which formerly passed overland
  through Egypt, has been diverted to the Suez Canal, the traffic
  through which has little to do with the trade or shipping of Egypt.
  The number of ships using the canal increased in the 20 years
  1880-1900 from 2000 to 4000, while in the same period the tonnage rose
  from 4,300,000 to 14,000,000. In 1905 the figures were:--Number of
  ships that passed through the canal, 4116 (2484 being British and 600
  German), net tonnage 13,134,105 (8,356,940 British and 2,113,484
  German). Next to British and German the nationality of ships using the
  canal in order of importance is French, Dutch, Austrian, Italian and
  Russian. About 250,000 passengers (including some 40,000 pilgrims to
  Mecca) pass through the canal in a year (see further SUEZ).

  _Currency._--The monetary system in force dates from 1885, when
  through the efforts of Sir Edgar Vincent the currency was placed on a
  sound basis. The system is based on the single gold standard. The unit
  is a gold coin called a pound and equal to L1, 0s. 6d. in English
  currency. The Egyptian pound (LE.) is divided into 100 piastres, of
  which there are coins in silver of 20, 10, 5 and 2 piastres. One, 1/2,
  1/5 and 1/10 piastre pieces are coined in nickel and 1/20 and 1/40
  piastre pieces in bronze. The one piastre piece is worth a fraction
  over 2-1/2d. The 1/40 of a piastre is popularly called a para and the
  native population generally reckon in paras. The legal piastre is
  called the piastre tariff (P.T.), to distinguish it from the 1/2
  piastre, which in local usage in Cairo and Alexandria is called a
  piastre. Officially the 1/2 piastre is known as 5 milliemes, and so
  with the coins of lower denomination, the para being 1/4 millieme. The
  old terms _kis_ or "purse" (500 piastres) and _khazna_ or "treasury"
  (1000 purses) are still occasionally used. Formerly European coins of
  all kinds were in general circulation, now the only foreign coins
  current are the English sovereign, the French 20 franc piece and the
  Turkish mejidie, a gold coin worth 18 shillings. For several years no
  Egyptian gold pieces have been coined. Egyptian silver money is minted
  at Birmingham, and nickel and bronze money at Vienna. Bank-notes, of
  the National Bank, are issued for LE.100, LE.50, LE.10, LE.5 and LE.1,
  and for 50 piastres. The notes are not legal tender, but are accepted
  by the government in payment of taxes.

  The history of the currency reform in Egypt is interesting as
  affording a practical example of a system much discussed in connexion
  with the currency question in India, namely, a gold standard without a
  gold coinage. The Egyptian pound is practically nonexistent, nearly
  all that were coined having been withdrawn from circulation. Their
  place has been taken by foreign gold, principally the English
  sovereign, which circulates at a value of 97-1/2 piastres. In practice
  the system works perfectly smoothly, the gold flowing in and out of
  the country through the agency of private banking establishments in
  proportion to the requirements of the circulation. It is, moreover,
  very economical for the government. As in most agricultural countries,
  there is a great expansion of the circulation in the autumn and winter
  months in order to move the crops, followed by a long period of
  contracted circulation throughout the rest of the year. Under the
  existing system the fluctuating requirements of the currency are met
  without the expense of alternately minting and melting down.

  _Weights and Measures._--The metrical system of weights and measures
  is in official but not in popular use, except in the foreign quarters
  of Cairo, Alexandria, &c. The most common Egyptian measures are the
  _fitr_, or space measured by the extension of the thumb and first
  finger; the _shibr_, or span; and the cubit (of three kinds = 22-2/3,
  25 and 26-1/2 in.). The measure of land is the _feddan_, equal to 1.03
  acres, subdivided into 24 _kirats_. The _ardeb_ is equal to about 5
  bushels, and is divided into 6 _waybas_, and each _wayba_ into 24
  _rubas_. The _okieh_ equals 1.32 oz., the _rotl_ .99 lb., the _oke_
  2.75 lb., the _kantar_ (or 100 _rotls_ or 36 _okes_) 99.04 lb.

_Constitution and Administration._--Egypt is a tributary state of the
Turkish empire, and is ruled by an hereditary prince with the style of
khedive, a Persian title regarded as the equivalent of king. The
succession to the throne is by primogeniture. The central administration
is carried on by a council of ministers, appointed by the khedive, one
of whom acts as prime minister. To these is added a British financial
adviser, who attends all meetings of the council of ministers, but has
not a vote; on the other hand, no financial decision may be taken
without his consent. The ministries are those of the interior, finance,
public works, justice, war, foreign affairs and public instruction,[4]
and in each of these are prepared the drafts of decrees, which are then
submitted to the council of ministers for approval, and on being signed
by the khedive become law. No important decision, however, has been
taken since 1882 without the concurrence of the British minister
plenipotentiary. With a few exceptions, laws cannot, owing to the
Capitulations, be enforced against foreigners except with the consent of
the powers.

While the council of ministers with the khedive forms the legislative
authority, there are various representative bodies with strictly limited
powers. The legislative council is a consultative body, partly elective,
partly nominative. It examines the budget and all proposed
administrative laws, but cannot initiate legislation, nor is the
government bound to adopt its suggestions. The general assembly consists
of the legislative council and the ministers of state, together with
popularly elected members, who form a majority of the whole assembly. It
has no legislative functions, but no new direct personal tax nor land
tax can be imposed without its consent. It must meet at least once in
every two years.

For purposes of local government the chief towns constitute
governorships (_moafzas_), the rest of the country being divided into
_mudirias_ or provinces. The governors and _mudirs_ (heads of provinces)
are responsible to the ministry of the interior. The provinces are
further divided into districts, each of which is under a _mamur_, who in
his turn supervises and controls the _omda_, mayor or head-man, of each
village in his district.

The governorships are: Cairo; Alexandria, which includes an area of 70
sq. m.; Suez Canal, including Port Said and Ismailia; Suez and El-Arish.
Lower Egypt is divided into the provinces of: Behera, Gharbia, Menufia,
Dakahlia, Kaliubia, Sharkia. The oasis of Siwa and the country to the
Tripolitan frontier are dependent on the province of Behera. Upper
Egypt: Giza, Beni Suef, Fayum, Minia, Assiut, Girga, Kena, Assuan. The
peninsula of Sinai is administered by the war office.

_Justice._--There are four judicial systems in Egypt: two applicable to
Egyptian subjects only, one applicable to foreigners only, and one
applicable to foreigners and, to a certain extent, natives also. This
multiplicity of tribunals arises from the fact that, owing to the
Capitulations, which apply to Egypt as part of the Turkish empire,
foreigners are almost entirely exempt from the jurisdiction of the
native courts. It will be convenient to state first the law as regards
foreigners, and secondly the law which concerns Egyptians. Criminal
jurisdiction over foreigners is exercised by the consuls of the fifteen
powers possessing such right by treaty, according to the law of the
country of the offender. These consular courts also judge civil cases
between foreigners of the same nationality.

Jurisdiction in civil matters between natives and foreigners and between
foreigners of different nationalities is no longer exercised by the
consular courts. The grave abuse to which the consular system was
subject led to the establishment, in February 1876, at the instance of
Nubar Pasha and after eight years of negotiation, of International or
"Mixed" Tribunals to supersede consular jurisdiction to the extent
indicated. The Mixed Tribunals employ a code based on the _Code
Napoleon_ with such additions from Mahommedan law as are applicable.
There are three tribunals of first instance, and an appeal court at
Alexandria. These courts have both foreign and Egyptian judges--the
foreign judges forming the majority of the bench. In certain designated
matters they enjoy criminal jurisdiction, including, since 1900,
offences against the bankruptcy laws. Cases have to be conducted in
Arabic, French, Italian and English, English having been admitted as a
"judicial language" by khedivial decree of the 17th of April 1905.
Besides their judicial duties, the courts practically exercise
legislative functions, as no important law can be made applicable to
Europeans without the consent of the powers, and the powers are mainly
guided by the opinions of the judges of the Mixed Courts.

The judicial systems applicable solely to Egyptians are supervised by
the ministry of justice, to which has been attached since 1890 a British
judicial adviser. Two systems of laws are administered:--(1) the
_Mehkemehs_, (2) the Native Tribunals. The _mehkemehs_, or courts of the
cadis, judge in all matters of personal status, such as marriage,
inheritance and guardianship, and are guided in their decisions by the
code of laws founded on the Koran. The grand cadi, who must belong to
the sect of the _Hanifis_, sits at Cairo, and is aided by a council of
_Ulema_ or learned men. This council consists of the sheikh or religious
chief of each of the four orthodox sects, the sheikh of the mosque of
Azhar, who is of the sect of the _Shafi'is_, the chief (_nakib_) of the
_Sherifs_, or descendants of Mahomet, and others. The cadis are chosen
from among the students at the Azhar university. (In the same manner, in
matters of personal law, Copts and other non-Moslem Egyptians are, in
general, subject to the jurisdiction of their own religious chiefs.)

For other than the purposes indicated, the native judicial system, both
civil and criminal, was superseded in 1884 by tribunals administering a
jurisprudence modelled on that of the French code. It is, in the words
of Lord Cromer, "in many respects ill adapted to meet the special needs
of the country" (_Egypt_, No. 1, 1904, p. 33). The system was, on the
advice of an Anglo-Indian official (Sir John Scott), modified and
simplified in 1891, but its essential character remained unaltered. In
1904, however, more important modifications were introduced. Save on
points of law, the right of appeal in criminal cases was abolished, and
assize courts, whose judgments were final, established. At the same time
the penal code was thoroughly revised, so that the Egyptian judges were
"for the first time provided with a sound working code" (Ibid. p. 49).
The native courts have both native and foreign judges. There are courts
of summary jurisdiction presided over by one judge, central tribunals
(or courts of first instance) with three judges, and a court of appeal
at Cairo. A committee of judicial surveillance watches the working of
the courts of first instance and the summary courts, and endeavours, by
letters and discussions, to maintain purity and sound law. There is a
_procureur-general_, who, with other duties, is entrusted with criminal
prosecutions. His representatives are attached to each tribunal, and
form the _parquet_ under whose orders the police act in bringing
criminals to justice. In the _markak_ (district) tribunals, created in
1904 and presided over by magistrates with jurisdiction in cases of
misdemeanour, the prosecution is, however, conducted directly by the
police. Special Children's Courts have been established for the trial of
juvenile offenders.

The police service, which has been subject to frequent modification, was
in 1895 put under the orders of the ministry of the interior, to which a
British adviser and British inspectors are attached. The provincial
police is under the direction of the local authorities, the _mudirs_ or
governors of provinces, and the _mamurs_ or district officials; to the
_omdas_, or village head-men, who are responsible for the good order of
the villages, a limited criminal jurisdiction has been entrusted.

_Religion._--The great majority of the inhabitants are Mahommedans. In
1907 the Moslems numbered over ten millions, or 91.8% of the entire
population. The Christians in the same year numbered 880,000, or 8% of
the population. Of these the Coptic Orthodox church had some 667,000
adherents. Among other churches represented were the Greek Orthodox, the
Armenian, Syrian and Maronite, the Roman Catholic and various Protestant
bodies. The last-named numbered 37,000 (including 24,000 Copts). There
were in 1907 over 38,000 Jews in Egypt.

The Mahommedans are Sunnites, professing the creed commonly termed
"orthodox," and are principally of the persuasion of the _Shafi'is_,
whose celebrated founder, the imam ash-Shafi'i, is buried in the great
southern cemetery of Cairo. Many of them are, however, _Hanifis_ (to
which persuasion the Turks chiefly belong), and in parts of Lower, and
almost universally in Upper, Egypt, _Malikis_. Among the Moslems the
_Sheikh-el-Islam_, appointed by the khedive from among the _Ulema_
(learned class), exercises the highest religious and, in certain
subjects, judicial authority. There is also a grand cadi, nominated by
the sultan of Turkey from among the _Ulema_ of Stamboul. Valuable
property is held by the Moslems in trust for the promotion of religion
and for charitable purposes, and is known as the Wakfs administration.
The revenue derived is over L250,000 yearly.

The Coptic organization includes in Egypt three metropolitans and
twelve bishops, under the headship of the patriarch of Alexandria. The
minor orders are arch-priests, priests, archdeacons, deacons, readers
and monks (see COPTS: _Coptic Church_).

_Education._--Two different systems of education exist, one founded on
native lines, the other European in character. Both systems are more or
less fully controlled by the ministry of public instruction. The
government has primary, secondary and technical schools, training
colleges for teachers, and schools of agriculture, engineering, law,
medicine and veterinary science. The government system, which dates back
to a period before the British occupation, is designed to provide, in
the main, a European education. In the primary schools Arabic is the
medium of instruction, the use of English for that purpose being
confined to lessons in that language itself. The school of law is
divided into English and French sections according to the language in
which the students study law. Besides the government primary and
secondary schools, there are many other schools in the large towns owned
by the Moslems, Copts, Hebrews, and by various missionary societies, and
in which the education is on the same lines. A movement initiated among
the leading Moslems led in 1908 to the establishment as a private
enterprise of a national Egyptian university devoted to scientific,
literary and philosophical studies. Political and religious subjects are
excluded from the curriculum and no discrimination in regard to race or
religion is allowed.

  Education on native lines is given in _kuttabs_ and in the Azhar
  university in Cairo. _Kuttabs_ are schools attached to mosques, found
  in every village and in every quarter of the larger towns. In these
  schools the instruction given before the British occupation was very
  slight. All pupils were taught to recite portions of the Koran, and a
  proportion of the scholars learnt to read and write Arabic and a
  little simple arithmetic. Those pupils who succeeded in committing to
  memory the whole of the Koran were regarded as _fiki_ (learned in
  Mahommedan law), and as such escaped liability to military
  conscription. The government has improved the education given in the
  _kuttabs_, and numbers of them have been taken under the direct
  control of the ministry of public instruction. In these latter schools
  an excellent elementary secular education is given, in addition to the
  instruction in the Koran, to which half the school hours are devoted.
  The number of pupils in 1905 was over 12,000 boys and 2000 girls.
  Grants-in-aid are given to other schools where a sufficiently good
  standard of instruction is maintained. No grant is made to any
  _kuttab_ where any language other than Arabic is taught. In all there
  are over 10,000 kuttabs, attended by some 250,000 scholars. The number
  of pupils in private schools under government inspection was in 1898,
  the first year of the grant-in-aid system, 7536; in 1900, 12,315; in
  1905, 145,691. The number of girls in attendance rose from 598 in 1898
  to 997 in 1900 and 9611 in 1905. The Copts have about 1000 primary
  schools, in which the teaching of Coptic is compulsory, a few
  industrial schools, and one college for higher instruction.

  Cairo holds a prominent place as a seat of Moslem learning, and its
  university, the Azhar, is considered the first of the eastern world.
  Its professors teach "grammatical inflexion and syntax, rhetoric,
  versification, logic, theology, the exposition of the Koran, the
  traditions of the Prophet, the complete science of jurisprudence, or
  rather of religious, moral, civil and criminal law, which is chiefly
  founded on the Koran and the traditions, together with arithmetic as
  far as it is useful in matters of law. Lectures are also given on
  algebra and on the calculations of the Mahommedan calendar, the times
  of prayer, &c." (E. W. Lane, _Modern Egyptians_). The students come
  from all parts of the Mahommedan world. They number about 8000, of
  whom some 2000 are resident. The students pay no fees, and the
  professors receive no salaries. The latter maintain themselves by
  private teaching and by copying manuscripts, and the former in the
  same manner, or by reciting the Koran. To meet the demand for better
  qualified judges for the Moslem courts a training college for cadis
  was established in 1907. Besides the subjects taught at the Azhar
  university, instruction is given in literature, mathematics and
  physical science. The necessity for a reorganization of the Azhar
  system itself being also recognized by the high Moslem dignitaries in
  Egypt, a law was passed in 1907 creating a superior board of control
  under the presidency of the Sheikh el-Azhar to supervise the
  proceedings of the university and other similar establishments. This
  attempt to reform the Azhar met, however, with so much opposition that
  in 1909 it was, for the time, abandoned.

  In 1907, of the sedentary Egyptian population over seven years of age,
  some 12% of the Moslems could read and write, female literacy having
  increased 50% since 1897; of the foreign population over seven years
  of age 75% could read and write. Of the Coptic community about 50% can
  read and write.

  _Literature and the Press._--Since the British occupation there has
  been a marked renaissance of Arabic learning and literature in Egypt.
  Societies formed for the encouragement of Arabic literature have
  brought to light important texts bearing on Mahommedan history,
  antiquities and religion. Numbers of magazines and reviews are
  published in Arabic which cater both for the needs of the moment and
  the advancement of learning. Side by side with these literary organs
  there exists a vernacular press largely devoted to nationalist
  propaganda. Prominent among these papers is _Al Lewa_ (_The
  Standard_), founded in 1900. Other papers of a similar character are
  _Al Omma_, _Al Moayad_ and _Al Gerida_. The _Mokattam_ represents the
  views of the more enlightened and conservative section of the native
  population. In Cairo and Alexandria there are also published several
  newspapers in English and French.

  AUTHORITIES.--(a) General descriptions, geography, travel, &c.:
  _Description de l'Egypte_, 10 folio vols. and atlas of 10 vols.
  (Paris, 1809-1822), compiled by the scientific commission sent to
  Egypt by Bonaparte; Clot Bey, _Apercu general sur l'Egypte_, 2 vols.
  (Paris, 1840); Boinet Bey, _Dictionnaire geographique de l'Egypte_
  (Cairo, 1899); Murray's and Baedeker's handbooks and _Guide Joanne_;
  G. Ebers, _Egypt, Descriptive, Historical and Picturesque_, translated
  from the German edition of 1879 by Clara Bell, new edition, 2 vols.
  (London, 1887); Sir Gardiner Wilkinson, _Modern Egypt and Thebes_ (2
  vols., London, 1843); Lady Duff Gordon, _Letters from Egypt_, complete
  edition (London, 1902), an invaluable account of social conditions in
  the period 1862-1869; A. B. Edwards, _A Thousand Miles up the Nile_
  (2nd edition, London, n.d. [1889]); _Pharaohs, Fellahs and Explorers_
  (London, 1892); H. W. Mardon, _Geography of Egypt ..._ (London, 1902),
  an excellent elementary text-book; D. G. Hogarth, _The Nearer East_
  (London, 1902), contains brief but suggestive chapters on Egypt; S.
  Lane Poole, _Egypt_ (London, 1881); A. B. de Guerville, _New Egypt_,
  translated from the French (London, 1905); R. T. Kelly, _Egypt Painted
  and Described_ (London, 1902). The best maps are those of the Survey
  Department, Cairo, on the scale of 1:50000 (1.3 in. to the mile).

  (b) Administration: Sir John Bowring's _Report on Egypt ..._ to Lord
  Palmerston (London, 1840) shows the system obtaining at that period.
  For the study of the state of Egypt at the time of the British
  occupation, 1882, and the development of the country since, the most
  valuable documents[5] are:

  I. _Official._--The _Reports on the Finances, Administration and
  Condition of Egypt_, issued yearly since 1892 (the reports 1888-1891
  were exclusively financial). Up to 1906 the reports were by Lord
  Cromer (Sir Evelyn Baring). They clearly picture the progress of the
  country. The following reports are specially valuable as exhibiting
  the difficulties which at the outset confronted the British
  administrators:--_Correspondence respecting the Reorganization of
  Egypt_ (1883); _Reports by Mr Villiers Stuart respecting
  Reorganization of Egypt_ (1883 and 1895); _Despatch from Lord Dufferin
  forwarding the Decree constituting the New Political Institutions of
  Egypt_ (1883); _Reports on the State of Egypt and the Progress of
  Administrative Reforms_ (1885); _Reports by Sir H. D. Wolff on the
  Administration of Egypt_ (1887). Annual returns are published in Cairo
  in English or French by the various ministries, and British consular
  reports on the trade of Egypt and of Alexandria and of the tonnage and
  shipping of the Suez Canal are also issued yearly.

  II. _Non-official._--Lord Cromer, _Modern Egypt_ (2 vols., 1908), an
  authoritative record; Alfred (Lord) Milner, _England in Egypt_, first
  published in 1892, the story being brought up to 1904 in the 11th
  edition; Sir A. Colvin, _The Making of Modern Egypt_ (1906); J. Ward,
  _Pyramids and Progress_ (1900); A. S. White, _The Expansion of Egypt_
  (1899); and F. W. Fuller, _Egypt and the Hinterland_ (1901). See also
  the works cited in _History_, last section.

  (c) Law: H. Lamba, _De l'evolution de la condition juridique des
  Europeens en Egypte_ (Paris, 1896); J. H. Scott, _The Law affecting
  Foreigners in Egypt ..._ (Edinburgh, 1907); _The Egyptian Codes_
  (London, 1892).

  (d) Irrigation, agriculture, geology, &c.: _Despatch from Sir Evelyn
  Baring enclosing Report on the Condition of the Agricultural
  Population in Egypt_ (1888); _Notes on Egyptian Crops_ (Cairo, 1896);
  Yacub Artin Bey, _La Propriete fonciere en Egypte_ (Bulak, 1885);
  _Report on Perennial Irrigation and Flood Protection for Egypt_, 1
  vol. and atlas (Cairo, 1894). The reports (_Egypt_, No. 2, 1901, and
  _Egypt_, No. 2, 1904), by Sir William Garstin on irrigation projects
  on the Upper Nile are very valuable records--notably the 1904 report.
  W. Willcocks, _Egyptian Irrigation_ (2nd ed., 1899); H. G. Lyons, _The
  Physiography of the River Nile and its Basin_ (Cairo, 1906); Leigh
  Canney, _The Meteorology of Egypt and its Influence on Disease_
  (1897). Annual meteorological reports are issued by the Public Works
  Department, Cairo. The same department issues special irrigation
  reports. See for geology Carl von Zittel, _Beitrage zur Geologie und
  Palaontologie der libyschen Wuste_ (Cassel, 1883); _Reports of the
  Geological Survey of Egypt_ (Cairo, 1900, et seq.).

  (e) Natural history, anthropology, &c.: F. Pruner, _Agyptens
  Naturgeschichte und Anthropologie_ (Erlangen, 1848); R. Hartmann,
  _Naturgeschichtliche Skizze der Nillander_ (Berlin, 1866); Captain G.
  E. Shelley, _Birds of Egypt_ (London, 1872).     (F. R. C.)


_Inhabitants._

The population enumerated at the census taken in April 1907 was
11,189,978. In these figures nomad Arabs or Bedouins, estimated to
number 97,381, are not included. The total population was thus returned
at 11,287,359, or some 16% more than in 1897 when the inhabitants
numbered 9,734,405. The figures for 1897 compared with 6,813,919 in
1882, an increase of 43.5% in fifteen years. Thus, during the first
twenty-five years of the British occupation of the country the
population increased by nearly 4,500,000. In 1800 the French estimated
the population at no more than 2,460,000; the census of 1846 gave the
figures at 4,476,440. From that year to 1882 the average annual increase
was 1.25%. If the desert regions be excluded, the population of Egypt is
extremely dense, being about 939 per sq. m. This figure may be compared
with that of Belgium, the most densely populated country in Europe, 589
per sq. m., and with that of Bengal, 586 per sq. m. In parts of Menufia,
a Delta province, the density rises to 1352 per sq. m., and in the Kena
province of Upper Egypt to 1308.

The population is generally divisible into--

  1. The fellahin or peasantry and the native townsmen.
  2. The Bedouins or nomad Arabs of the desert.
  3. The Nuba, Nubians or Berberin, inhabitants of the Nile valley
       between Assuan and Dongola.
  4. Foreigners.

The first of these divisions includes both the Moslem and Coptic
inhabitants. The Bedouins, or the Arabs of the desert, are of two
different classes: first, Arabic-speaking tribes who range the deserts
as far south as 26 deg. N.; secondly, the tribes inhabiting the desert
from Kosseir to Suakin, namely the Hadendoa, Bisharin and the Ababda
tribes. This group speak a language of their own, and are probably
descendants of the Blemmyes, who occupied these parts in ancient times
(see ARABS; BEDOUINS; HADENDOA; BISHARIN; &c.). The Nubas are of mixed
negro and Arab blood. They are mainly agriculturists, though some are
keen traders (see NUBIA).

Foreigners number over 150,000 and form 1-1/2% of the total population.
They are chiefly Greeks--of whom the majority live in
Alexandria--Italians, British and French. Syrians and Levantines are
numerous, and there is a colony of Persians. The Turkish element is not
numerically strong--a few thousands only--but holds a high social
position.

Of the total population, about 20% is urban. In addition to the 97,000
pure nomads, there are half a million Bedouins described as
"semi-sedentaries," i.e. tent-dwelling Arabs, usually encamped in those
parts of the desert adjoining the cultivated land. The rural classes are
mainly engaged in agriculture, which occupies over 62% of the adults.
The professional and trading classes form about 10% of the whole
population, but 50% of the foreigners are engaged in trade. Of the total
population the males exceed the females by some 46,000.


    Physical characteristics of the Egyptians.

  The Coptic inhabitants are described in the article COPTS, and the
  rural population under FELLAH. It remains here to describe
  characteristics and customs common to the Moslem Egyptians and
  particularly to those of the cities. In some respects the manner of
  life of the natives has been modified by contact with Europeans, and
  what follows depicts in general the habits of the people where little
  affected by western culture. With regard to physical characteristics
  the Egyptians are of full average height (the men are mostly 5 ft. 8
  in. or 5 ft. 9 in), and both sexes are remarkably well proportioned
  and of strong physique. The Cairenes and the inhabitants of Lower
  Egypt generally have a clear complexion and soft skin of a light
  yellowish colour; those of Middle Egypt have a tawny skin, and the
  dwellers in Upper Egypt a deep bronze or brown complexion. The face of
  the men is of a fine oval, forehead prominent but seldom high,
  straight nose, eyes deep set, black and brilliant, mouth well formed,
  but with rather full lips, regular teeth beautifully made, and beard
  usually black and curly but scanty. Moustaches are worn, while the
  head is shaved save for a small tuft (called _shusheh_) upon the
  crown. As to the women, "from the age of about fourteen to that of
  eighteen or twenty, they are generally models of beauty in body and
  limbs; and in countenance most of them are pleasing, and many
  exceedingly lovely; but soon after they have attained their perfect
  growth, they rapidly decline." There are few Egyptian women over forty
  who retain either good looks or good figures. "The forms of womanhood
  begin to develop themselves about the ninth and tenth year: at the
  age of fifteen or sixteen they generally attain their highest degree
  of perfection. With regard to their complexions, the same remarks
  apply to them as to the men, with only this difference, that their
  faces, being generally veiled when they go abroad, are not quite so
  much tanned as those of the men. They are characterized, like the men,
  by a fine oval countenance, though in some instances it is rather
  broad. The eyes, with very few exceptions, are black, large and of a
  long almond-form, with long and beautiful lashes, and an exquisitely
  soft, bewitching expression--eyes more beautiful can hardly be
  conceived: their charming effect is much heightened by the concealment
  of the other features (however pleasing the latter may be), and is
  rendered still more striking by a practice universal among the females
  of the higher and middle classes, and very common among those of the
  lower orders, which is that of blackening the edge of the eyelids both
  above and below the eye, with a black powder called 'kohl'" (Lane,
  _Modern Egyptians_). Both sexes, but especially the women, tattoo
  several parts of the person, and the women stain their hands and feet
  with the red dye of the henna.


    Dress and social life.

  The dress of the men of the upper and middle classes who have not
  adopted European clothing--a practice increasingly common--consists of
  cotton drawers, and a cotton or silk shirt with very wide sleeves.
  Above these are generally worn a waistcoat without sleeves, and a long
  vest of silk, called kaftan, which has hanging sleeves, and reaches
  nearly to the ankles. The kaftan is confined by the girdle, which is a
  silk scarf, or cashmere or other woollen shawl. Over all is worn a
  long cloth robe, the gibbeh (or jibbeh) somewhat resembling the kaftan
  in shape, but having shorter sleeves, and being open in front. The
  dress of the lower orders is the shirt and drawers, and waistcoat,
  with an outer shirt of blue cotton or brown woollen stuff; some wear a
  kaftan. The head-dress is the red cloth fez or tarbush round which a
  turban is usually worn. Men who have otherwise adopted European
  costume retain the tarbush. Many professions and religions, &c., are
  distinguished by the shape and colour of the turban, and various
  classes, and particularly servants, are marked by the form and colour
  of their shoes; but the poor go usually barefoot. Many ladies of the
  upper classes now dress in European style, with certain modifications,
  such as the head-veil. Those who retain native costume wear a very
  full pair of silk trousers, bright coloured stockings (usually pink),
  and a close-fitting vest with hanging sleeves and skirts, open down
  the front and at the sides, and long enough to turn up and fasten into
  the girdle, which is generally a cashmere shawl; a cloth jacket,
  richly embroidered with gold, and having short sleeves, is commonly
  worn over the vest. The hair in front is combed down over the forehead
  and cut across in a straight line; behind it is divided into very many
  small plaits, which hang down the back, and are lengthened by silken
  cords, and often adorned with gold coins and ornaments. A small
  tarbush is worn on the back of the head, sometimes having a plate of
  gold fixed on the crown, and a handkerchief is tastefully bound round
  the temples. The women of the lower orders have trousers of printed or
  dyed cotton, and a close waistcoat. All wear the long and elegant
  head-veil. This is a simple "breadth" of muslin, which passes over the
  head and hangs down behind, one side, being drawn forward over the
  face in the presence of a man. A lady's veil is of white muslin,
  embroidered at the ends in gold and colours; that of a person of the
  lower class is simply dyed blue. In going abroad the ladies wear above
  their indoor dress a loose robe of coloured silk without sleeves, and
  nearly open at the sides, and above it a large enveloping piece of
  black silk, which is brought over the head, and gathered round the
  person by the arms and hands on each side. A face-veil entirely
  conceals the features, except the eyes; it is a long and narrow piece
  of thick white muslin, reaching to a little below the knees. The women
  of the lower orders have the same out-door dress of different
  materials and colour. Ladies use slippers of yellow morocco, and
  abroad, inner boots of the same material, above which they wear, in
  either case, thick shoes, having only toes. The poor wear red shoes,
  very like those of the men. The women, especially in Upper Egypt, not
  infrequently wear nose-rings.

  Children, though often neglected, are not unkindly treated, and
  reverence for their parents and the aged is early inculcated. They are
  also well grounded in the leading doctrines of Islam. Boys are
  circumcised at the age of five or six years, when the boy is paraded,
  generally with a bridal procession, on a gaily caparisoned horse and
  dressed in woman's clothes. Most parents send their boys to school
  where a knowledge of reading and writing Arabic--the common tongue of
  the Egyptians--is obtainable, and from the closing years of the 19th
  century a great desire for the education of girls has arisen (see S
  _Education_).

  It is deemed disreputable for a young man not to marry when he has
  attained a sufficient age; there are, therefore, few unmarried men.
  Girls, in like manner, marry very young, some at ten years of age, and
  few remain single beyond the age of sixteen; they are generally very
  prolific. The bridegroom never sees his future wife before the wedding
  night, a custom rendered more tolerable than it otherwise might be by
  the facility of divorce. A dowry is always given, and a simple
  marriage ceremony performed by a _fiki_ (a schoolmaster, or one who
  recites the Koran, properly one learned in _fiqh_, Mahommedan law) in
  the presence of two witnesses. The bridal of a virgin is attended with
  great festivity and rejoicing, a grandee's wedding sometimes
  continuing eleven days and nights. On the last day, which should be
  that terminating with the eve of Friday, or of Monday, the bride is
  taken in procession to the bridegroom's house, accompanied by her
  female friends, and a band of musicians, jugglers, wrestlers, &c. As
  before stated, a boy about to be circumcised joins in such a
  procession, or, frequently, a succession of such boys. Though allowed
  by his religion four wives, most Egyptians are monogamists. A man may,
  however, possess any number of concubines, who, though objects of
  jealousy to the legal wife, are tolerated by her in consideration of
  her superior position and power over them, a power which she often
  uses with great tyranny; but certain privileges are possessed by
  concubines, especially if they have borne sons to their master. A
  divorce is rendered obligatory by the simple words "Thou art
  divorced." Repudiation may take place twice without being final, but
  if the husband repeats thrice "Thou art divorced" the separation is
  absolute. In that case the dowry must be returned to the wife.

  Elaborate ceremonies are observed at funerals. Immediately on death
  the corpse is turned towards Mecca, and the women of the household,
  assisted by hired mourners, commence their peculiar wailing, while
  fikis recite portions of the Koran. The funeral takes place on the day
  of the death, if that happen in the morning; otherwise on the next
  day. The corpse, having been washed and shrouded, is placed in an open
  bier, covered with a cashmere shawl, in the case of a man; or in a
  closed bier, having a post in front, on which are placed feminine
  ornaments, in that of a woman or child. The funeral procession is
  headed by a number of poor, and generally blind, men, chanting the
  profession of the faith, followed by male friends of the deceased, and
  a party of schoolboys, also chanting, generally from a poem
  descriptive of the state of the soul after death. Then follows the
  bier, borne on the shoulders of friends, who are relieved by the
  passers-by, such an act being deemed highly meritorious. Behind come
  the women relatives and the hired wailers. On the way to the cemetery
  the corpse is generally carried to some revered mosque. Here the
  funeral service is performed by the imam, and the procession then
  proceeds to the tomb. In the burials of the rich, water and bread are
  distributed to the poor at the grave; and sometimes a buffalo or
  several buffaloes are slaughtered there, and the flesh given away. The
  tomb is a vault, surmounted by an oblong stone monument, with a stele
  at the head and feet; and a cupola, supported by four walls, covers
  the whole in the case of sheikhs' tombs and those of the wealthy.
  During the night following the interment, called the Night of
  Desolation, or that of Solitude, the soul being believed to remain
  with the body that one night, fikis are engaged at the house of the
  deceased to recite various portions of the Koran, and, commonly, to
  repeat the first clause of the profession of the faith, "There is no
  God but God," three thousand times. The women alone put on mourning
  attire, by dyeing their veils, shirts, &c., dark blue, with indigo;
  and they stain their hands, and smear the walls, with the same colour.
  Everything in the house is also turned upside down. The latter customs
  are not, however, observed on the death of an old man. At certain
  periods after the burial, a khatmeh, or recitation of the whole of the
  Koran, is performed, and the tomb is visited by the women relations
  and friends of the deceased. The women of the peasants of Upper Egypt
  perform strange dances, &c., at funerals, which are regarded partly as
  relics of ancient Egyptian customs.

  The harem system of appointing separate apartments to the women, and
  secluding them from the gaze of men, is observed in Egypt as in other
  Moslem countries, but less strictly. The women of an Egyptian
  household in which old customs are maintained never sit in the
  presence of the master, but attend him at his meals, and are treated
  in every respect as inferiors. The mother, however, forms a remarkable
  exception to this rule; in rare instances, also, a wife becomes a
  companion to her husband. On the other hand, if a pair of women's
  shoes are placed outside the door of the harem apartments, they are
  understood to signify that female visitors are within, and a man is
  sometimes thus excluded from the upper portion of his own house for
  many days. Ladies of the upper or middle classes lead a life of
  extreme inactivity, spending their time at the bath, which is the
  general place of gossip, or in receiving visits, embroidering, and the
  like, and in absolute _dolce far niente_. Both sexes are given to
  licentiousness.

  The principal meals are breakfast, about an hour after sunrise;
  dinner, or the mid-day meal, at noon; and supper, which is the chief
  meal of the day, a little after sunset. Pastry, sweetmeats and fruit
  are highly esteemed. Coffee is taken at all hours, and is, with a
  pipe, presented at least once to each guest. Tobacco is the great
  luxury of the men of all classes in Egypt, who begin and end the day
  with it, and generally smoke all day with little intermission. Many
  women, also, especially among the rich, adopt the habit. The smoking
  of hashish, though illegal, is indulged in by considerable numbers of
  people. Men who can afford to keep a horse, mule or ass are very
  seldom seen to walk. Ladies ride asses and sit astride. The poorer
  classes cannot fully observe the harem system, but the women are in
  general carefully veiled. Some of them keep small shops, and all fetch
  water, make fuel, and cook for their households. Domestic slavery
  lingers but is moribund. The majority of the slaves are negresses
  employed in household duties.

  In social intercourse the Egyptians observe many forms of salutation
  and much etiquette; they are very affable, and readily enter into
  conversation with strangers. Their courtesy and dignity of manner are
  very striking, and are combined with ease and a fluency of discourse.
  They have a remarkable quickness of apprehension, a ready wit, a
  retentive memory, combined, however, with religious pride and
  hypocrisy, and a disregard for the truth. Their common discourse is
  full of asseverations and expressions respecting sacred things. They
  entertain reverence for their Prophet; and the Koran is treated with
  the utmost respect--never, for example, being placed in a low
  situation--and this is the case with everything they esteem holy. They
  are fatalists, and bear calamities with surprising resignation. Their
  filial piety and respect for the aged have been mentioned, and
  benevolence and charity are conspicuous in their character. Humanity
  to animals is another virtue, and cruelty is openly discountenanced in
  the streets. Their affability, cheerfulness and hospitality are
  remarkable, as well as frugality and temperance in food and drink, and
  honesty in the payment of debt. Their cupidity is mitigated by
  generosity; their natural indolence by the necessity, especially among
  the peasantry, to work hard to gain a livelihood. Egyptians, however,
  are as a rule suspicious of all not of their own creed and country.
  Murders and other grave crimes are rare, but petty larcenies are very
  common.

  The amusements of the people are generally not of a violent kind,
  being in keeping with their sedentary habits and the heat of the
  climate. The bath is a favourite resort of both sexes and all classes.
  They are acquainted with chess, draughts, backgammon, and other games,
  among which is one peculiar to themselves, called Mankalah, and played
  with cowries. Notwithstanding its condemnation by Mahomet, music is
  the most favourite recreation of the people; the songs of the boatmen,
  the religious chants, and the cries in the streets are all musical.
  There are male and female musical performers; the former are both
  instrumental and vocal, the latter (called _'Almeh_, pl. _'Awalim_)
  generally vocal. The 'Awalim are, as their name ("learned") implies,
  generally accomplished women, and should not be confounded with the
  Ghawazi, or dancing-girls. There are many kinds of musical
  instruments. The music, vocal and instrumental, is generally of little
  compass, and in the minor key; it is therefore plaintive, and strikes
  a European ear as somewhat monotonous, though often possessing a
  simple beauty, and the charm of antiquity, for there is little doubt
  that the favourite airs have been handed down from remote ages. The
  Ghawazi (sing. Ghazia) form a separate class, very similar to the
  gipsies. They intermarry among themselves only, and their women are
  professional dancers. Their performances are often objectionable and
  are so regarded by many Egyptians. They dance in public, at fairs and
  religious festivals, and at private festivities, but, it is said, not
  in respectable houses. Mehemet Ali banished them to Esna, in Upper
  Egypt; and the few that remained in Cairo called themselves 'Awalim,
  to avoid punishment. Many of the dancing-girls of Cairo to-day are
  neither 'Awalim nor Ghawazi, but women of the very lowest class whose
  performances are both ungraceful and indecent. A most objectionable
  class of male dancers also exists, who imitate the dances of the
  Ghawazi, and dress in a kind of nondescript female attire. Not the
  least curious of the public performances are those of the
  serpent-charmers, who are generally Rifa'ia (Saadia) dervishes. Their
  power over serpents has been doubted, yet their performances remain
  unexplained; they, however, always extract the fangs of venomous
  serpents. Jugglers, rope-dancers and farce-players must also be
  mentioned. In the principal coffee-shops of Cairo are to be found
  reciters of romances, surrounded by interested audiences.


    Public festivals.

  The periodical public festivals are exceedingly interesting, but many
  of the remarkable observances connected with them are passing away.
  The first ten days of the Mahommedan year are held to be blessed, and
  especially the tenth; and many curious practices are observed on these
  days, particularly by the women. The tenth day, being the anniversary
  of the martyrdom of Hosain, the son of Ali and grandson of the
  Prophet, the mosque of the Hasanen at Cairo is thronged to excess,
  mostly by women. In the evening a procession goes to the mosque, the
  principal figure being a white horse with white trappings, upon which
  is seated a small boy, the horse and the lad, who represents Hosain,
  being smeared with blood. From the mosque the procession goes to a
  private house, where a mullah recites the story of the martyrdom.
  Following the order of the lunar year, the next festival is that of
  the Return of the Pilgrims, which is the occasion of great rejoicing,
  many having friends or relatives in the caravan. The Mahmal, a kind of
  covered litter, first originated by Queen Sheger-ed-Dur, is brought
  into the city in procession, though not with as much pomp as when it
  leaves with the pilgrims. These and other processions have lost much
  of their effect since the extinction of the Mamelukes, and the gradual
  disuse of gorgeous dress for the retainers of the officers of state. A
  regiment of regular infantry makes but a sorry substitute for the
  splendid cavalcade of former times. The Birth of the Prophet (Molid
  en-Nebi), which is celebrated in the beginning of the third month, is
  the greatest festival of the whole year. For nine days and nights
  Cairo has more the aspect of a fair than of a city keeping a religious
  festival. The chief ceremonies take place in some large open spot
  round which are erected the tents of the khedive, of great state
  officials, and of the dervishes. Next in time, and also in importance,
  is the Molid El-Hasanen, commemorative of the birth of Hosain, and
  lasting fifteen days and nights; and at the same time is kept the
  Molid of al-Salih Ayyub, the last sovereign but two of the Ayyubite
  dynasty. In the seventh month occur the Molid of the sayyida Zenab,
  and the commemoration of the Miarag, or the Prophet's miraculous
  journey to heaven. Early in the eighth month (Sha'ban), the Molid of
  the imam Shafi'i is observed; and the night of the middle of that
  month has its peculiar customs, being held by the Moslems to be that
  on which the fate of all living is decided for the ensuing year. Then
  follows Ramadan, the month of abstinence, a severe trial to the
  faithful; and the Lesser Festival (Al-'id as-saghir), which commences
  Shawwal, is hailed by them with delight. A few days after, the Kiswa,
  or new covering for the Ka'ba at Mecca, is taken in procession from
  the citadel, where it is always manufactured, to the mosque of the
  Hasanen to be completed; and, later, the caravan of pilgrims departs,
  when the grand procession of the Mahmal takes place. On the tenth day
  of the last month of the year the Great Festival (Al-'id al-kabir), or
  that of the Sacrifice (commemorating the willingness of Ibrahim to
  slay his son Ismail--according to the Arab legend), closes the
  calendar. The Lesser and Great Festivals are those known in Turkish as
  the Bairam (q.v.).

  The rise of the Nile is naturally the occasion of annual customs, some
  of which are doubtless relics of antiquity; these are observed
  according to the Coptic calendar. The commencement of the rise is
  commemorated on the night of the 11th of Bauna, the 17th of June,
  called that of the Drop (Lelet-en-Nukta), because a miraculous drop is
  then supposed to fall and cause the swelling of the river. The real
  rise begins at Cairo about the summer solstice, or a few days later,
  and early in July a crier in each district of the city begins to go
  his daily rounds, announcing, in a quaint chant, the increase of water
  in the nilometer of the island of Roda. When the river has risen 20 or
  21 ft., he proclaims the Wefa en-Nil, "Completion" or "Abundance of
  the Nile." On the following day the dam which closed the canal of
  Cairo was cut with much ceremony. The canal having been filled up in
  1897 the ceremony has been much modified, but a brief description of
  what used to take place may be given. A pillar of earth before the dam
  is called the "Bride of the Nile," and Arab historians relate that
  this was substituted, at the Moslem conquest, for a virgin whom it was
  the custom annually to sacrifice, to ensure a plentiful inundation. A
  large boat, gaily decked out, representing that in which the victim
  used to be conveyed, was anchored near, and a gun on board fired every
  quarter of an hour during the night. Rockets and other fireworks were
  also let off, but the best, strangely, after daybreak. The governor of
  Cairo attended the ceremony, with the cadi and others, and gave the
  signal for the cutting of the dam. As soon as sufficient water had
  entered, boats ascended the canal to the city. The crier continues his
  daily rounds, with his former chant, excepting on the Coptic New
  Year's Day, when the cry of the Wefa is repeated, until the Salib, or
  Discovery of the Cross, the 26th or 27th of September, at which
  period, the river having attained its greatest height, he concludes
  his annual employment with another chant, and presents to each house
  some limes and other fruit, and dry lumps of Nile mud.

  The period of the hot winds, called the khamsin, that is, "the
  fifties," is calculated from the day after the Coptic Easter, and
  terminates on the day of Pentecost, and the Moslems observe the
  Wednesday preceding this period, called "Job's Wednesday," as well as
  its first day, when many go into the country from Cairo, "to smell the
  air." This day is hence called Shem en-Nesim, or "the smelling of the
  zephyr." The Ulema observe the same custom on the first three days of
  the spring quarter.

  Tombs of saints abound, one or more being found in every town and
  village; and no traveller up the Nile can fail to remark how every
  prominent hill has the sepulchre of its patron saint. The great saints
  of Egypt are the imam Ash-Shafi'i, founder of the persuasion called
  after him, the sayyid Ahmad al-Baidawi, and the sayyid Ibrahim
  Ed-Desuki, both of whom were founders of orders of dervishes.
  Al-Baidawi, who lived in the 13th century A.D., is buried at the town
  of Tanta, in the Delta, and his tomb attracts many thousands of
  visitors at each of the three festivals held yearly in his honour;
  Ed-Desuki is also much revered, and his festivals draw together, in
  like manner, great crowds to his birthplace, the town of Desuk. But,
  besides the graves of her native saints, Egypt boasts of those of
  several members of the Prophet's family, the tomb of the sayyida
  Zeyneb, daughter of 'Ali, that of the sayyida Sekeina, daughter of
  Hosain, and that of the sayyida Nefisa, great-granddaughter of Hasan,
  all of which are held in high veneration. The mosque of the Hasanen
  (or that of the "two Hasans") is the most reverenced shrine in the
  country, and is believed to contain the head of Hosain. Many orders of
  Dervishes live in Egypt, the following being the most celebrated:--(1)
  the Rifa'ia, and their sects the 'Ilwania and Saadia; (2) the Qadiria
  (Kahiria), or howling dervishes; (3) the Ahmedia, or followers of the
  sayyid Ahmad al-Baidawi, and their sects the Beyumia (known by their
  long hair), Shinnawia, Sharawia and many others; and (4) the Baramia,
  or followers of the sayyid Ibrahim Ed-Desuki. These are all presided
  over by a direct descendant of the caliph Abu Bekr, called the Sheikh
  El-Bekri. The Saadia are famous for charming and eating live serpents,
  &c., and the 'Ilwania for eating fire, glass, &c. The Egyptians firmly
  believe in the efficacy of charms, a belief associated with that in
  an omnipresent and over-ruling providence. Thus the doors of houses
  are inscribed with sentences from the Koran, or the like, to preserve
  from the evil eye, or avert the dangers of an unlucky threshold;
  similar inscriptions may be observed over most shops, while almost
  every one carries some charm about his person. The so-called sciences
  of magic, astrology and alchemy still flourish.

  AUTHORITIES.--The standard authority for the Moslem Egyptians is E. W.
  Lane's _Manners and Customs of the Modern Egyptians_, first published
  in 1836. The best edition is that of 1860, edited, with additions, by
  E. S. Poole. See also B. Saint-John, _Village Life in Egypt_ (2 vols.,
  1852); S. Lane Poole, _Social Life in Egypt_ (1884); P. Arminjon,
  _L'Enseignement, la doctrine, el la vie dans les universites
  musulmanes d'Egypte_ (Paris, 1907). For the language see J. S.
  Willmore, _The Spoken Arabic of Egypt_ (2nd ed., London, 1905); Spitta
  Bey, _Grammatik des arabischen Vulgardialektes von Agypten, Contes
  arabes modernes_ (Leiden, 1883). For statistical information consult
  the reports on the censuses of 1897 and 1907, published by the
  Ministry of the Interior, Cairo, in 1898 and 1909.
       (E. S. P.; S. L.-P.; F. R. C.)


_Finance._

The important part which the financial arrangements have played in the
political and social history of Egypt since the accession of Ismail
Pasha in 1863 is shown in the section _History_ of this article. Here it
is proposed to trace the steps by which Egypt, after having been brought
to a state of bankruptcy, passed through a period of great stress, and
finally attained prosperity and a large measure of financial autonomy.

In 1862 the foreign debt of Egypt stood at L3,292,000. With the
accession of Ismail (q.v.) there followed a period of wild extravagance
and reckless borrowing accompanied by the extortion of every piastre
possible from the fellahin. The real state of affairs was disclosed in
the report of Mr Stephen Cave, a well-known banker, who was sent by the
British government in December 1875 to inquire into the situation. The
Cave report showed that Egypt suffered from "the ignorance, dishonesty,
waste and extravagance of the East" and from "the vast expense caused by
hasty and inconsiderate endeavours to adopt the civilization of the
West." The debtor and creditor account of the state from 1864 to 1875
showed receipts amounting to L148,215,000. Of this sum over L94,000,000
had been obtained from revenue and nearly L4,000,000 by the sale of the
khedive's shares in the Suez Canal to Great Britain. The rest was
credited to: loans L31,713,000, floating debt L18,243,000. The cash
which reached the Egyptian treasury from the loans and floating debt was
far less than the nominal amount of such loans, none of which cost the
Egyptian government less than 12% per annum. When the expenditure during
the same period was examined the extraordinary fact was disclosed that
the sum raised by revenue was only three millions less than that spent
on administration, tribute and public works, including a sum of
L10,500,000, described as "expenses of questionable utility or policy."
The whole proceeds of the loans and floating debt had been absorbed in
payment of interest and sinking funds, with the exception of L16,000,000
debited to the Suez Canal. In other words, Egypt was burdened with a
debt of L91,000,000--funded or floating--for which she had no return,
for even from the Suez Canal she derived no revenue, owing to the sale
of the khedive's shares.

Soon after Mr Cave's report appeared (March 1876), default took place on
several of the loans. Nearly the whole of the debt, it should be stated,
was held in England or France, and at the instance of French financiers
the stoppage of payment was followed by a scheme to unify the debt. This
scheme included the distribution of a bonus of 25% to holders of
treasury bonds. These bonds had then reached a sum exceeding L20,000,000
and were held chiefly by French firms. The unification scheme was
elaborated in a khedivial decree of the 7th of May 1876, but was
rendered abortive by the opposition of the British bondholders. Its
place was taken by another scheme drawn up by Mr (afterwards Lord)
Goschen and M. Joubert, who represented the British and French
bondholders respectively. The details of this settlement, promulgated by
decree of the 17th of November 1876, need not be given, as it was
superseded in 1880. One of the securities devised for the benefit of the
bondholders in the abortive scheme of May 1876 was retained in the
Goschen-Joubert settlement, and being continued in later settlements
grew to be one of the most important institutions in Egypt. This
security was the establishment of a Treasury of the Public Debt, known
by its French title of _Caisse de la Dette_, and commonly spoken of
simply as "the Caisse." The duty of this body was to act as receivers of
the revenues assigned to the service of the debt. To render their powers
effective they were given the right to sue the Egyptian government in
the Mixed Tribunals for any breach of engagement to the bondholders.


  The Law of Liquidation.

The Goschen-Joubert settlement was accompanied by guarantees against
maladministration by the appointment of an Englishman and a Frenchman to
superintend the revenue and expenditure--the "Dual Control"; while a
commission was appointed in 1878 to investigate the condition of the
country. The settlement of 1880 was effected on the basis of the
proposals made by this commission, and was embodied in the Law of
Liquidation of July 1880--after the deposition of Ismail. For the
purposes of the new settlement the loans raised by Ismail on his private
estates, those known as the Daira (i.e. "administrations") and Domains
loans, were brought into account. By the Law of Liquidation the floating
debt was paid off, the whole debt being consolidated into four large
loans, upon which the rate of interest was reduced to a figure which it
was considered Egypt was able to bear. The Egyptian debt under this
composition was:

  Privileged debt        L22,609,000
  Unified debt            58,018,000
  Daira Sanieh loan        9,513,000
  Domains loan             8,500,000
                         -----------
                         L98,640,000

The rate of interest was, on the Privileged debt and Domains loan, 5%;
on the Unified debt and Daira loan, 4%. Under this settlement the total
annual charges on the country amounted to L4,500,000, about half the
then revenue of Egypt. These charges included the services of the
Privileged and Unified debts, the tribute to Turkey and the interest on
the Suez Canal shares held by Great Britain, but excluded the interest
on the Daira and Domains loans, expected to be defrayed by the revenues
from the estates on which those loans were secured. The general revenue
of Egypt was divided between the bondholders and the government, any
surplus on the bondholders' share being devoted to the redemption of the
capital.

The 1880 settlement proved little more lasting than that of 1876. After
a brief period of prosperity, the Arabi rising, the riots at Alexandria,
and the events generally which led to the British occupation of Egypt in
1882, followed by the losses incurred in the Sudan in the effort to
prevent it falling into the hands of the Mahdi, brought Egypt once more
to the verge of financial disaster. The situation was an anomalous one.
While the revenue assigned to the service of the debt was more than
sufficient for the payment of interest and the sinking fund was in full
operation, the government found that their share of the revenue was
altogether inadequate for the expenses of administration, and they were
compelled to borrow on short loans at high rate of interest. Moreover,
to make good the losses incurred at Alexandria, and to get money to pay
the charges arising out of the Sudan War and the Arabi rebellion, a new
loan was essential. On the initiative of Great Britain a conference
between the representatives of the great powers and Turkey was held in
London, and resulted in the signing of a convention in March 1885. The
terms agreed upon in this instrument, known as the London Convention,
were embodied in a khedivial decree, which, with some modification in
detail, remained for twenty years the organic law under which the
finances of Egypt were administered.


  Provisions of the London Convention.

The principle of dividing the revenue of the country between the Caisse,
as representing the bondholders, and the government was maintained by
the London Convention. The revenue assigned to the service of the debt,
namely, that derived from the railway, telegraphs, port of Alexandria,
customs (including tobacco) and from four of the provinces, remained as
before. It was recognized, however, that the non-assigned revenue was
insufficient to meet the necessary expenses of government, and a scale
of administrative expenditure was drawn up. This was originally fixed at
LE.5,237,000,[6] but subsequently other items were allowed, and in 1904,
the last year in which the system described existed, it was
LE.6,300,600. The Caisse was authorized, after payment of the coupons on
the debt, to make good out of their balance in hand the difference
between the authorized expenditure and the non-assigned revenue. If a
surplus remained to the Caisse after making good such deficit the
surplus was to be divided equally between the Caisse and the government;
the government to be free to spend its share as it pleased, while the
Caisse had to devote its share to the reduction of the debt. This
limitation of administrative expenditure was the cardinal feature and
the leading defect of the convention. Those responsible for this
arrangement--the most favourable for Egypt that Great Britain could
secure--failed to recognize the complete change likely to result from
the British occupation of Egypt, and probably regarded that occupation
as temporary. The system devised might have been justifiable as a check
on a retrograde government, but was wholly inapplicable to a reforming
government and a serious obstacle to the attainment of national
prosperity. In practice administrative expenditure always exceeded the
amount fixed by the convention. Any excess could, however, only be met
out of the half-share of the eventual surplus reached in the manner
described. Consequently, in order to meet new expenditure necessitated
by the growing wants of a country in process of development, just double
the amount of revenue had to be raised.

To return to the provisions of the London Convention. The convention
left the permanent rate of interest on the debt, as fixed by the Law of
Liquidation, unchanged, but to afford temporary relief to the Egyptian
exchequer a reduction of 5% on the interest of the debt was granted for
two years, on condition that if at the end of that period payment,
including the arrears of the two years, was not resumed in full, another
international commission was to be appointed to examine into the whole
financial situation. Lastly, the convention empowered Egypt to raise a
loan of nine millions, guaranteed by all the powers, at a rate of
interest of 3%. For the service of this loan--known as the Guaranteed
loan--an annuity of L315,000 was provided in the Egyptian budget for
interest and sinking fund. The L9,000,000 was sufficient to pay the
Alexandria indemnities, to wipe out the deficits of the preceding years,
to give the Egyptian treasury a working balance of LE.500,000 and
thereby avoid the creation of a fresh floating debt, and to provide a
million for new irrigation works. To the wise foresight which, at a
moment when the country was sinking beneath a weight of debt, did not
hesitate to add this million for expenditure on productive works, the
present prosperity of Egypt is largely due.

The provisions of the London Convention did not exhaust the restrictions
placed upon the Egyptian government in respect of financial autonomy.
These restrictions were of two categories, (1) those independent of the
London Convention, (2) those dependent upon that instrument. In the
first category came (a) the prohibition to raise a loan without the
consent of the Porte. The right to raise loans had been granted to the
khedive Ismail in 1873, but was taken away in 1879 by the firman
appointing Tewfik khedive. (b) Next came the inability to levy taxes on
foreigners without the consent of their respective governments. This
last obligation was, in virtue of the Capitulations, applicable to Egypt
as part of the Ottoman empire. The only exception, resulting from the
Ottoman law under which foreigners are allowed to acquire and hold real
property, is the land tax. (All taxes formerly paid by natives and not
by foreigners have been abolished in Egypt, but the immunity described
constitutes a most serious obstacle to the redistribution of the burden
of taxation in a more equitable manner.)

From the purely Egyptian point of view the most powerful restriction in
this first category remains to be named. In 1883 the supervision
exercised over the finances by French and British controllers was
replaced by that of a British official called the financial adviser. The
British government has declared that "no financial decision shall be
taken without his consent," a declaration never questioned by the
Egyptian government. This restriction, therefore, is at the same time
the chief safeguard for the purity of Egypt's finances.

In the second category of restrictions, namely, those dependent on the
London Convention, were the various commissions or boards known as Mixed
Administrations and having relations of a quasi-independent character
with the ministry of finance. Of these boards by far the most important
was the Caisse. As first constituted it consisted of a French, an
Austrian, and an Italian member; a British member was added in 1877 and
a German and a Russian member in 1885. The revenue assigned to the debt
charges was paid direct to the Caisse without passing through the
ministry of finance. The assent of the Caisse (as well as that of the
sultan) was necessary before any new loan could be issued, and in the
course of a few years from its creation this body acquired very
extensive powers. Besides the Caisse there was the Railway Board, which
administered the railways, telegraphs and port of Alexandria for the
benefit of the bondholders, and the Daira and Domains commissions, which
administered the estates mortgaged to the holders of those loans. Each
of the three boards last named consisted of an Englishman, a Frenchman
and an Egyptian.


  The race against bankruptcy.

During the two years that followed the signing of the London Convention,
the financial policy of the Egyptian government was directed to placing
the country in a position to resume full payment of the interest on the
debt in 1887, and thereby to avoid the appointment of an international
commission. By the exercise of the most rigid economy in all branches
this end was attained, though budgetary equilibrium was only secured by
a variety of financial expedients, justified by the vital importance of
saving Egypt from further international interference. By such means this
additional complication was averted, but the struggle to put Egypt in a
genuinely solvent position was by no means over. It was not until his
report on the financial results of 1888 that Sir Evelyn Baring
(afterwards Lord Cromer) was able to inform the British government that
the situation was such that "it would take a series of untoward events
seriously to endanger the stability of Egyptian finance and the solvency
of the Egyptian government." From this moment the corner was turned, and
the era of financial prosperity commenced. The results of the labours of
the preceding six years began to manifest themselves with a rapidity
which surprised the most sanguine observers. The principal feature of
the successive Egyptian budgets of 1890-1894 was the fiscal relief
afforded to the population. From 1894 onward more attention was paid
than had hitherto been possible to the legitimate demands of the
spending departments and to the prosecution of public works. Of these
the most notable was the construction (1898-1902) of the Assuan dam,
which by bringing more land under cultivation permanently increased the
resources of the country and widened the area of taxation.


  Reserve funds.

With the accumulating proofs of the financial stability of the country
various changes were made in connexion with the debt charges. With the
consent of the powers a General Reserve Fund was created by decree of
the 12th of July 1888, into which was paid the Caisse's half-share in
the eventual surplus of revenue. This fund, primarily intended as a
security for the bondholders, might be drawn upon for extraordinary
expenditure with the consent of the commissioners of the Caisse. Large
sums were so advanced for the purposes of drainage and irrigation and
other public works, and in relief of taxation. The defect of this
arrangement consisted in the necessity of obtaining the consent of the
commissioners--a consent sometimes withheld on purely political grounds.
At the same time it is believed that but for the faculty given by the
decree of 1888 to spend the General Reserve Fund on public works, the
financial system elaborated by the London Convention would have broken
down altogether. Between 1888 and 1904 about L10,000,000 was devoted
from this fund to public works.

In June 1890 the assent of the powers was obtained to the conversion of
the Preference (Privileged), Domains and Daira loans on the following
conditions, imposed at the initiative of the French government:--

  1. The employment of the economies resulting from the conversion was
  to be the subject of future agreement with the powers.

  2. The Daira loan was to be reimbursed at 85%, instead of 80%, as
  provided by the Law of Liquidation.

  3. The sales of Domains and Daira lands were to be restricted to
  LE.300,000 a year each, thus prolonging the period of liquidation of
  those estates.

The interest on the Preference stock was reduced from 5 to 3-1/2%, and on
the Domains from 5 to 4-1/4%. As regards the Daira loan, there was no
apparent reduction in the rate of interest, which remained at 4%, but
the bondholders received L85 of the new stock for every L100 of the old.
The capital of the debt was increased by L1,945,000 by these
conversions, while the annual economy to the Egyptian government
amounted at the time of the conversion to LE.348,000. Further, an
engagement was entered into that there should be no reimbursement of the
loans till 1905 for the Preference and Daira, and 1908 for the Domains.
By an arrangement concluded in June 1898, between the Egyptian
government and a syndicate, the unsold balance of the Daira estates was
taken over by the syndicate in October 1905, for the amount of the debt
remaining, when the Daira loan ceased to exist. The fund formed by the
accumulation of the economies resulting from the conversion of the
Privileged, Daira and Domains loan was known as the Conversion Economies
Fund. The fund could not be used for any purpose without the consent of
the powers, and the money paid into it was invested by the Caisse in
Egyptian stock. The fund therefore acted as a very expensive sinking
fund, the market price of the stock purchased being above par. Up to
1904 the consent of the powers to the employment of this fund for any
purpose of public utility was withheld. On the 31st of December of that
year the fund amounted to LE.6,031,000. It may be added that besides the
General Reserve Fund and the Conversion Economies Fund, there existed
another fund called the Special Reserve Fund. This was constituted in
1886 and was chiefly made up of the net savings of the Egyptian
government on its share of the annual surpluses from revenue. Of the
three funds this last-named was the only one at the absolute disposal of
the government. The whole of the extraordinary expenditure of the Sudan
campaigns of 1896-1898, with the exception of L800,000 granted by the
British government, was paid out of this fund--a sum amounting in round
figures to L1,500,000.


  An era of prosperity.

Notwithstanding all the hampering conditions stated, the prosperity of
the country became more manifest each succeeding year. During the four
years 1883-1886, both inclusive, the aggregate deficit amounted to
LE.2,606,000. In 1887 there was practical equilibrium in the budget, in
1888 there was a deficit of LE.53,000. In 1889 there was a surplus of
LE.218,000, and from that date onward every year has shown a surplus. In
1895 the surplus exceeded, for the first time, LE.1,000,000. The growth
of revenue was no less marked. "In 1883--the first complete year after
the British occupation--the revenue was slightly under 9 millions. This
sum was collected with difficulty. The revenue steadily rose until, in
1890, the figure of 10 millions was exceeded. In 1897 a figure of over
11 millions was attained. Continuing to rise with ever-increasing
rapidity, a revenue of close on 12 millions was collected in 1901 and
1902, in spite of the fact that during the latter of these two years the
Nile flood was one of the lowest on record. In 1903 the revenue amounted
to 12-1/2 millions, and in 1904 the unprecedented figure of LE.13,906,000
was reached."[7] Yet during this period the amount of direct taxation
remitted reached LE.1,900,000 a year. Arrears of land tax to the extent
of LE.1,245,000 were cancelled. In indirect taxation the salt tax had
been reduced by 40%, the postal, railway and telegraph rates lowered,
octroi duties and bridge and lock dues abolished. The only increase of
taxation had been on tobacco, on which the duty was raised from P.T. 14
to P.T. 20 per kilogramme. At the same time the house duty, with the
consent of the powers, had been imposed on European residents. The fact
that during the period under review Egypt suffered very severely from
the general fall in the price of commodities makes the prosperity of the
country the more remarkable. Had it not been for the great increase of
production as the result of improved irrigation and the fiscal relief
afforded to landowners, the agricultural depression would have impaired
the financial situation. In this connexion it should be stated that
during 1899 the reassessment of the land tax, a much-needed reform, was
seriously taken in hand. The existing assessment, made before the
British occupation, had long been condemned by all competent
authorities, but the inherent intricacies and difficulties of the
problem had hitherto postponed a solution. After careful study and a
preliminary examination of the land, a scheme was passed which has given
satisfaction to the landowning community, and which distributes the tax
equitably in proportion to the fertility of the soil. The reassessment
was completed in 1907.


  The cost of internationalism.

While the country thus prospered it also suffered greatly from the
restrictions imposed by the system of international control. This system
produced a great disproportion between the sums available for capital
and those available for administrative expenditure. Although the money
for public works could be obtained out of grants from the General
Reserve Fund, there was no fund from which to provide a sufficient sum
to keep those works in order. Moreover, to avoid having to pay half the
amount received into the General Reserve Fund the government was
compelled to keep certain items of revenue and expenditure out of the
accounts altogether--a violation of the principles of sound finance.
Then there was the glaring anomaly of allowing the Conversion Economies
to accumulate at compound interest in the hands of the commissioners of
the Caisse, instead of using the money for remunerative purposes. The
net result of internationalism was to impose an extra charge of about
L1,750,000 a year on the Egyptian treasury.


  Egypt gains financial liberty.

All these cumbersome restrictions were swept away by the khedivial
decree of the 28th of November 1904, a decree which received the assent
of the powers and was the result of the Anglo-French agreement of April
1904 (see S HISTORY). The decree did not affect the inability of Egypt
to tax foreigners without their consent nor remove the right of Turkey
to veto the issue of new loans, but in other respects the financial
changes made by it were of a radical character. The main effect was to
give to the Egyptian government a free hand in the disposal of its own
resources so long as the punctual payment of interest on the debt was
assured. The plan devised by the London Convention of fixing a limit to
administrative expenditure was abolished. The consent of the Caisse to
the raising of a new loan was no longer required. The Caisse itself
remained, but shorn of all political and administrative powers, its
functions being strictly limited to receiving the assigned revenues and
to ensuring the due payment of the coupon. The nature of the assigned
revenue was altered, the land tax being substituted for those previously
assigned, that tax being chosen as it had a greater character of
stability than any other source of revenue. By this means Egypt gained
complete control of its railways, telegraphs, the port of Alexandria and
the customs, and as a consequence the mixed administration known as the
Railway Board ceased to exist. Moreover, it was provided that when the
Caisse had received from the land tax the amount needed for the service
of the debt, the balance of the tax was to be paid direct to the
Egyptian treasury. The Conversion Economies Fund was also placed at the
free disposal of the Egyptian government. The General Reserve Fund
ceased to exist, but for the better security of the bondholders a
reserve fund of L1,800,000 was constituted and left in the hands of the
Caisse to be used in the highly improbable event of the land tax being
insufficient to meet the debt charges. Moreover, the Caisse started
under the new arrangement with a cash balance of L1,250,000. The
interest of the money lying in the hands of the Caisse goes towards
meeting the debt charges and thus reduces the amount needed from the
land tax. The bondholders gained a further material advantage by the
consent of the Egyptian government to delay the conversion of the loans,
which under previous arrangements they would have been free to do in
1905. It was agreed that there should be no conversion of the Guaranteed
or Privileged debts before 1910 and no conversion of the Unified debt
until 1912. Such were the chief provisions of the khedivial decree, and
in 1905, for the first time, it was possible to draw up the Egyptian
budget in accordance with the needs of the country and on perfectly
sound principles.

  In the system adopted in 1905 and since maintained, recurring and
  non-recurring expenditure were shown separately, the non-recurring
  expenditure being termed "special." At the same time a new General
  Reserve Fund was created, made up chiefly of the surpluses of the old
  General Reserve, Special Reserve, and Conversion Economies funds. This
  new fund started with a capital of L13,376,000 and was replenished by
  the surpluses of subsequent years, by the interest earned by its
  temporary investment, and by the sums accruing by the liquidation of
  the Daira and Domains loans. During 1905 and 1906 about L3,000,000 was
  paid into the fund through the liquidation of the Daira loan. From
  this fund, which had a balance of over L12,000,000 in 1906, is taken
  capital expenditure on remunerative public works in Egypt and the
  Sudan, and while the fund lasts the necessity for any new loan is
  avoided. The greater freedom of action attained as the result of the
  Anglo-French declaration of 1904 enabled the Egyptian government to
  advance simultaneously along the lines of fiscal reform and increased
  administrative expenditure. Thus in 1906 the salt monopoly was
  abolished at a cost to the revenue of L175,000, while the reduction of
  import duties on coal and other fuels, live-stock, &c., involved a
  further loss of L118,000, and an increase of over L1,000,000 in
  expenditure was budgeted for. The accounts for 1907 showed a total
  revenue of LE.16,368,000 and a total expenditure of LE.14,280,000, a
  surplus of LE.2,088,000. The annual growth of revenue for the previous
  five years averaged over LE.500,000. About one-third of the annual
  revenue is derived from the land tax; customs and tobacco duties yield
  about L3,000,000, and an equal or larger amount is received from
  railways and other revenue-earning departments. The chief items of
  ordinary expenditure are tribute and debt charges, the expenses of the
  civil administration, of the Egyptian army (between L500,000 and
  L600,000 yearly), of the revenue-earning departments and of pensions.

  It will be convenient here to summarize the position of the Egyptian
  debt at the close of 1905, that is at the period immediately following
  the liquidation of the Daira loan. In a previous table it has been
  shown that under the Law of Liquidation of 1880 the total debt was
  L98,640,000. In 1883, the first complete year after the British
  occupation, the capital of the debt--then exclusively held by the
  public--was L96,457,000. In 1885 the Guaranteed loan, the nominal
  capital of which was L9,424,000, was issued, and in 1891 the debt
  reached its maximum figure of L106,802,000. At that period the charge
  for interest and sinking fund was L4,127,000. On the 31st of December
  1905 the total capital of the debt was as follows:--

    Guaranteed 3%            L7,849,000
    Preference 3-1/2%        31,128,000
    Unified 4%               55,972,000
    Domains 4-1/4%            1,535,000
                             ----------
                     Total  L96,484,000

  The charge on account of interest and sinking fund was L3,709,000.
  Thus the capital of the debt in 1905 stood at almost the exact figure
  it did in 1883, although by borrowing and conversion operations nearly
  L17,000,000 had in the meantime been added to the capital. This
  reduction was brought about by surplus revenue, and by the operation
  of the sinking fund in the case of the Guaranteed loan, while
  L15,729,000 had been wiped out by the sale of Daira and Domains
  property. These figures do not, however, indicate fully the prosperity
  of the country, for although the nominal amount of the capital was
  practically identical in 1883 and 1905, in the latter year the
  Egyptian government or the Caisse held stock (bought with surplus
  revenue) to the value of L8,770,000. The amount of debt in the hands
  of the public was therefore only L87,714,000, that is to say
  L8,743,000 less than in 1883, while the interest charge to be borne by
  the taxpayer of Egypt was L3,378,000, being L890,000 less than in
  1883. The charge amounts to about 40% of the national expenditure. On
  the other hand, Egypt is not now weighed down with a huge warlike
  expenditure. There is no navy to support, and the army costs but 7% of
  the total expenditure.

  AUTHORITIES.--A concise view of the financial situation in 1877 will
  be found in J. C. McCoan's _Egypt as it is_ (London n.d.). Mr Cave's
  report is printed in an appendix. The subsequent history of Egyptian
  finance is told in the following blue-books, &c.:--_Correspondence
  respecting the State Domains of Egypt_ (1883); _Statement of the
  Revenue and Expenditure of Egypt, together with a List of the Egyptian
  Bonds and the Charges for their Services_ (1885); _Reports on the
  Finances of Egypt_, by the British agent, yearly from 1888;
  _Convention ... relative to the Finance of Egypt, signed at London,
  March 18, 1885; Khedivial decree of the 28th November 1904; Compte
  general de l'administration des finances_, issued yearly at Cairo.
  Consult also the works of Lord Cromer, Lord Milner, and Sir A. Colvin
  cited under S History, last section.     (E. Go.; F. R. C.)


_The Egyptian Army._

  Early history.

The fellah soldier has been aptly likened to a bicycle, which although
incapable of standing up alone, is very useful while under the control
of a skilful master. It is generally believed that the successes gained
in the time of the Pharaohs were due to foreign legions; and from
Cambyses to Alexander, from the Ptolemies to Antony (Cleopatra), from
Augustus to the 7th century, throughout the Arab period, and from
Saladin's dynasty down to the middle of the 13th century, the military
power of Egypt was dependent on mercenaries. The Mamelukes (slaves),
imported from the eastern borders of the Black Sea and then trained as
soldiers, usurped the government of Egypt, and held it till 1517, when
the Ottomans began to rule. This form of government, speaking generally,
endured till the French invasion at the end of the 18th century. British
and Turkish troops drove the French out after an occupation of two
years, the British troops remaining till 1803. Then Mehemet Ali, a small
tobacconist of Kavala, Macedonia, coming with Albanian mercenaries, made
himself governor, and later (1811), by massacring the Mamelukes, became
the actual master of the country, and after seven years' war brought
Arabia under Egypt's rule. He subdued Nubia and Sennar in 1820-22; and
then, requiring a larger army, he obtained instructors from France. To
them were handed over 1000 Turks and Circassians to be trained as
officers, who later took command of 30,000 Sudanese. These died so
rapidly in Egypt from pneumonia[8] that Mehemet Ali conscripted over
250,000 fellahin, and in so arbitrary a fashion that many peasants
mutilated themselves to avoid the much-dreaded service. The common
practice was to place a small piece of nitrate of silver into the eye,
which was then kept tightly bandaged till the sight was destroyed.
Battalions were then formed of one-eyed men, and of soldiers who, having
cut off their right-hand fingers, were made to shoot from the left
shoulder. Every man who could not purchase exemption, with the exception
of those living in Cairo, Alexandria and Suez, on becoming 19 years old
was liable nominally to 12 years' service; but many men were kept for 30
or 40 years, in spite of constant appeals. Nevertheless the experiment
succeeded. The docile, yet robust and hardy peasants, under their
foreign leaders, gained an unbroken series of successes in the first
Syrian War; and after the bloody battle of Konia (1832), where the raw
Turkish army was routed and the grand vizier taken prisoner, it was only
European intervention which prevented the Egyptian general, Ibrahim
Pasha, from marching unopposed to the Bosphorus. The defeat of the
Turkish army at Nizib (Nezeeb or Nisib), in the second Syrian War
(1839), showed that it was possible to obtain favourable military
results with Egyptians when stiffened by foreigners and well commanded.
Ibrahim, the hero of Konia, declared, however, that no native Egyptian
ought to rise higher than the rank of sergeant; and in the Syrian
campaigns nearly all the officers were Turks or Circassians, as were
several non-commissioned officers. In the cavalry and artillery many of
the privates were foreigners, numbers of the janissaries who escaped the
massacre at Stamboul (1832) having joined Mehemet Ali's army.

In the reign of Abbas, who succeeded Mehemet Ali, the Egyptian troops
were driven from Nejd, and the Wahhabi state recovered its independence.
The next viceroy, Said, began as an ardent soldier, but took to
agriculture, and at his death (1863) 3000 men only were retained under
arms. Ismail, on succeeding, immediately added 27,000 men, and in seven
years was able to put 100,000 men, well equipped, in the field. He sent
10,000 men to help to suppress a rebellion in Crete, and conquered the
greater part of the (Nile) Sudan; but an expedition of 11,000 men, sent
to Abyssinia under Prince Hasan and Rateb Pasha, well equipped with guns
and all essentials, was, in two successive disasters (1875 and 1876),
practically destroyed. The education of Egyptians in continental cities
had not produced the class of leaders who led the fellahin to victory at
Konia.

Ismail's exactions from the Egyptian peasantry reacted on the army,
causing discontent; and when he was tottering on the throne he
instigated military demonstrations against his own government, and, by
thus sapping the foundations of discipline, assisted Arabi's revolution;
the result was the battle of Tell el-Kebir, the British occupation, and
the disbandment of the army, which at that time in Egypt proper
consisted of 18,000 men. Ismail had collected 500 field-guns, 200
Armstrong cannon, and had created factories of warlike and other stores.
These latter were conducted extravagantly, and badly administered.


  Reorganization.

In January 1883, Major-General Sir Evelyn Wood, V.C., was given
L200,000, and directed to spend it in raising a fellahin force of 6000
men for the defence of Egypt. He was assisted at first by 26 officers,
amongst whom were two who later became successively sirdars--Colonel F.
Grenfell, commanding a brigade, and Lieutenant H. Kitchener, R.E.,
second in command of the cavalry regiment. There were four batteries,
eight battalions, and a camel company. Each battalion of the 1st
infantry brigade had three British mounted officers, Turks and Egyptians
holding the corresponding positions in the battalions of the 2nd
Brigade. The sirdar selected these native officers from those of Arabi's
followers who had been the least prominent in the recent mutiny;
non-commissioned officers who had been drill-instructors in the old army
were recalled temporarily, but all the privates were conscripted from
their villages. The earlier merciless practice had been in theory
abolished by a decree based on the German system, published in 1880; but
owing to defective organization, and internal disturbances induced by
Khedive Ismail's follies, the law had not been applied, and the 6000
recruits collected at Cairo in January 1883 represented the biggest and
strongest peasants who could not purchase exemption by bribing the
officials concerned. The difficulties experienced in applying the 1880
decree were great, but the perseverance of British officers gave the
oppressed peasants, in 1885, an equitable law, which has been since
improved by the decree of 1900. General considerations later caused the
sirdar to allow exemption by payment of (Badalia) L20 before ballot.
This tax, which is popular amongst the peasantry, produced in 1906
LE.150,000, and over L250,000 in 1908. This is a marked indication of
the increasing prosperity of the fellahin. A portion of the badalia is
expended in the betterment of the soldier's position. He is no longer
drafted into the police on completing his army service, but goes free at
the end of five years with a gift of LE.20. The sirdar is allowed,
moreover, to use L20,000 per annum of the badalia for the improvement of
the education of the rank and file. As an experiment the police is now a
voluntary service, except in Alexandria and Cairo, for which cities
peasants are conscripted for the police under army conditions. The
recruiting superintending committee, travelling through districts,
supervise every ballot, and work under stringent rules which render
systematic bribery difficult. The recruits who draw unlucky numbers at
19 years of age are seldom called up till they are 23, when they are
summoned by name and escorted by a policeman to Cairo. To prevent
substitution on the journey each recruit wears a string girdle sealed in
lead. The periods of service are: with the colours, 5 years; in the
reserve, 5 years, during which time they may be called up for police
service, manoeuvres, &c. The pay is LE.3, 14s. per annum for all
services, and the liberal scale of rations of meat, bread and rice
remains as before in theory, but in practice the value of pay and food
received is greatly enhanced. So also with the pension and promotion
regulations. They were in 1882 sufficiently liberal on paper, but had
never been carried into effect.

The efforts of 48 American officers, who under Gen. C. P. Stone
zealously served Ismail, had entirely failed to overcome Egyptian
venality and intrigue; and in spite of the military schools, with a
comprehensive syllabus, the only perceptible difference between the
Egyptian officer and private in 1879 consisted, according to one of the
Americans, in the fact that the first was the product of the harem, and
the second of the field. Marshal Marmont, writing in 1839, mentions the
capacity of the Egyptians for endurance; and it was tested in 1883,
especially in the 2nd Brigade, since its officers (Turks and Egyptians),
anxious to excel as drill-masters, worked their men not only from morn
till eve, but also by lamplight in the corridors of the barracks. On the
31st March 1883, ten weeks after the arrival of the first draft of
recruits, about 5600 men went through the ceremonial parade movements as
practised by the British guards in Hyde Park, with unusual precision.
The British officers had acquired the words of command in Turkish, as
used in the old army, an attempt to substitute Egyptian words having
failed owing to lack of crisp, sharp-sounding words. As the Egyptian
brigadier, who had spent some years in Berlin, spoke German fluently,
and it was also understood by the senior British officers, that language
was used for all commands given by the sirdar on that special parade.
The British drill-book, minus about one-third of the least serviceable
movements, was translated by an English officer, and by 1900 every
necessary British official book had been published in English and
Arabic, except the new Recruiting Law (1885) and a manufacturing manual,
for which French and Arabic editions are in use. The discipline of the
old army had been regulated by a translation of part of the Code
Napoleon, which was inadequate for an Eastern army, and the sirdar
replaced it by the British Army Act of 1881, slightly modified, and
printed in Arabic.

The task undertaken by the small body of British officers was difficult.
There was not one point in the former administration of the army
acceptable to English gentlemen. That there had been no adequate
auxiliary departments, without which an army cannot move or be
efficient, was comparatively a minor difficulty. To succeed, it was
essential that the fellah should be taught that discipline might be
strict without being oppressive, that pay and rations would be fairly
distributed, that brutal usage by superiors would be checked, that
complaints would be thoroughly investigated, and impartial justice meted
out to soldiers of all ranks. An epidemic of cholera in the summer of
1883 gave the British officers their first chance of acquiring the
esteem and confidence of their men, and the opportunity was nobly
utilized. While the patient fellah, resigned to the decrees of the
Almighty, saw the ruling Egyptian class hurry away from Cairo, he saw
also those of his comrades who were stricken tenderly nursed, soothed in
death's struggles, and in many cases actually washed, laid out and
interred by their new self-sacrificing and determined masters. The
regeneration of the fellahin army dates from that epidemic.

When the Egyptian Army of the Delta was dispersed at Tell el-Kebir, the
khedive had 40,000 troops in the Sudan, scattered from Massawa on the
Red Sea to 1200 m. towards the west, and from Wadi Halfa, 1500 m.
southward to Wadelai, near Albert Nyanza. These were composed of Turks,
Albanians, Circassians and some Sudanese. Ten thousand fellahin,
collected in March 1883, mainly from Arabi's former forces, set out from
Duem, 100 m. south of Khartum, in September 1883, under Hicks Pasha, a
dauntless retired Indian Army officer, to vanquish the Mahdi. They
disappeared in the deserts of Kordofan, where they were destroyed by the
Mahdists about 50 m. south of El Obeid. In the wave of successful
rebellion, except at Khartum, few of the Egyptian garrisons were killed
when the posts fell, long residence and local family ties rendering easy
their assimilation in the ranks of the Mahdists.

Baker Pasha, with about 4000 constabulary, who were old soldiers,
attempted to relieve Tokar in February 1884. He was attacked by 1200
tribesmen and utterly routed, losing 4 Krupp guns, 2 machine guns and
3000 rifles. Only 1400 Egyptians escaped the slaughter.

The sirdar made an attempt to raise a battalion of Albanians, but the
few men obtained mutinied when ordered to proceed to the Sudan, and it
was deemed advisable, after the ringleaders had been executed, to
abandon the idea, and rely on blacks to stiffen the fellahin. Then the
9th (Sudanese) Battalion was created for service at Suakin, and four
others having been successively added, these (with one exception--at
Gedaref) have since borne the brunt of all the fighting which has been
done by the khedivial troops. The Egyptian troops in the operations near
Suakin behaved well; and there were many instances of personal gallantry
by individual soldiers. In the autumn of 1884, when a British expedition
went up the Nile to endeavour to relieve the heroic Gordon, besieged in
Khartum, the Egyptians did remarkably good work on the line of
communication from Assiut to Korti, a distance of 800 m., and the
training and experience thus gained were of great value in all
subsequent operations. The honesty and discipline of the fellah were
shown to be undoubtedly of a high order. When the crews of the
whale-boats were conveying stores, the forwarding officers tried to keep
brandy and such like medical comforts from the European crews, coffee
and tea from Canadian voyageurs and sugar from Kroo boys. The only
immaculate carrier was the Egyptian. A large sum of specie having failed
under British escort to reach Dongola, an equivalent sum was handed to
an Egyptian lieutenant of six months' service, with 10 men, and duly
reached its destination.

Twelve years later the standard of honesty was unimpaired, and the
British officers had imparted energy and activity into Egyptians of all
ranks. The intelligent professional knowledge of the native officers,
taught under British gentlemen, and the constant hard work cheerfully
rendered by the fellah soldiers, were the main factors of the success
achieved at Omdurman on the 2nd of September 1898. The large depots of
stores at Assuan, Halfa and Dongola could only be cursorily supervised
by British officers, and yet when the stores were received at the
advance depot the losses were infinitesimal.


  Character of Egyptian soldier.

By nature the fellah is unwarlike. Born in the valley of a great river,
he resembles in many respects the Bengali, who exists under similar
conditions; but the Egyptian has proved capable of greater improvement.
He is stronger in frame, and can undergo greater exertion. Singularly
unemotional, he stood steady at Tell el-Kebir after Arabi Pasha and all
his officers, from general to subaltern, had fled, and gave way only
when decimated by the British field artillery firing case shot. At El
Teb, however, in 1884 he allowed himself to be slaughtered by tribesmen
formerly despised, and only about one-fourth of the force under General
Valentine Baker escaped. Baker Pasha's force was termed constabulary,
yet his men were all old soldiers, though new to their gallant leader
and to the small band of their brave but strange British officers. Since
that fatal day, however, many of the fellahin have shown they are
capable of devoted conduct, and much has been done to raise in the
soldiers a sense of self-respect, and, in spite of centuries of
oppression, of veracity. The barrack-square drill was smart under the
old system, but there was no fire discipline, and all individuality was
crushed. Now both are encouraged, and the men, receiving their full
rations, are unsurpassable in endurance at work and in marching. All the
troops present in the surprise fight when the Dervish force was
destroyed at Firket in June 1896 had covered long distances, and one
battalion (the 10th Sudanese) accomplished 90 m. within 72 hours,
including the march back to railhead immediately after the action. The
troops under Colonel Parsons, Royal Artillery, who beat the Dervishes at
Gedaref, were so short of British officers that all orders were
necessarily given in Arabic and carried to commanders of units by Arabs.
While an Egyptian battalion was attacking in line, it was halted to
repel a rush from the rear, and front and rear ranks were simultaneously
engaged, firing in opposite directions--yet the fellahin were absolutely
steady; they shot well and showed no signs of trepidation. On the other
hand, neither was there any exultation after their victory. It has been
aptly said "the fellah would make an admirable soldier if he only
wished to kill some one!" The fellahin furnish three squadrons, five
batteries, three garrison artillery companies and nine battalions.

The well-educated Egyptian officer, with his natural aptitude for
figures, does subordinate regimental routine carefully, and works well
when supervised by men of stronger character. The ordinary Egyptian is
not self-reliant or energetic by nature, and, like most Eastern people,
finds it difficult to be impartial where duty and family or other
personal relations are in the balance. The black soldier has, on the
other hand, many of the finest fighting qualities. This was observed by
British officers, from the time of the preliminary operations about
Kosha and at the action near Ginnis in December 1885 down to the
brilliant operations in the pursuit of the Mahdists on the Blue Nile
after the action of Gedaref (subsequent to the battle of Omdurman), and
the fighting in Kordofan in 1899, which resulted in the death of the
khalifa and his amirs.

Black soldiers served in the army of Mehemet Ali, but their fighting
value was not then duly appreciated. Prior to the death of the khalifa,
many of his soldiers deserted to join their brethren who had been
captured by the sirdar's troops, during the gradual advance up the Nile.
After 1899 many more enlisted: the greater number were Shilluks and
Dinkas coming from the country between Fashoda and the equatorial
provinces, but a proportion came from the western borders of the Sudan,
and some from Wadai and Bornu. Many were absolute savages, difficult to
control, wayward and thoughtless like children. Sudanese are very
excitable and apt to get out of hand; unlike the fellahs they are not
fond of drill, and are slow to acquire it; but their dash, pugnacious
instincts and desire to close with an enemy, are valuable military
qualities. The Sudanese, moreover, shoot better than the fellahin, whose
eyesight is often defective. The Sudanese captain can seldom read or
write, and is therefore in the hands of the Egyptian-born company
quartermaster-sergeant as regards pay and clothing accounts. He is slow,
and as a rule has little knowledge of drill. Nevertheless he is
self-reliant, much respected by his men, and can be trusted in the field
to carry out any orders received from his British officer. The most
efficient companies in the Sudanese battalions are apparently those in
which the captain is a black and the lieutenants are Egyptians.

  In 1908 the Egyptian army, with a total establishment of 18,000,
  consisted of three squadrons of cavalry (one composed of Sudanese)
  each numbering 116 men; four batteries of field artillery and a Maxim
  battery, horses and mules being used, with a total strength of 1257 of
  all ranks; the camel corps, 626 of all ranks (fellahin and Sudanese);
  and nine fellahin and six Sudanese infantry battalions, 10,631 of all
  ranks. Every battalion receives two additional companies on
  mobilization and takes the field with six companies.

  The armament of the infantry is Martini-Henry rifle and bayonet; of
  the cavalry, lance, sword and carbine.

  There are seven gunboats on the Nile.

  The medical department (reorganized in 1883 by Surgeon-Major J. G.
  Rogers at the time of the cholera epidemic) controls in peace fourteen
  station hospitals, and in war furnishes a mobile field hospital to
  each brigade. There are also veterinary station hospitals. The supply
  department controls mills at Tura, Halfa and Khartum.

  The stringent system of selecting British officers, originated by the
  first sirdar in 1883, is shown by the fact that of the 24 employed in
  creating the army, 14 rose to be generals. The competition for
  employment in the army is still severe. In 1908 there were 140 British
  warrant and non-commissioned officers. Four of the fellahin battalions
  were officered by Orientals; in the other five, British officers
  commanded. Seven officers were employed with the artillery, six with
  the camel corps. Each of the Sudanese battalions had four British
  officers, and each squadron of cavalry one. Twelve medical and two
  veterinary officers are also employed departmentally, as well as
  officers acting as directors of supply, &c. Since the assumption of
  command by the third sirdar, Colonel (afterwards Lord) Kitchener, the
  ordnance, supply and engineer services have been separately
  administered, and a financial secretary is charged with the duty of
  preparing the budget, making contracts, &c. The total annual
  expenditure is L500,000.

  The reorganized military school system under British control, for
  supplying officers, dates from 1887. The course lasts for about two
  years, and two hundred students can be accommodated. After the
  reconquest of the Sudan one-fourth of the cadets in the military
  school of Cairo were Sudanese. Later, however, the Sudanese cadets
  were transferred to a branch school at Khartum.

  The army raised by the first sirdar in January 1883 was highly
  commended for its work on the line of communication in 1884-1885, and
  its artillery and camelry distinguished themselves in the action at
  Kirbekan in February 1885. Colonel Sir Francis Grenfell succeeded
  General Sir Evelyn Wood in March 1885, and while under his command the
  army continued to improve, and fought successful actions at Gemaiza,
  Argin, Toski and Tokar. At Toski the Dervish force was nearly
  annihilated. In March 1892 Colonel Kitchener succeeded General Sir
  Francis Grenfell, and four years later began his successful reconquest
  of the Sudan. In June 1896, owing to the indefatigable exertions of
  Major Wingate, a perfected system of secret intelligence enabled the
  sirdar to bring an overwhelming force of 6 to 1 against the Dervish
  outpost at Firket and destroy it. In September 1896 a skirmish at
  Hafir, with similarly successful tactics, gave the British commander
  the possession of Dongola. On the 7th of August 1897 Colonel Hunter
  surprised and annihilated a weak Dervish garrison at Abu Hamed, to
  which place, by the 31st of October 1897, a railway had been laid
  across the Nubian desert from Wadi Halfa, a distance of 230 m., the
  "record" construction of 5300 yds surveyed, embanked and laid in one
  day having been attained. On the 26th of December 1897 the Italian
  troops handed over Kassala to Colonel Parsons, R.A. On the 8th of
  April 1898 a British division, with the Egyptian army, destroyed the
  Dervish force under the amir Mahmud Ahmed, on the Atbara river. On the
  2nd of September the khalifa attacked the British-Egyptian troops at
  Kerreri (near Omdurman), and being routed, his men dispersed; Khartum
  was occupied, and on the 19th of September the Egyptian flag was
  rehoisted at Fashoda. On the 22nd of September 1898 Gedaref was taken
  from the amir Ahmed Fedil by Colonel Parsons, and on the 26th of
  December the army of Ahmed Fedil was finally defeated and dispersed
  near Roseires. The khalifa's army, reduced to an insignificant number,
  after several unsuccessful engagements withdrew to the west of the
  Nile, where it was attacked, on the 24th of November 1899, after a
  forced march by Colonel Wingate, and annihilated. The khalifa himself
  was killed; while the victor, who had joined the Egyptian army in 1883
  as aide-de-camp to the first sirdar, in December 1899 became the
  fourth sirdar, as Major-General Sir F. R. Wingate, K.C.B., K.C.M.G.,
  D.S.O., &c.     (E. Wo.)


II. ANCIENT EGYPT

A. _Exploration and Research._--Owing to its early development of a high
civilization with written records, its wealth, and its preservative
climate, Egypt is the country which most amply repays archaeological
research. It is especially those long ages during which Egypt was an
independent centre of culture and government, before its absorption in
the Persian empire in the 6th century B.C., that make the most powerful
appeal to the imagination and can often justify this appeal by the
splendour of the monuments representing them. Later, however, the
history of Hellenism, the provincial history of the Roman empire, the
rise of Christianity and the triumph of Islam successively receive
brilliant illustration in Egypt.

As early as the 17th century travellers began to bring home specimens of
ancient Egyptian handiwork: a valuable stele from Sakkara of the
beginning of the Old Kingdom was presented to the Ashmolean Museum at
Oxford in 1683. In the following century the Englishman R. Pococke
(1704-1765), the Dane F. L. Norden (1708-1742), both travelling in 1737,
and others later, planned, described or figured Egyptian ruins in a
primitive way and identified many of the sites with cities named in
classical authors. Napoleon's great military expedition in 1798 was
accompanied by a scientific commission including artists and
archaeologists, the results of whose labours fill several of the
magnificent volumes of the _Description de l'Egypte_. The antiquities
collected by the expedition, including the famous Rosetta stone, were
ceded to the British government at the capitulation of Alexandria, in
1801. Thereafter Mehemet Ali threw Egypt freely open to Europeans, and a
busy traffic in antiquities began, chiefly through the agency of the
consuls of different powers. From the year 1820 onwards the growth of
the European collections was rapid, and Champollion's decipherments (see
below, S "Language and Writing") of the hieroglyphic inscriptions,
dating from 1821, added fresh impetus to the fashion of collecting, in
spite of doubts as to their trustworthiness. In 1827 a combined
expedition led by Champollion and Rosellini was despatched by the
governments of France and Tuscany, and accomplished a great deal of
valuable work in copying scenes and inscriptions. But the greatest of
such expeditions was that of Lepsius, under the auspices of the
Prussian government, in 1842-1845. Its labours embraced not only Egypt
and Nubia (as far as Khartum) but also the Egyptian monuments in Sinai
and Syria; its immense harvest of material is of the highest value, the
new device of taking paper impressions or "squeezes" giving Lepsius a
great advantage over his predecessors, similar to that which was later
conferred by the photographic camera.

A new period was opened in Egyptian exploration in 1858 when Mariette
was appointed director of archaeological works in Egypt, his duties
being to safeguard the monuments and prevent their exploitation by
dealers. As early as 1835 Mehemet Ali had given orders for a museum to
be formed; little however, was accomplished before the whole of the
resulting collection was given away to the Archduke Maximilian of
Austria in 1855. Mariette, who was appointed by the viceroy Said Pasha
at the instance of the French government, succeeded in making his office
effective and permanent, in spite of political intrigues and the whims
of an Oriental ruler; he also secured a building on the island of Bulak
(Bulaq) for a viceregal museum in which the results of his explorations
could be permanently housed. Supported by the French interest, the
established character of this work as a department of the Egyptian
government (which also claims the ancient sites) has been fully
recognized since the British occupation. The "Service of Antiquities"
now boasts a large annual budget and employs a number of European and
native officials--a director, curators of the museum, European
inspectors and native sub-inspectors of provinces (at Luxor for Upper
Egypt and Nubia, at Assiut for Middle Egypt and the Fayum, at Mansura
for Lower Egypt, besides a European official in charge of the government
excavations at Memphis). The museum, no longer the property of an
individual, was removed in 1889 from the small building at Bulak to a
disused palace at Giza, and since 1902 has been established at
Kasr-en-Nil, Cairo, in a special building, of ample size and safe from
fire and flood. In the year 1881 the directorship of the museum was
temporarily undertaken by Prof. Maspero, who resumed it in 1899. The
admirably conducted Archaeological Survey of the portion of Nubia
threatened by the raising of the Assuan dam is in the charge of another
department--the Survey department, directed for many years up to 1909 by
Captain H. G. Lyons. Non-official agencies (supported by voluntary
contributions) for exploration in Egypt comprise the Egypt Exploration
Fund, started in London in 1881, with its two branches, viz. the
Archaeological Survey (1890) for copying and publishing the monuments
above ground, and the Graeco-Roman Branch (1897), well known through the
brilliant work in Greek papyri of B. P. Grenfell and A. S. Hunt; and the
separate Research Account founded by Professor W. M. Flinders Petrie in
London (University College) in 1896, and since 1905 called the British
School of Archaeology in Egypt (see especially MEMPHIS). The _Mission
archeologique francaise au Caire_, established as a school by the French
government in 1881, was re-organized in 1901 on a lavish scale under the
title _Institut francais d'archeologie orientale du Caire_, and
domiciled with printing-press and library in a fine building near the
museum. As the result of an excellent bargain, it was afterwards removed
to the Munira palace in the south-east part of the city. An
archaeologist is attached to the German general consulate to look after
the interests of German museums, and is director of the German Institute
of Archaeology. The Orient-Gesellschaft (German Orient-Society) has
worked in Egypt since 1901 with brilliant results. Excavations and
explorations are also conducted annually by the agents of universities
and museums in England, America and Germany, and by private explorers,
concessions being granted generally on the terms that the Egyptian
government shall retain half of the antiquities discovered, while the
other half remains for the finders.

The era of scientific excavation began with Flinders Petrie's work at
Tanis in 1883. Previous explorers kept scientific aims in view, but the
idea of scientific archaeology was not realized by them. The procedure
in scientific excavation is directed to collecting and interpreting all
the information that can be obtained from the excavation as to the
history and nature of the site explored, be it town, temple, house,
cemetery or individual grave, wasting no evidence that results from it
touching the endless problems which scientific archaeology
affords--whether in regard to arts and crafts, manners and customs,
language, history or beliefs. This is a totally different thing from
mere hunting for inscriptions, statues or other portable objects which
will present a greater or less value in themselves even when torn from
their context. Such may, of course, form the greater part of the harvest
and working material of a scientific excavator; their presence is most
welcome to him, but their complete absence need be no bar to his
attainment of important historical results. The absence of scientific
excavation in Egypt was deplored by the Scottish archaeologist Alexander
Henry Rhind (1833-1863), as early as 1862. Since Flinders Petrie began,
the general level of research has gradually risen, and, while much is
shamefully bad and destructive, there is a certain proportion that fully
realizes the requirements of scientific archaeology.

_Antiquities, Sites, &c._--The remains for archaeological investigation
in Egypt may be roughly classified as material and literary: to the
latter belong the texts on papyri and the inscriptions, to the former
the sites of ancient towns with the temples, fortifications and houses;
remains of roads, canals, quarries and other matters falling within the
domain of ancient topography; the larger monuments, as obelisks,
statues, stelae, &c.; and finally the small antiquities--utensils,
clothes, weapons, amulets, &c. Where moisture can reach the antiquities
their preservation is no better in Egypt than it would have been in
other countries; for this reason all the papyri in the Delta have
perished unless they happen to have been charred by fire. A terrible
pest is a kind of termite which is locally abundant and has probably
visited most parts of Egypt at one time or another, destroying all dead
vegetable or animal material in the soil that was not specially
protected.

In Lower Egypt the cities built of crude brick were very numerous,
especially after the 7th century B.C., but owing to the value of stone
very few of their monuments have escaped destruction: even the mounds of
rubbish which marked their sites furnish a valuable manure for the
fields and in consequence are rapidly disappearing. Granite and other
hard stones, having but a limited use (for millstones and the like),
have the best chance of survival. At Bubastis, Tanis, Behbeit (Iseum)
and Heliopolis considerable stone remains have been discovered. In the
north of the Delta wherever salt marshes have prevented cultivation in
modern times, the mounds, such as those of Pelusium, still stand to
their full height, and the more important are covered with ruins of
brick structures of Byzantine and Arab date.

Middle and Upper Egypt were less busy and prosperous in the later ages
than Lower Egypt. There was consequently somewhat less consumption of
the old stone-work. Moreover, in many places equally good material could
be obtained without much difficulty from the cliffs on both sides of the
Nile. Yet even the buried portions of limestone buildings have seldom
been permitted to survive on the cultivated land; the Nubian sandstone
of Upper Egypt was of comparatively little value, and, generally
speaking, buildings in that material have fallen into decay rather than
been destroyed by quarrying.

Starting from Cairo and going southward we have first the great
pyramid-field, with the necropolis of Memphis as its centre; stretching
from Abu Roash on the north to Lisht on the south, it is followed by the
pyramid group of Dahshur, the more isolated pyramids of Medum and
Illahun, and that of Hawara in the Fayum. On the east bank are the
limestone quarries of Turra and Masara opposite Memphis. South of the
Fayum on the western border of the desert are the tombs of Deshasha,
Meir and Assiut, and on the east bank those of Beni Hasan, the rock-cut
temple of Speos Artemidos, the tombs of El Bersha and Sheikh Said, the
tombs and stelae of El Amarna with the alabaster quarries of Hanub in
the desert behind them, and the tombs of Deir el Gebrawi. Beyond Assiut
are the tombs of Dronka and Rifa, the temples of Abydos and Dendera, and
the tombs, &c., at Akhmim and Kasr es Saiyad. Farther south are the
stupendous ruins of Thebes on both sides of the river, the temple of
Esna, the ruins and tombs of El Kab, the temple of Edfu, the quarries of
Silsila and the temple of Ombos, followed by the inscribed rocks of the
First Cataract, the tombs and quarries of Assuan and the temples of
Philae.

[Illustration: EGYPT Scale, 1:8,400,000]

In Nubia, owing to the poverty of the country and its scanty population,
the proportion of monuments surviving is infinitely greater than in
Egypt. Here are the temples of Debod, the temple and quarries of
Kertassi, the temples of Kalabsha, Bet el Wali, Dendur, Gerf Husen,
Dakka, Maharaka, Es-Sebu'a, 'Amada and Derr, the grottos of Elles ya,
the tombs of Aniba, the temple of Ibrim, the great rock-temples of
Abu-Simbel, the temples at Jebel Adda and Wadi Halfa, the forts and
temples of Semna, the temples of Amara (Meroitic) and Soleb. Beyond are
the Ethiopian temples and pyramids of Jebel Barkal and the other
pyramids of Napata at Tangassi, &c., the still later pyramids of Meroe
at Begerawia, and the temples of Mesauwarat and Naga reaching to within
50 m. of Khartum.

Outside the Nile valley on the west are temples in the Great and Little
Oases and the Oasis of Ammon: on the east quarries and stelae on the
Hammamat road to the Red Sea, and mines and other remains at Wadi
Maghara and Serabit el Khadim in the Sinai peninsula. In Syria there are
tablets of conquest on the rocks at the mouth of the Nahr el Kelb.

Of the collections of Egyptian antiquities in public museums, those of
the British Museum, Leiden, Berlin, the Louvre, Turin were already very
important in the first half of the 19th century, also in a less degree
those of Florence, Bologna and the Vatican. Most of these have since
been greatly increased and many others have been created. By far the
largest collection in the world is that at Cairo. In America the museums
and universities of Boston, Chicago, Philadelphia, San Francisco and New
York have collections of greater or less interest. Besides these the
museums of Edinburgh, Liverpool, Manchester and Oxford are noteworthy in
Great Britain for their Egyptian antiquities, as are those of St
Petersburg, Vienna, Marseilles, Munich, Copenhagen, Palermo and Athens;
there are also collections in most of the British colonies. Private
collections are numerous.

_Literary Records._--In estimating the sources of information regarding
pre-Christian Egypt, the native sources, first opened to us by
Champollion, are infinitely the most important. With very few exceptions
they are contemporary with the events which they record. Of the
composition of history and the description of their own manners and
customs by the Egyptians for posterity, few traces have reached our day.
Consequently the information derived from their monuments, in spite of
their great abundance, is of a fortuitous character. For one early
papyrus that survives, many millions must have perished. If the journals
of accounts, the letters and business documents, had come down to us _en
masse_, they would no doubt have yielded to research the history and
life of Egypt day by day; but those that now represent a thousand years
of the Old Kingdom and Middle Kingdom together would not half fill an
ordinary muniment chest. A larger proportion of the records on stone
have survived, but that an event should be inscribed on stone depends on
a variety of circumstances and not necessarily on its importance. There
may seem to be a great abundance of Egyptian monuments, but they have to
cover an enormous space of time, and even in the periods which are best
represented, gravestones recording the names of private persons with a
prayer or two are scarcely material for history. A scrap of annals has
been found extending from the earliest times to the Vth Dynasty, as well
as a very fragmentary list of kings reaching nearly to the end of the
Middle Kingdom, to help out the scattered data of the other monuments.
As to manners and customs, although we possess no systematic
descriptions of them from a native source, the native artists and
scribes have presented us with exceptionally rich materials in the
painted and sculptured scenes of the tombs from the Old and Middle
Kingdoms and the New Empire. For the Deltaic dynasties these sources
fail absolutely, the scenes being then either purely religious or
conventional imitations of the earlier ones.

Fortunately the native records are largely supplemented by others:
valuable information comes from cuneiform literature, belonging to two
widely separated periods. The first group is contemporary with the
XVIIIth and XIXth Dynasties and consists in the first place of the Tell
el Amarna tablets with others related to them, containing the reports of
governors of the Syrian possessions of Egypt, and the correspondence of
the kings of Babylon, Assur, Mitanni and Khatti (the Hittites) with the
Pharaohs. The sequel to this is furnished by Winckler's discovery of
documents relating to Rameses II. of the XIXth Dynasty in the Hittite
capital at Boghaz Keui (see also HITTITES and PTERIA). The other group
comprises the annals and inscriptions of the Assyrian kings Esarhaddon
and Assur-bani-pal, recording their invasions of Egypt under the XXVth
Dynasty. There are also a few references to Egypt of later date down to
the reign of Darius. In Hebrew literature the Pentateuch, the historical
books and the prophets alike contain scanty but precious information
regarding Egypt. Aramaic papyri written principally by Jews of the
Persian period (5th century B.C.) have been found at Syene and Memphis.

Of all the external sources the literary accounts written in Greek are
the most valuable. They comprise fragments of the native historian
Manetho, the descriptions of Egypt in Herodotus and Diodorus, the
geographical accounts of Strabo and Ptolemy, the treatise of Plutarch on
Isis and Osiris and other monographs or scattered notices of less
importance. Our knowledge of the history of Alexander's conquest, of the
Ptolemies and of the Roman occupation is almost entirely derived from
Greek sources, and in fact almost the same might be said of the history
of Egypt as far back as the beginning of the XXVIth Dynasty. The
non-literary Greek remains in papyri and inscriptions which are being
found in great abundance throw a flood of light on life in Egypt and the
administration of the country from the time of Ptolemy Philadelphus to
the Arab conquest. On the other hand, papyri and inscriptions in Latin
are of the greatest rarity, and the literary remains in that language
are of small importance for Egypt.

Arabic literature appears to be entirely barren of authentic information
regarding the earlier condition of the country. Two centuries of
unchallenged Christianity had broken almost completely the traditions of
paganism, even if the Moslems had been willing to consider them, either
in their fanciful accounts of the origins of cities, &c., or elsewhere.

B. _The Country in Ancient Times._--The native name of Egypt was Kemi
(KM.T), clearly meaning "the black land," Egypt being so called from the
blackness of its alluvial soil (cf. Plut. _De Is. et Os._ cap. 33): in
poetical inscriptions _Kemi_ is often opposed to _Toshri_, "the red
land," referring to the sandy deserts around, which however, would
probably be included in the term Kemi in its widest sense. Egypt is
called in Hebrew Mizraim, [Hebrew: Mizraim], possibly a dual form
describing the country in reference to its two great natural and
historical divisions of Upper Egypt and Lower Egypt: but Mizraim
(poetically sometimes Mazor) often means Lower Egypt, Upper Egypt being
named Pathros, "the south land." In Assyrian the name was Musri, Misri:
in Arabic it is Misr, [Arabic: Misr], pronounced Masr in the vulgar
dialect of Egypt. These names are certainly of Semitic origin and
perhaps derive from the Assyrian with the meaning "frontier-land" (see
MIZRAIM). Winckler's theory of a separate Musri immediately south of
Palestine is now generally rejected (see, for instance, Ed. Meyer, _Die
Israeliten und ihre Nachbarstamme_, 455). The Greek [Greek: Aigyptos]
(Aegyptus) occurs as early as Homer; in the _Odyssey_ it is the name of
the Nile (masc.) as well as of the country (fem.): later it was confined
to the country. Its origin is very obscure (see Pietschmann in
Pauly-Wissowa, _Realencyclopadie_, s.v. "Aigyptos"). Brugsch's
derivation from Hakeptah, a name of the northern capital, Memphis,
though attractive, is unconfirmed.

Egypt normally included the whole of the Nile valley from the First
Cataract to the sea; pure Egyptians, however, formed the population of
Lower Nubia above the Cataract in prehistoric times; at some periods
also the land was divided into separate kingdoms, while at others Egypt
stretched southward into Nubia, and it generally claimed the
neighbouring Libyan deserts and oases on the west and the Arabian
deserts on the east to the shore of the Red Sea, with Sinai and the
Mediterranean coast as far as Rhinocorura (El Arish). The physical
features in ancient times were essentially the same as at the present
day. The bed of the Nile was lower: it appears to have risen by its own
deposits at a rate of about 4 in. in a century. In the north of the
Delta, however, there was a sinking of the land, in consequence of which
the accumulations on some of the ancient sites there extend below the
present sea-level. On the other hand at the south end of the Suez canal
the land may have risen bodily, since the head of the Gulf of Suez has
been cut off by a bank of rock from the Bitter lakes, which were
probably joined to it in former days. The banks of the Nile and the
islands in it are subject to gradual but constant alteration--indeed,
several ancient sites have been much eroded or destroyed--and the main
volume of the stream may in course of time be diverted into what has
previously been a secondary channel. According to the classical writers,
the mouths or branches of the Nile in the Delta were five in number
(seven including two that were artificial): now there are only two. In
Upper Egypt the main stream tended as now to flow along the eastern edge
of the valley, while to the west was a parallel stream corresponding to
the Bahr Yusuf. From the latter a canal or branch led to the Lake of
Moeris, which, until the 3rd century B.C., filled the deep depression of
the Fayum, but is now represented only by the strongly brackish waters
of the Birket el Kerun, left in the deepest part. The area of alluvial
land has probably not changed greatly in historic times. The principal
changes that have occurred are due to the grip which civilization has
taken upon the land in the course of thousands of years, often weakening
but now firmer than ever. In early days no doubt the soil was cultivated
in patches, but gradually a great system of canals was organized under
the control of the central government, both for irrigation and for
transport. The wild flora of the alluvial valley was probably always
restricted and eventually was reduced almost to the "weeds of
cultivation," when every acre of soil, at one period of the year under
water, and at another roasted under the burning heat of a semi-tropical
sun, was carefully tilled. The acacia abounded on the borders of the
valley, but the groves were gradually cut down for the use of the
carpenter and the charcoal-burner. The desert was full of wild life, the
balance of nature being preserved by the carnivorous animals preying on
the herbivorous; trees watered by soakage from the Nile protected the
undergrowth and encouraged occasional rainfall. But this balance was
upset by the early introduction of the goat and later of the camel,
which destroyed the sapling trees, while the grown ones fell to the axe
of the woodcutter. Thus in all probability the Egyptian deserts have
become far poorer in animals and trees than they were in primitive
times. Much of Lower Egypt was left in a wilder state than Upper Egypt.
The marshy lands in the north were the resort of fishermen and fowlers,
and the papyrus, the cultivation of which was a regular industry,
protected an abundance of wild life. The abandonment of papyrus culture
in the 8th century A.D., the neglect of the canals, and the inroads of
the sea, have converted much of that country into barren salt marsh,
which only years of draining and washing can restore to fertility.

The rich alluvial deposits of the Nile which respond so readily to the
efforts of the cultivator ensured the wealth of the country. Moulded
into brick, without burning, this black clay also supplied the common
wants of the builder, and even the palaces of the greatest kings were
constructed of crude brick. For more lasting and ambitious work in
temples and tombs the materials could be obtained from the rocks and
deserts of the Nile valley. The chief of these was limestone of varying
degrees of fineness, composing the cliffs which lined the valley from
the apex of the Delta to the neighbourhood of El Kab; the best quality
was obtained on the east side opposite Memphis from the quarries of
Turra and Masara. From El Kab southward its place was taken by Libyan
sandstone, soft and easily worked, but unsuitable for fine sculpture.
These two were the ordinary building stones. In the limestone was found
the flint or chert used for weapons and instruments in early times. For
alabaster the principal quarry was that of Hanub in the desert 10 m.
behind El Amarna, but it was obtained elsewhere in the limestone region,
including a spot near Alexandria. A hard and fine-grained quartzite
sandstone was quarried at Jebel Ahmar behind Heliopolis, and basalt was
found thence along the eastern edge of the Delta to near the Wadi
Tumilat. Red granite was obtained from the First Cataract, breccia and
diorite were quarried from very early times in the Wadi Hammamat, on the
road from Coptos to the Red Sea, and porphyry was brought, chiefly in
Roman times but also in the prehistoric age, from the same region at
Jebel Dokhan.

Egypt was poor in metals. Gold was obtained chiefly from Nubia: iron was
found in small quantities in the country and at one time was worked in
the neighbourhood of Assuan. Some copper was obtained in Sinai. Of
stones that were accounted precious Sinai produced turquoise and the
Egyptian deserts garnet, carnelian and jasper.

The native supply of wood for industrial purposes was exceedingly bad:
there was no native wood long enough and straight enough to be used in
joiners' work or sculpture without fitting and patching: palm trees were
abundant, and if the trees could be spared, their split stems could be
used for roofing. For boatbuilding papyrus stems and acacia wood were
employed, and for the best work cedar-wood was imported from Lebanon.

Egypt was isolated by the deserts and the sea. The Nile valley afforded
a passage by ship or on foot into Nubia, where, however, little wealth
was to be sought, though gold and rarities from the Sudan, such as ivory
and ebony, came that way and an armed raid could yield a good spoil in
slaves and cattle. The poverty-stricken and barbarous Nubians were
strong and courageous, and gladly served in Egypt as mercenary soldiers
and police. Through the oases also ran paths to the Sudan by which the
raw merchandise of the southern countries could be brought to Egypt.
Eastward, roads led through the Arabian mountains to the Red Sea, whence
ships made voyages to the incense-bearing land of Puoni (Punt) on the
Somali coast of Africa, rich also in gold and ivory. The mines of Sinai
could be reached either by sea or by land along the route of the Exodus.
The roads to Syria skirted the east border of the Delta and then
followed the coast from near Pelusium through El Arish and Gaza. A
secondary road branched off through the Wadi Tumilat, whence the ways
ran northwards to Syria and southwards to Sinai. On the Libyan side the
oasis of Siwa could be reached from the Lake of Moeris or from Terrana
(Terenuthis), or by the coast route which also led to the Cyrenaica. The
Egyptians had some traffic on the Mediterranean from very remote times,
especially with Byblus in Phoenicia, the port for cedar-wood.

Of the populations surrounding Egypt the negroes (Nehsi) in the south
(Cush) were the lowest in the scale of civilization: the people of Puoni
and of Libya (the Tehen, &c.) were pale in colour and superior to the
negroes, but still show no sign of a high culture. The Syrians and the
Keftiu, the latter now identified with the Cretans and other
representatives of the Aegean civilization, are the only peoples who by
their elaborate clothing and artistic products reveal themselves upon
the ancient Egyptian monuments as the equals in culture of the Egyptian
nation.

The Egyptians seem to have applied no distinctive name to themselves in
early times: they called themselves proudly _romi_ (RMTW), i.e. simply
"men," "people," while the despised races around them, collectively
H'SWT, "desert-peoples," were distinguished by special appellations.
The races of mankind, including the Egyptians, were often called the
Nine Archers. Ultimately the Egyptians, when their insularity
disappeared under the successive dominations of Ethiopia, Assyria and
Persia, described themselves as _rem-n-Kemi_, "men of Egypt." Whence the
population of Egypt as we trace it in prehistoric and historic times
came, is not certain. The early civilization of Egypt shows remarkable
coincidences with that of Babylonia, the language is of a Semitic type,
the religion may well be a compound of a lower African and a higher
Asiatic order of ideas. According to the evidence of the mummies, the
Egyptians were of slender build, with dark hair and of Caucasian type.
Dr Elliott Smith, who has examined thousands of skeletons and mummies of
all periods, finds that the prehistoric population of Upper Egypt, a
branch of the North African-Mediterranean-Arabian race, changed with the
advent of the dynasties to a stronger type, better developed than before
in skull and muscle. This was apparently due to admixture with the Lower
Egyptians, who themselves had been affected by Syrian immigration.
Thereafter little further change is observable, although the rich lands
of Egypt must have attracted foreigners from all parts. The Egyptian
artists of the New Empire assigned distinctive types of feature as well
as of dress to the different races with which they came into contact,
Hittites, Syrians, Libyans, Bedouins, negroes, &c.

The people of Egypt were not naturally fierce or cruel. Intellectually,
too, they were somewhat sluggish, careless and unbusinesslike. In the
mass they were a body of patient labourers, tilling a rich soil, and
hating all foreign lands and ways. The wealth of their country gave
scope for ability within the population and also attracted it from
outside: it enabled the kings to organize great monumental enterprises
as well as to arm irresistible raids upon the inferior tribes around.
Urged on by necessity and opportunity, the Egyptians possessed
sufficient enterprise and originating power to keep ahead of their
neighbours in most departments of civilization, until the more warlike
empires of Assyria and Persia overwhelmed them and the keener intellects
of the Greeks outshone them in almost every department. The debt of
civilization to Egypt as a pioneer must be considerable, above all
perhaps in religious thought. The moral ideals of its nameless teachers
were high from an early date: their conception of an after-life was
exceedingly vivid: the piety of the Egyptians in the later days was a
matter of wonder and scoffing to their contemporaries; it is generally
agreed that certain features in the development of Christianity are to
be traced to Egypt as their birthplace and nidus.

  For researches into the ethnography of Egypt and the neighbouring
  countries, see W. Max Muller, _Asien und Europa nach den altag.
  Inschriften_ (Leipzig, 1893), _Egyptological Researches_ (Washington,
  1906); for measurements of Egyptian skulls, Miss Fawcett in
  _Biometrika_ (1902); A. Thomson and D. Randall-MacIver, _The Ancient
  Races of the Thebaid_ (Oxford, 1905) (cf. criticisms in _Man_, 1905;
  and for comparisons with modern measurements, C. S. Myers, _Journ.
  Anthropological Institute_, 1905, 80). W. Flinders Petrie has
  collected and discussed a series of facial types shown in prehistoric
  and early Egyptian sculpture, _Journal Anthropological Institute_,
  1901, 248. For Elliott Smith's results see _The Cairo Scientific
  Journal_, No. 30, vol. iii., March 1909.

_Divisions._--In ancient times Egypt was divided into two regions,
representing the kingdoms that existed before Menes. Lower Egypt,
comprising the Delta and its borders, formed the "North Land," _To-meh_,
and reached up the valley to include Memphis and its province or "nome,"
while the remainder of the Egyptian Nile valley was "the South," _Shema_
(SM'W [HRGs: sw-w-a]). The south, if only as the abode of the sun,
always had the precedence over the north in Egypt, and the west over the
east. Later the two regions were known respectively as P-to-res
(Pathros), "the south land," and P-to-meh, "the north land." In
practical administration this historic distinction was sometimes
observed, at others ignored, but in religious tradition it had a firm
hold. In Roman times a different system marked off a third region,
namely Middle Egypt, from the point of the Delta southward.
Theoretically, as its name Heptanomis implies, this division contained
seven nomes, actually from the Hermopolite on the south to the Memphite
on the north (excluding the Arsinoite according to the papyri). Some
tendency to this existed earlier. Egypt to the south of the Heptanomis
was the Thebais, called P-tesh-en-Ne, "the province of Thebes," as early
as the XXVIth Dynasty. The Thebais was much under the influence of the
Ethiopian kingdom, and was separated politically in the troubled times
of the XXIIIrd Dynasty, though the old division into Upper and Lower
Egypt was resumed in the XXVIth Dynasty.

If Upper and Lower Egypt represented ancient kingdoms, the nomes have
been thought to carry on the traditions of tribal settlements. They are
found in inscriptions as early as the end of the IIIrd Dynasty, and the
very name of Thoth, and that of another very ancient god, are derived
from those of two contiguous nomes in Lower Egypt. The names are written
by special emblems placed on standards, such as an ibis, [HRG: G26], a
jackal [HRG: E15:R12], a hare [HRG: wn:R12], a feathered crown [HRG:
Swty:R12], a sistrum [HRG: zSSt:R12], a blade [HRG: T30:R12], &c.,
suggesting tribal badges. Some nomes having a common badge but
distinguished as "nearer" or "further," i.e. "northern" or "southern,"
have simply been split, as they are contiguous: in one case, however,
corresponding "eastern" and "western" Harpoon nomes are widely separated
on opposite sides of the Delta. In a few cases, such as "the West," "the
Beginning of the East," it is obvious that the names are derived solely
from their geographical situation. It is quite possible that the
divisions are geographical in the main, but it seems likely that there
were also religious, tribal and other historical reasons for them. How
their boundaries were determined is not certain: in Upper Egypt in many
cases a single nome embraced both sides of the river. The number and
nomenclature of the nomes were never absolutely fixed. In temples of
Ptolemaic and Roman age the full series is figured presenting their
tribute to the god, and this series approximately agrees with the
scattered data of early monuments. The normal number of the nomes in the
sacred lists appears to be 42, of which 22 belonged to Upper Egypt and
20 to Lower Egypt. In reality again these nome-divisions were treated
with considerable freedom, being split or reunited and their boundaries
readjusted. Each nome had its metropolis, normally the seat of a
governor or nomarch and the centre of its religious observances. During
the New Empire, except at the beginning, the nomes seem to have been
almost entirely ignored: under the Deltaic dynasties (except of course
in the traditions of the sacred writing) they were named after the
metropolis, as "the province (_tosh_) of Busiris," "the province of
Sais," &c.: hence the Greek names [Greek: Bousirites nomos], &c. The
Arsinoite nome was added by the Ptolemies after the draining of the Lake
of Moeris (q.v.), and in the later Ptolemaic and the Roman times many
changes and additions to the list must have been made. In Christian
texts the "provinces" appear to have been very numerous.

  See H. Brugsch, _Geographische Inschriften altagyptischer Denkmaler_
  (3 vols., Leipzig, 1857-1860), and for the nomes on monuments of the
  Old Kingdom, N. de G. Davies, _Mastaba of Ptahhetep and Akhethetep_
  (London, 1901), p. 24 et sqq.

_King and Government._--The government of Egypt was monarchical. The
king (for titles see PHARAOH) was the head of the hierarchy: he was
himself divine and is often styled "the good god," and was the proper
mediator between gods and men. He was also the dispenser of office,
confirmer of hereditary titles and estates and the fountain of justice.
Oaths were generally sworn by the "life" of the king. The king wore
special headdresses and costumes, including the crowns of Upper [HRG:
HDt] and Lower Egypt [HRG: N] (often united [HRG: S5]), and the cobra
upon his forehead. Females were admitted to the succession, but very few
instances occur before the Cleopatras. The most notable Pharaonic queen
in her own right was Hatshepsut in the XVIIIth Dynasty, but her reign
was ignored by the later rulers even of her own family. A certain
Nitocris of about the VIIIth Dynasty and Scemiophris of the XIIth
Dynasty are in the lists, but are quite obscure. Yet inheritance through
the female line was fully recognized, and marriage with the heiress
princess was sought by usurpers to legitimate the claims of their
offspring. Often, especially in the XIIth Dynasty, the king associated
his heir on the throne with him to ensure the succession.

From time to time feudal conditions prevailed: the great landowners and
local princes had establishments of their own on the model of the royal
court, and were with difficulty kept in order by the monarch. In rare
cases during the Middle Kingdom (inscriptions in the tomb of Ameni at
Beni Hasan, graffiti in the quarries of Hanub) documents were dated in
the years of reign of these feudatory nobles. Under the Empire all power
was again centralized in the hands of the Pharaoh. The apportionment of
duties amongst the swarm of officials varied from age to age, as did
their titles. Members of the royal family generally held high office.
Under the Empire Egypt was administered by a vast bureaucracy, at the
head of which, responsible to the king, was the vizier, or sometimes two
viziers, one for Upper Egypt, the other for Lower Egypt (in which case
the former, stationed at Thebes, had the precedence). The duties of the
vizier and the procedure in his court are detailed in a long inscription
which is repeated in three tombs of the XVIIIth Dynasty at Thebes
(Breasted, _Records_, ii. S 663 et seqq.). The strictest impartiality
was enjoined upon him, and he was advised to hold aloof from the people
in order to preserve his authority. The office of vizier was by no means
a sinecure. All the business of the country was overlooked by
him--treasury, taxation, army, law-courts, expeditions of every kind.
Egypt was the vast estate of Pharaoh, and the vizier was the steward of
it.

_Army._--The youth of Egypt was liable to be called upon for service in
the field under the local chiefs. Their training consisted of gymnastic
and warlike exercises which developed strength and discipline that would
be as useful in executing public works and in dragging large monuments
as in strictly military service. They were armed in separate companies
with bows and arrows, spears, daggers and shields, and the officers
carried battle-axes and maces. The army, commanded in chief by Una under
the VIth Dynasty for raids in Sinai or Palestine, comprised levies from
every part of Egypt and from Nubia, each under its own leader. Under the
New Empire, when Egypt was almost a military state, the army was a more
specialized institution, the art of war in siege and strategy had
developed, divisions were formed with special standards, there were
regiments armed with battle-axes and scimitars, and chariots formed an
essential part of the host. Egyptian cavalry are not represented upon
the monuments, and we hear little of such at any time. Herodotus divides
the army into two classes, the Calasiries and the Hermotybies; these
names, although he was not aware of it, mean respectively horse- and
foot-soldiers, but it is possible that the former name was only
traditional and had characterized those who fought from chariots, a mode
of warfare that was obsolete in Herodotus's own day: as a matter of fact
both classes are said to have served on the warships of Xerxes' fleet.

_Arms and Armour._--From the contents of graves and other remains, and
the sculptured and painted scenes, an approximate idea can be obtained
of the weapons of the Egyptians at all periods from the prehistoric age
onwards. Only a few points are here noted. Stone mace-heads are found in
the earliest cemeteries, together with flint implements that may be the
heads of lances, &c., and thin leaf-shaped daggers of bronze. Stone
arrow-heads are common on the surface of the desert. Thin bronze
arrow-heads appear at an early date; under the Empire they are stouter
and furnished with a tang, and later still, towards the Greek period,
they are socketed (often three-sided), or, if of iron, still tanged. The
wooden club, a somewhat primitive weapon, seems to have been considered
characteristic of foreigners from very early times, and, in scenes
dating from the Middle Kingdom, belong principally to the levies from
the surrounding barbarians. The dagger grew longer and stouter, but the
sword made its appearance late, probably first in the hands of the
_Sherdana_ (Sardinian?), mercenaries of the time of Rameses II. A
peculiar scimitar, _khopsh_ [HRG], is characteristic of the Empire.
Slings are first heard of in Egyptian warfare in the 8th century B.C.
The chariot was doubtless introduced with the horse in the Hyksos
period; several examples have been discovered in the tombs of the New
Kingdom. Shields were covered with ox-hide and furnished with round
sighting-holes above the middle. Cuirasses of bronze scales were worn by
the kings and other leaders. The linen corslets of the Egyptian soldiery
at a later time were famous, and were adopted by the Persian army.
According to the paintings of the Middle Kingdom in the tombs of Beni
Hasan, the battlements of brick fortresses were attacked and wrenched
away with long and massive spears. No siege engines are depicted, even
in the time of the Empire, and the absence of original representations
after the XXth Dynasty renders it difficult to judge the advances made
in the art of war during the first half of the last millennium B.C. The
inscription of Pankhi, however, proves that in the 8th century
approaches and towers were raised against the walls of besieged cities.

_Priesthood._--The priesthood was in a great degree hereditary, though
perhaps not essentially so. In each temple the priests were divided into
four orders (until Ptolemy Euergetes added a fifth), each of which
served in turn for a lunar month under the chief priest or prophet. They
received shares of the annual revenues of the temple in kind, consisting
of linen, oil, flesh, bread, vegetables, wine, beer, &c. The "divine
servants" or "prophets" had residences assigned them in the temple area.
In late times the priests were always shaven, and paid the greatest
attention to cleanliness and ceremonial purity already implied in their
ancient name. Fish and beans then were abhorred by them. Among the
priests were the most learned men of Egypt, but probably many were
illiterate. For the Hellenistic period see W. Otto, _Priester und Tempel
im hellenistichen Agypten_ (Leipzig, 1905 foll.).

  For ancient Egyptian life and civilization in all departments, the
  principal work is Ad. Erman, _Life in Ancient Egypt_, translated by H.
  M. Tirard (London, 1894), (the original _Agypten und agyptisches Leben
  im Altertum_, 2 vols., was published in 1885 at Tubingen); G. Maspero,
  _Life in Ancient Egypt and Assyria_, translated by A. P. Morton
  (London, 1892), (_Lectures historiques_, Paris, 1890); also J. G.
  Wilkinson, _Manners and Customs of the Ancient Egyptians_, new ed. by
  S. Birch (3 vols., London, 1878). The annual _Archaeological Reports_
  of the Egypt Exploration Fund contain summaries of the work done each
  year in the several departments of research.

  Of the innumerable publications of Egyptian monuments, scenes and
  inscriptions, C. R. Lepsius, _Denkmaler aus Agypten und Athiopien_
  (Berlin, 1849-1859), and Memoirs of the _Archaeological Survey_ of the
  Egypt Exploration Fund, may be specified. For antiquities in museums
  there is the sumptuous _Catalogue general des antiquites egyptiennes
  du musee de Caire_; for excavations the Memoirs of the Egypt
  Exploration Fund, of the Research Account, of the British School of
  Archaeology, of the Liverpool School of Archaeology, of the Deutsche
  Orient-Gesellschaft, of the Hearst Egyptian Expedition, of the
  Theodore M. Davis excavations (Tombs of the Kings).

_Trade and Money._--There is little evidence to show how buying and
selling were carried on in ancient Egypt. A unique scene in a tomb of
the IVth Dynasty, however, shows men and women exchanging commodities
against each other--fish, fish-hooks, fans, necklaces, &c. Probably this
was a market in the open air such as is held weekly at the present time
in every considerable village. Rings of metal, gold, silver and bronze
played some part in exchange, and from the Hyksos period onwards formed
the usual standards by which articles of all kinds might be valued. In
the XVIIIth Dynasty the value of meat, &c., was reckoned in gold;
somewhat later copper seems the commonest standard, and under the
Deltaic dynasties silver. But barter must have prevailed much longer.
The precious metals were kept in the temples under the tutelage of the
deities. During the XXVth and XXVIth Dynasties silver of the treasury of
Harshafe (at Heracleopolis Magna) was commonly prescribed in contracts,
and in the reign of Darius we hear of silver of the treasury of Ptah (at
Memphis). Aryandes, satrap of Egypt, is said by Herodotus to have been
punished by Darius for coining money of equal fineness with that of the
king in Persia: thus coinage had then begun in Egypt. But the early
coins that have been found there are mainly Greek, and especially
Athenian, and it was not until the introduction of a regular currency in
the three metals under the Ptolemies that much use was made of coined
money.

Corn was the staple produce of Egypt and may have been exported
regularly, and especially when there was famine in other countries. In
the Tell el-Amarna letters the friendly kings ask Pharaoh for "much
gold." Papyrus rolls and fine linen were good merchandise in Phoenicia
in the 10th century B.C. From the earliest times Egypt was dependent on
foreign countries to supply its wants in some degree. Vessels were
fashioned in foreign stone as early as the Ist Dynasty. All silver must
have been imported, and all copper except a little that the Pharaohs
obtained from the mines of Sinai. Cedar wood was brought from the
forests of Lebanon, ivory, leopard skins and gold from the south, all
kinds of spices and ingredients of incense from Somaliland and Arabia,
fine linen and beautifully worked vessels from Syria and the islands.
Such supplies might be obtained by forcible raiding or as tribute of
conquered countries, or perhaps as the free offerings of simple savages
awed by the arrival of ships and civilized well-armed crews, or again by
royal missions in which rich gifts on both sides were exchanged, or
lastly by private trading. For deciding how large a share was due to
trade, there is almost no evidence. But there are records of expeditions
sent out by the king to obtain the rarities of different countries, and
the hero of the Story of the Shipwrecked Sailor was upon this quest.
Egyptian objects of the age of the XVIIIth Dynasty are found in the
Greek islands and on the mainland among remains of the Mycenaean epoch,
and on the other hand the products of the workshops of Crete and other
centres of that culture are found in Egypt and are figured as "tribute
of the Keftiu" in the tomb-paintings, though we have no information of
any war with or conquest of that people. It must be a case of trade
rather than tribute here and in like instances. According to the papyrus
of Unamun at the end of the weak XXth Dynasty payment for cedar was
insisted on by the king of Byblus from the Egyptian commissioner, and
proofs were shown to him of payment having been made even in the more
glorious times of Egypt. Trade both internal and external must have been
largely in the hands of foreigners. It is impossible to say at what
period Phoenician traffic by sea with Egypt began, but it existed as
early as the IIIrd Dynasty. In the time of Herodotus much wine was
imported from Syria and Greece. Amasis II. (c. 570 B.C.) established
Naucratis as the centre of Greek trade in Egypt. Financial transactions
by Jews settled at the southern extremity of Egypt, at Assuan, are found
as early as the reign of Artaxerxes.

_Hunting, Fishing, &c._--In the desert hunting was carried on by hunters
with bows and arrows, dogs and nets to check the game. Here in ancient
times were found the oryx, addax, ibex, gazelle, bubale, ostrich, hyena
and porcupine, more rarely the wild ox and wild sheep (_O.
tragelaphus_). All of these were considered fit for the table. The lion,
leopard and jackal were not eaten. Pigeons and other birds were caught
in traps, and quails were netted in the fields and on the sea-shore. In
the papyrus marshes the hippopotamus was slain with harpoons, the wild
boar, too, was probably hunted, and the sportsman brought down wild-fowl
with the boomerang, or speared or angled for fish. Enormous quantities
of wild-fowl of many sorts were taken in clap-nets, to be preserved in
jars with salt. Fish were taken sometimes in hand-nets, but the
professional fishermen with their draw-nets caught them in shoals. The
fishing industry was of great importance: the annual catch in the Lake
of Moeris and its canal formed an important part of the Egyptian
revenue. The fish of the Nile, which were of many kinds (including
mullets, &c., which came up from the sea), were split and dried in the
sun: others were salted and so preserved. A supply of sea fish would be
obtained off the coast of the Delta and at the mouth of the Lake
Serbonis.

_Farming, Horticulture, &c._--The wealth of Egypt lay in its
agriculture. The regular inundations, the ease of irrigating the rich
alluvial flats, and the great heat of the sun in a cloudless sky, while
limiting the natural flora, gave immense opportunities to the
industrious farmer. The normal rise of the Nile was sixteen cubits at
the island of Roda, and two cubits more or less caused a failure of the
harvest. In the paintings we see gardens irrigated by handbuckets and
_shadufs_; the latter (buckets hung on a lever-pole) were probably the
usual means of raising water for the fields in ancient times, and still
are common in Egypt and Nubia, although water-wheels have been known
since the Ptolemaic age, if not earlier. Probably a certain amount of
cultivation was possible all the year round, and there was perhaps a
succession of harvests; but there was a pause after the main harvests
were gathered in by the end of April, and from then till June was the
period in which taxes were collected and loans were repaid. Under the
Ptolemaic regime the records show a great variety of crops, wheat and
barley being probably the largest (see B. P. Grenfell and A. S. Hunt,
_Tebtunis Papyri_, i. 560; J. P. Mahaffy and J. G. Smyly, _Petrie
Papyri_, iii. p. 205). Earlier the _boti_, in Greek [Greek: olyra]
(spelt? or durra?) was the main crop, and earlier again inferior
varieties of wheat and barley took the lead, with _boti_ apparently in
the second place. The bread was mainly made of _boti_, the beer of
barley. There were green crops such as clover, and lentils, peas, beans,
radishes, onions, lettuces (as a vegetable and for oil), castor oil and
flax were grown. The principal fruit trees were the date palm, useful
also for its wood and fibre, the pomegranate, fig and fig-sycamore. The
vine was much cultivated in early times, and the vintage is a subject
frequently depicted. Later the wine of the Mareotic region near
Alexandria was celebrated even amongst Roman epicures. Papyrus, which
grew wild in the marshes, was also cultivated, at least in the later
ages: its stems were used for boat-building, and according to the
classical authors for rope-making, as well as for the famous writing
material. About the 8th century A.D. paper drove the latter out of use,
and the papyrus plant quickly became extinct. The Indian lotus described
by Herodotus is found in deposits of the Roman age. Native lotuses, blue
and white, were much used for decoration in garlands, &c., also the
chrysanthemum and the corn-flower.

  See chapters on plant remains by Newberry in W. M. F. Petrie, _Hawara,
  Biahmu, and Arsinoe_ (London, 1889); _Kahun, Gurob and Hawara_ (1890);
  V. Loret, _La Flore pharaonique_ (2nd ed., Paris, 1892), and the
  authorities there cited.

_Domestic Animals and Birds._--The farmer kept up a large stock of
animals: in the houses there were pets and in the temples sacred
creatures of many kinds. Goats browsed on the trees and herbage at the
edge of the desert. Sheep of a peculiar breed with horizontal twisted
horns and hairy coat are figured on the earliest monuments: a more
valuable variety, woolly with curved horns, made its appearance in the
Middle Kingdom and pushed out the older form: sheep were driven into the
ploughed fields to break the clods and trample in the seed. The oxen
were long-horned, short-horned and polled. They drew the plough,
trampled the corn sheaves round the circular threshing floor, and were
sometimes employed to drag heavy weights. The pig is rarely figured and
was less and less tolerated as the Egyptians grew in ceremonial purity.
A variety of wild animals caught in the chase were kept alive and fed
for slaughter. Geese and ducks of different sorts were bred in countless
numbers by the farmers, also pigeons and quails, and in the early ages
cranes. The domestic fowl was unknown in Egypt before the Deltaic
dynasties, but Diodorus in the first century B.C. describes how its eggs
were hatched artificially, as they are at the present day. Bee-keeping,
too, must have been a considerable industry, though dates furnished a
supply of sweetening material.

The farm lands were generally held at a rent from an overlord, who might
according to times and circumstances be the king, a feudal prince, or a
temple-corporation. The stock also might be similarly held, or might
belong to the farmers. The ordinary beast of burden, even in the desert,
was the ass. The horse seems to have been introduced with the chariot
during the Hyksos period. It is thought that the camel is shown in rude
figures of the earliest age, but it is scarcely traceable again before
the XXVIth Dynasty. In the Ptolemaic period it was used for desert
transport and gradually became common. Strange to say, it is only very
rarely that men are depicted riding on animals, and never before the New
Kingdom.

The dog was of many varieties as early as the XIIth Dynasty, when the
greyhound and turnspit and other well-marked forms are seen. The cat was
sometimes trained by the sportsman to catch birds. Monkeys were commonly
kept as pets. The sacred beasts in the various temples, tame as far as
possible, were of almost every conceivable variety, from the vulture to
the swallow or the goose, from the lion to the shrew-mouse, from the
hippopotamus to the sheep and the monkey, from the crocodile to the
tortoise and the cobra, from the carp to the eel; the scorpion and the
scarab beetle were perhaps the strangest in this strange company of
deities.

  For agriculture see J. J. Tylor and F. Ll. Griffith, _The Tomb of
  Paheri_ at El Kab, in the XIth Memoir of the Egypt Exploration Fund.
  Together with hunting and fishing it is illustrated in many of the
  Memoirs of the _Archaeological Survey_ of the same society. See also
  Lortet and M. C. Gaillard, _La Faune momifiee de l'ancienne Egypte_
  (Lyons, 1905).

_Law._--No code of Egyptian laws has come down to us. Diodorus names a
series of Egyptian kings who were law-givers, ending with Amasis (Ahmosi
II.) and Darius. Frequent reference is made in inscriptions to customs
and laws which were traditional, and perhaps had been codified in the
sacred books. From time to time regulations on special points were
issued by royal decree: a fragment of such a decree, directed by
Horemheb of the XVIIIth Dynasty against oppression of the peasantry by
officials and prescribing penalties, is preserved on a stela in the
temple of Karnak, and enactments of Ptolemy Philadelphus and Euergetes
II. are known from papyri. In the Ptolemaic age matters arising out of
native contracts were decided according to native law by [Greek:
laokritai], while travelling courts of [Greek: chrematistai]
representing the king settled litigation on Greek contracts and most
other disputes. Affairs were decided in accordance with the code of the
country, [Greek: tes choras nomoi], the Greek code, [Greek: politikoi
nomoi], modelled, it would seem, on Athenian law or royal decrees,
[Greek: prostagmata]. "Native" law was still quoted in Roman times, but
the significance of the expression remains to be ascertained. In ancient
Egypt petitions were sent to the king or the great feudal landowners in
whose territory the petitioner or his adversary dwelt or the injury was
committed: courts were composed of royal or feudal officials, or in the
New Kingdom of officials or responsible citizens. The right of appeal to
the king probably existed at all times. The statement of the case and
the evidence were frequently ordered to be put in writing. The evidence
was supported by oath: in criminal cases, such as the harem conspiracy
against Rameses III., torture of the accused was resorted to to extract
evidence, the bastinado being applied on the hands and the feet.
Penalties in the New Kingdom were death (by starvation or
self-inflicted), fines, beating with a certain number of blows so as to
open a specified number of wounds on as many different parts of the body
(e.g. five wounds, i.e. on hands, feet and back?), also cutting off the
nose with banishment to Nubia or the Syrian frontier. In the times of
the Old Kingdom decapitation was in use, and a decree exists of the
Middle Kingdom degrading a nomarch of Coptos and his family for ever
from his office and from the priesthood on account of services to a
rival pretender.

As to legal instruments: contracts agreed to in public or before
witnesses and written on papyrus are found as early as the Middle
Kingdom and perhaps belong to all historic times, but are very scarce
until the XXVth Dynasty. Two wills exist on papyrus of the XIIth
Dynasty, but they are isolated, and such are not again found among
native documents, though they occur in Greek in the Ptolemaic age. The
virtual will of a high priest of Ammon under the XXIInd Dynasty is put
in the form of a decree of the god himself.

From the time of the XXVth Dynasty there is a great increase in written
documents of a legal character, sales, loans, &c., apparently due to a
change in law and custom; but after the reign of Darius I. there is
again almost a complete cessation until the reign of Alexander, probably
only because of the disturbed condition of the country. Under Ptolemy
Philadelphus Greek documents begin to be numerous: under Euergetes II.
(Physcon) demotic contracts are particularly abundant, but they cease
entirely after the first century of Roman rule.

Marriage contracts are not found earlier than the XXVIth Dynasty. Women
had full powers of inheritance (though not of dealing with their
property), and succession through the mother was of importance. In the
royal line there are almost certain instances of the marriage of a
brother with an heiress-sister in Pharaonic times: this was perhaps
helped by the analogy of Osiris and Isis: in the Ptolemaic dynasty it
was an established custom, and one of the stories of Khamois, written in
the Ptolemaic age, assumes its frequency at a very remote date. It would
be no surprise to find examples of the practice in other ranks also at
an early period, as it certainly was prevalent in the Hellenistic age,
but as yet it is very difficult to prove its occurrence. The native
contracts with the wife gave to her child all the husband's property,
and divorce or separation was provided for, entailing forfeiture of the
dowry. The "native law" of Roman times allowed a man to take his
daughter away from her husband if the last quarrelled with him.

Slavery is traceable from an early date. Private ownership of slaves,
captured in war and given by the king to their captor or otherwise, is
certainly seen at the beginning of the XVIIIth Dynasty. Sales of slaves
occur in the XXVth Dynasty, and contracts of servitude are found in the
XXVIth Dynasty and in the reign of Darius, appearing as if the consent
of the slave was then required. Presumably at this late period there
were eunuchs in Egypt, though adequate evidence of their existence there
is not yet forthcoming. They must have originated among a more cruel
people. That circumcision (though perhaps not till puberty) was
regularly practised is proved by the mummies (agreeing with the
testimony of Herodotus and the indications of the early tomb sculptures)
until an edict of Hadrian forbade it: after that, only priests were
circumcised.

  See A. H. Gardiner, _The Inscription of Mes_ (from Sethe's
  _Untersuchungen zur Geschichte und Altertumskunde Agyptens_, iv.); J.
  H. Breasted, _Ancient Records_, Egypt, passim, esp. i. S 190, 535 et
  seqq., 773, ii. 54, 671, iii. 45, 367, iv. 416, 499, 795; F. Ll.
  Griffith, _Catalogue of the John Rylands Demotic Papyri_; B. P.
  Grenfell and J. P. Mahaffy, _Revenue Laws of Philadelphus_ (Oxford,
  1896); B. P. Grenfell and A. S. Hunt, _Tebtunis Papyri_, part i.
  (London, 1902); Bouche-Leclercq, _Histoire des Lagides_, tome iv.
  (Paris, 1907).

_Science._--The Egyptians sought little after knowledge for its own
sake: they might indulge in religious speculation, but their science was
no more than the knowledge of practical methods. Undoubtedly the
Egyptians acquired great skill in the application of simple means to the
fulfilment of the most difficult tasks. But the books that have come
down to us prove how greatly their written theoretical knowledge fell
short of their practical accomplishment. The explanation of the fact may
partly be that the mechanical and other discoveries of the most
ingenious minds among them, when not in constant requisition by later
generations, were misunderstood or forgotten, and even in other cases
were preserved only as rules of thumb by the craftsmen and experts, who
would jealously hide them as secrets of trade. Men of genius were not
wanting in the long history of Egypt; two doctors, Imhotp (Imuthes), the
architect of Zoser, in the IIIrd Dynasty, and Amenophis (Amenhotp), son
of Hap, the wise scribe under Amenophis III. in the XVIIIth, eventually
received the honours of deification; and Hardadf under Cheops of the
IVth Dynasty was little behind these two in the estimation of posterity.
Such men, who, capable in every field, designed the Great Pyramids and
bestowed the highest monumental fame on their masters, must surely have
had an insight into scientific principles that would hardly be credited
to the Egyptians from the written documents alone.

_Mathematics._--The Egyptian notation for whole numbers was decimal,
each power of 10 up to 100,000 being represented by a different figure,
on much the same principle as the Roman numerals. Fractions except 2/3
were all primary, i.e. with the numerator unity: in order to express
such an idea as 9/13 the Egyptians were obliged to reduce it to a series
of primary fractions through double fractions 2/13 + 2/13 + 2/13 + 2/13
+ 1/13 = 4(1/8 + 1/52 + 1/104) + 1/13 = 1/2 + 2/13 + 1/26 = 1/2 + 1/8 +
1/26 + 1/52 + 1/104; this operation was performed in the head, only the
result being written down, and to facilitate it tables were drawn up of
the division of 2 by odd numbers. With integers, besides adding and
subtracting, it was easy to double and to multiply by 10: multiplying
and dividing by 5 and finding the 1-1/2 value were also among the
fundamental instruments of calculation, and all multiplication proceeded
by repetitions of these processes with addition, e.g. 9 x 7 = (9 x 2 x
2) + (9 x 2) + 9. Division was accomplished by multiplying the divisor
until the dividend was reached; the answer being the number of times the
divisor was so multiplied. Weights and measures proceeded generally on
either a decimal or a doubling system or a combination of the two. Apart
from a few calculations and accounts, practically all the materials for
our knowledge of Egyptian mathematics before the Hellenistic period date
from the Middle Kingdom.

  The principal text is the Rhind Mathematical Papyrus in the British
  Museum, written under a Hyksos king c. 1600 B.C.; unfortunately it is
  full of gross errors. Its contents fall roughly into the following
  scheme, but the main headings are not shown in the original:--

  I. _Arithmetic._--A. Tables and rule to facilitate the employment of
  fractions.

    (a) Table of the divisions of 2 by odd numbers from 3 to 99 (e.g. 2
          : 11 = 1/6 + 1/66), see above.
    (b) Conversions of compound fractions (e.g. 2/3 x 1/3 = 1/6 + 1/18),
          with rule for finding 2/3 of a fraction.

  B. The "bread" calculation--a division by 10 of the units 1 to 9.

  C. "Completing" calculations.

    (a) Adding multiples of a fraction to produce a more convenient
          fraction (perhaps connected with the use of palms and
          cubits in decoration in a proportion based on the number 8).
    (b) Finding the difference between a given fraction and a given
          whole number.

  D. _Ahe_[9] or "mass"-problems (of the form x + x/n = a, to find the
  _ahe_ x).

  E. _Tooun_-problems (_tooun_, "rising," seems to be the difference
  between the shares of two sets of persons dividing an amount between
  them on a lower and a higher scale).

  II. _Geometry._--A. Measurement of volume (amounts of grain in
  cylindrical and rectangular spaces of different dimensions and vice
  versa).

  B. Measurement of area (areas of square, circular, triangular, &c.,
  fields).

  C. Proportions of pyramids and other monuments with sloping sides.

  III. _Miscellaneous problems_ (and tables) such as are met with in
  bread-making, beer-making, food of live-stock, &c. &c.

  The method of estimating the area of irregular fields and the cubic
  contents of granaries, &c., is very faulty. It would be interesting to
  find material of later date, such as Pythagoras is reported to have
  studied.

  See A. Eisenlohr, _Ein mathematisches Handbuch der alten Agypter_
  (Leipzig, 1877); F. Ll. Griffith, "The Rhind Mathematical Papyrus" in
  _Proceedings of the Soc. of Biblical Archaeology_, Nov. 1891, March,
  May and June 1894.

_Astronomy._--The brilliant skies of day and night in Egypt favoured the
development of astronomy. A papyrus of the Roman period in the British
Museum attributes the invention of horoscopes to the Egyptians, but no
early instance is known. Professor Petrie has indeed suggested, chiefly
on chronological grounds, that a table of stars on the ceiling of the
Ramesseum temple and another in the tomb of Rameses VI. (repeated in
that of Rameses IX. without alteration) were horoscopes of Rameses II.
and VI.; but Mahler's interpretation of the tables on which this would
rest appears to be false. Astronomy played a considerable part in
religious matters for fixing the dates of festivals and determining the
hours of the night. The titles of several temple books are preserved
recording the movements and phases of the sun, moon and stars. The
rising of Sothis (Sirius) at the beginning of the inundation was a
particularly important point to fix in the yearly calendar (see below, S
"Chronology"). The primitive clock[10] of the temple time-keeper
(horoscopus), consisting of a [Greek: horologion kai phoinika] (Clemens
Alex. _Strom._, vi. 4. 35), has been identified with two inscribed
objects in the Berlin Museum; these are a palm branch with a sight-slit
in the broader end, and a short handle from which a plummet line was
hung. The former was held close to the eye, the latter in the other
hand, perhaps at arm's length. From the above-mentioned tables of
culmination in the tombs of Rameses VI. and IX. it seems that for fixing
the hours of the night a man seated on the ground faced the horoscopus
in such a position that the line of observation of the Pole-star passed
over the middle of his head. On the different days of the year each hour
was determined by a fixed star culminating or nearly culminating in it,
and the position of these stars at the time is given in the tables as
"in the centre," "on the left eye," "on the right shoulder," &c.
According to the texts, in founding or rebuilding temples the north axis
was determined by the same apparatus, and we may conclude that it was
the usual one for astronomical observations. It is conceivable that in
ingenious and careful hands it might give results of a high degree of
accuracy.

  See L. Borchardt, "Ein altagyptisches astronomisches Instrument" in
  _Zeitschrift fur agyptische Sprache_, xxxvii. (1899), p. 10; Ed.
  Meyer, _Agyptische Chronologie_, p. 36. Besides the sun and moon, five
  planets, thirty-six dekans, and constellations to which animal and
  other forms are given, appear in the early astronomical texts and
  paintings. The zodiacal signs were not introduced till the Ptolemaic
  period. See H. Brugsch, _Die Agyptologie_ (Leipzig, 1891), pp. 315 et
  seqq., for a full account of all these.

_Medicine._--Except, that splints are sometimes found on the limbs of
bodies of all periods, at present nothing is known, from texts or
otherwise, of the existence of Egyptian surgery or dentistry. For
historical pathology the examination of mummies and skeletons is
yielding good results. There is little sign of the existence of gout or
of syphilitic diseases until late times (see MUMMY). A number of papyri
have been discovered containing medical prescriptions. The earliest are
of the XIIth Dynasty from Kahun, one being veterinary, the other
gynaecological. The finest non-religious papyrus known, the Ebers
Papyrus, is a vast collection of receipts. One section, giving us some
of "the mysteries of the physician," shows how lamentably crude were his
notions of the constitution of the body. It teaches little more than
that the pulse is felt in every part of the body, that there are vessels
leading from the heart to the eyes, ears, nose and all the other
members, and that "the breath entering the nose goes to the heart and
the lungs." The prescriptions are for a great variety of ailments and
afflictions--diseases of the eye and the stomach, sores and broken
bones, to make the hair grow, to keep away snakes, fleas, &c. Purgatives
and diuretics are particularly numerous, and the medicines take the form
of pillules, draughts, liniments, fumigations, &c. The prescriptions are
often fanciful and may thus bear some absurd relation to the disease to
be cured, but generally they would be to some extent effective. Their
action was assisted by spells, for general use in the preparation or
application, or for special diseases. In most cases several ingredients
are prescribed together: when the amounts are indicated it is by measure
not by weight, and evidently no very potent drugs were employed, for the
smallest measure specified is equal to about half of a cubic inch.
Little has yet been accomplished in identifying the diseases and the
substances named in the medical papyri.

  See G. A. Reisner, _The Hearst Medical Papyrus_ (Leipzig, 1905),
  (XVIIIth Dynasty), and for a great magical text of the Roman period
  (3rd century A.D.) with some prescriptions, F. Ll. Griffith and H.
  Thompson, _The Demotic Magical Papyrus of London and Leiden_ (London,
  1904).

_Literature_.--The vast mass of writing which has come down to us from
the ancient Egyptians comprises documents of almost every conceivable
kind, business documents and correspondence, legal documents, memorial
inscriptions, historical, scientific, didactic, magical and religious
literature; also tales and lyrics and other compositions in poetical
language. Most of these classes are dealt with in this article under
special headings. In addition there should be mentioned the abundant
explanatory inscriptions attached to wall-scenes as a secondary element
in those compositions. As early as the Middle Kingdom, papyri are found
containing classified lists of words, titles, names of cities, &c., and
of nomes with their capitals, festivals, deities and sacred things,
calendars, &c.

To a great extent the standard works in all classes date from an early
age, not later than the Middle Kingdom, and subsequent works of religion
and learning like the later additions were largely written in the same
style. Several books of proverbs or "instructions" were put in
circulation during the Middle Kingdom. Kagemni and Ptahhotp of the Old
Kingdom were nominally or really the instructors in manners: King
Amenemhe I. laid down the principles of conduct in government for his
son Senwosri I., preaching on the text of beneficence rewarded by
treachery; Kheti points out in detail to his schoolboy son Pepi the
advantages enjoyed by scribes and the miseries of all other careers.
Some of these books are known only in copies of the New Kingdom. The
instructions of Ani to his son Khenshotp are of later date. In demotic
the most notable of such works is a papyrus of the first century A.D. at
Leiden.

A number of Egyptian tales are known, dating from the Middle Kingdom and
later. Some are so sober and realistic as to make it doubtful whether
they are not true biographies and narratives of actual events. Such are
the story of Sinuhi, a fugitive to Syria in the reign of Sesostris
[Senwosri] I., and perhaps the narrative of Unamun of his expedition in
quest of cedar wood for the bark of the Theban Ammon in the XXIst
Dynasty. Others are highly imaginative or with miraculous incidents,
like the story of the Predestined Prince and the story of the Two
Brothers, which begins with a pleasing picture of the industrious
farmer, and, in demotic of the Ptolemaic and Roman periods, two stories
of the learned Sethon Khamois, son of Rameses II. and high priest of
Ptah, with his rather tragical experiences at the hands of magicians.
The stories of the Middle Kingdom were in choice diction, large portions
of them being rhetorical or poetical compositions attributed to the
principal characters. The story of Sinuhi is of this description and was
much read during the New Kingdom. Another, of the Eloquent Peasant whose
ass had been stolen, was only a framework to the rhetoric of endless
petitions. The tale of the Shipwrecked Sailor in the Red Sea was a piece
of simpler writing, not unpicturesque, of the marvellous type of a
Sindbad story. If all these are deficient in literary merit, they are
deeply interesting as revelations of primitive mind and manners. Of New
Kingdom tales, the story of the Two Brothers is frankly in the simplest
speech of everyday life, while others are more stilted. The demotic
stories of Khamois are simple, but the "Rape of Inaros' Cuirass" (at
Vienna) is told in a stiff and high-flown style.

In general it may be said of Egyptian literary compositions that apart
from their interest as anthropological documents they possess no merit
which would entitle them to survive. They are more or less touched by
artificiality, but so far as we are able to appreciate them at present
they very seldom attain to any degree of literary beauty. Most of the
compositions in the literary language, whether old or archaistic, are in
a stilted style and often with parallelisms of phrase like those of
Hebrew poetry. Simple prose narrative is here quite exceptional. Some
few hymns contain stanzas of ten lines, each line with a break in the
middle. There is no sign of rhyming in Egyptian poetry, and the rhythm
is not yet recognizable owing to our ignorance of the ancient
vocalization. In old Egyptian tales the narrative portions are
frequently in prose; New Egyptian and demotic contain as a rule little
else. Hymns exist in both of these later forms of the language, and a
few love songs in Late Egyptian.

  See W. M. F. Petrie, _Egyptian Tales_ (2 vols., London, 1895); G.
  Maspero, _Les Contes populaires de l'Egypte ancienne_ (3rd edition,
  Paris, 1906); W. Max Muller, _Die Liebespoesie der alten Agypter_
  (Leipzig, 1899).     (F. LL. G.)

C. _Religion._--1. _Introductory._--Copious as are the sources of
information from which our knowledge of the Egyptian religion is drawn,
there is nevertheless no aspect of the ancient civilization of Egypt
that we really so little understand. While the youth of Egyptological
research is in part responsible for this, the reason lies still more in
the nature of the religion itself and the character of the testimony
bearing upon it. For a true appreciation of the chaotic polytheism that
reveals itself even in the earliest texts it would be necessary to be
able to trace its development, stage by stage, out of a number of naive
primitive cults; but the period of growth lies behind recorded history,
and we are here reduced to hypotheses and _a posteriori_
reconstructions. The same criticism applies, no doubt, to other
religions, like those of Greece and Rome. In Egypt, however, the
difficulty is much aggravated by the poor quality of the evidence. The
religious books are textually very corrupt, one-sided in their
subject-matter, and distributed over a period of more than two thousand
years. The greatest defect of all is their relative silence with regard
to the myths. For the story of Isis and Osiris we have indeed the late
treatise ascribed to Plutarch, and a few fragments of other myths may be
culled from earlier native sources. But in general the tales that passed
current about the gods are referred to only in mysterious and recondite
allusions; as Herodotus for his own times explicitly testifies, a
reticence in such matters seems to have been encouraged by the priests.
Thus with regard to Egyptian theology we are very imperfectly informed,
and the account that is here given of it must be looked upon as merely
provisional. The actual practices of the cult, both funerary and divine,
are better known, and we are tolerably familiar with the doctrines as to
the future state of the dead. There is good material, too, for the study
of Egyptian magic, though this branch has been somewhat neglected
hitherto.

2. _Main Sources._--(a) _The Pyramid texts,_ a vast collection of
incantations inscribed on the inner walls of five royal tombs of the Vth
and VIth Dynasties at Sakkara, discovered and first published by
Maspero. Much of these texts is of extreme antiquity; one incantation at
least has been proved to belong to an age anterior to the unification of
the Northern and Southern kingdoms. Later copies also exist, but possess
little independent critical value. The subject-matter is funerary, i.e.
it deals with the fate of the dead king in the next life. Some chapters
describe the manner in which he passes from earth to heaven and becomes
a star in the firmament, others deal with the food and drink necessary
for his continued existence after death, and others again with the royal
prerogatives which he hopes still to enjoy; many are directed against
the bites of snakes and stings of scorpions. It is possible that these
incantations were recited as part of the funerary ritual, but there is
no doubt that their mere presence in the tombs was supposed to be
magically effective for the welfare of the dead. Originally these texts
had an application to the king alone, but before the beginning of the
XIIth Dynasty private individuals had begun to employ them on their own
behalf. They seem to be relatively free from textual corruption, but the
vocabulary still occasions much difficulty to the translator.

(b) _The Book of the Dead_ is the somewhat inappropriate name applied to
a large similar collection of texts of various dates, certain chapters
of which show a tendency to become welded together into a book of fixed
content and uniform order. A number of chapters contained in the later
recensions are already found on the sarcophagi of the Middle Kingdom,
together with a host of funereal texts not usually reckoned as belonging
to the Book of the Dead; these have been published by Lepsius and Lacau.
The above-mentioned nucleus, combined with other chapters of more recent
origin, is found in the papyri of the XVIIIth-XXth Dynasties, and forms
the so-called Theban recension, which has been edited by Naville in an
important work. Here already more or less rigid groups of chapters may
be noted, but individual manuscripts differ greatly in what they include
and exclude. In the Saite period a sort of standard edition was drawn
up, consisting of 165 chapters in a fixed order and with a common title
"the book of going forth in the day"; this recension was published by
Lepsius in 1842 from a Turin papyrus. Like the Pyramid texts, the Book
of the Dead served a funerary purpose, but its contents are far more
heterogeneous; besides chapters enabling the dead man to assume what
shape he will, or to issue triumphant from the last judgment, there are
lists of gates to be passed and demons to be encountered in the nether
world, formulae such as are inscribed on sepulchral figures and amulets,
and even hymns to the sun-god. These texts are for the most part
excessively corrupt, and despite the translations of Pierret, Renouf and
Budge, much labour must yet be expended upon them before they can rank
as a first-rate source.

(c) The texts of the _Tombs of the Kings at Thebes_ (XVIIIth-XXth Dyn.)
consist of a series of theological books compiled at an uncertain date;
they have been edited by Naville and Lefebure. The chief of these,
extant in a longer and a shorter version, is called _The book of that
which is in the Nether World_ (familiarly known as the _Am Duat_) and
deals with the journey of the sun during the twelve hours of the night.
_The Book of Gates_ treats of the same topic from a more theological
standpoint. _The Litanies of the Sun_ contain the acclamations with
which the sun-god Re was greeted, when at eventide his bark reached the
entrance of the nether world. Another treatise relates the destruction
of mankind, and the circumstances that led to the creation of the
heavens in the form of a cow.

(d) Among the _later religious books_ one or two deserve a special
mention, such as _The Overthrowing of Apophis_, the serpent enemy of the
sun-god; _The Lamentations of Isis and Nephthys_ over their murdered
brother Osiris; _The Book of Breathings_, a favourite book among the
later Theban priests. Several of these books were used in the ritual of
feast days, but all have received a secondary funerary employment, and
are therefore found buried with the dead in their tombs.

(e) The _Ritual texts_ have survived only in copies not earlier than the
New Kingdom. The temple ritual employed in the daily cult is illustrated
by the scenes depicted on the inner walls of the great temples: the
formulae recited during the performance of the ceremonies are recorded
at length in the temple of Seti I. (XIXth Dyn.) at Abydos, as well as in
some later papyri in Berlin. The whole material has been collected and
studied by Moret. The funerary ritual is known from texts in the Theban
tombs (XVIIIth-XXth Dyn.) and papyri and sarcophagi of later date; older
versions are contained in the Pyramid texts and _The Book of the Dead_.
Schiaparelli has done much towards gathering together this scattered
material. The ritual observed during the process of embalmment is
preserved in late papyri in Paris and Cairo published by Maspero.

(f) The _magical_ documents have been comparatively little studied, in
spite of their great interest. They deal for the most part with the
hearing of diseases, the bites of snakes and scorpions, &c., but
incidentally cast many sidelights on the mythology and superstitious
beliefs. The best-known of these books is the _Papyrus Harris_ published
by F. J. Chabas, but other papyri of as great or greater importance are
to be found in the Leiden, Turin and other collections. A curious book
published by A. Erman contains spells to be used by mothers for the
protection of their children. A papyrus in London contains a calendar of
lucky and unlucky days. A late class of stelae, of which the best
specimen has been published by Golenischeff, consists of spells of
various kinds originally intended for the use of the living, but later
employed for funerary purposes.

(g) Under the heading _Miscellaneous_ we must mention a number of
sources of great value: the grave-stones, or stelae, especially those
from Abydos, which throw much light on funerary beliefs; the great
_Papyrus Harris_, the longest of all papyri, which enumerates the gifts
of Rameses III. (XXth Dyn.) to the various temples of Egypt; the hymns
to the gods preserved in Cairo and Leiden papyri; and the inscriptions
of the Ptolemaic temples (Dendera, Edfu, &c.), which teem with good
religious material. Nor can any attempt here be made to summarize the
remaining native Egyptian sources, literary and archaeological, that
deserve notice.

(h) Among the classical writers, Plutarch in his treatise _Concerning
Isis and Osiris_ is the most important. Diodorus also is useful.
Herodotus, owing to his religious awe and dread of divulging sacred
mysteries, is only a second-rate source.

3. _The Gods._--The end of the pre-dynastic period, in which we dimly
descry a number of independent tribes in constant warfare with one
another, was marked by the rise of a united Egyptian state with a single
Pharaonic ruler at its head. The era of peace thus inaugurated brought
with it a rapid progress in all branches of civilization; and there soon
emerged not only a national art and a condition of material prosperity
shared by the entire land in common, but also a state religion, which
gathered up the ancient tribal cults and floating cosmical conceptions,
and combining them as best it could, imposed them on the people as a
whole. By the time that the Pyramid texts were put into writing,
doubtless long before the Vth Dynasty, this religion had assumed a
stereotyped appearance that clung to it for ever afterwards. But the
multitude of the deities and the variety of the myths that it strove to
incorporate prevented the development of a uniform theological system,
and the heterogeneous origin of the religion remained irretrievably
stamped upon its face. Written records were few at the time when the
pantheon was built up, so that the process of construction cannot be
followed historically from stage to stage; but it is possible by arguing
backwards from the later facts to discern the main tendencies at work,
and the principal elementary cults that served as the materials.


  Classification of pre-dynastic gods.

The gods of the pre-dynastic period may be divided into two chief
groups, the tribal or local divinities and the cosmic or explanatory
deities. At the beginning each tribe had its own particular god, who in
essence was nothing but the articulate expression of the inner cohesion
and of the outward independence of the tribe itself, but who outwardly
manifested himself in the form of some animal or took up his abode in
some fetish of wood or stone. In times of peace this visible emblem of
the god's presence was housed in a rude shrine, but in war-time it was
taken thence and carried into the battlefield on a standard. We find
such divine standards [HRG: R12] often depicted on the earliest
monuments, and among the symbols placed upon them may be detected the
images of many deities destined to play an important part in the later
national pantheon, such as the falcon Horus [HRG: G5:R12], the wolf
Wepwawet (Ophois) [HRG: zAb:R12], the goddess Neith [HRG: R25:R12],
symbolized by a shield transfixed with arrows, and the god Min [HRG:
R23:R12], the nature of whose fetish is obscure. In course of time the
tribes became localized in particular districts, under the influence of
a growing central authority, and their gods then passed from tribal into
local deities. Hence it came about that the provincial districts or
nomes, as they were called, often derived their names from the gods of
tribes that settled in them, these names being hieroglyphically written
with the sign for "district" surmounted by standards of the type above
described, e.g. [HRG: E15:R12], "the nome of the dog Anubis," the 17th
or Cynopolite nome of Upper Egypt. In this way a large number of deities
came to enjoy special reverence in restricted territories, e.g. the ram
[HRG:] Khnum in Elephantine, the jerboa or okapi (?) [HRG: E20] Seth in
Ombos, the ibis [HRG: G26] Thoth in Hermopolis Magna, and of the gods
named above, Horus in Hieraconpolis, Wepwawet in Assiut, Neith in Sais,
and Min in Coptos. As towns and villages gradually sprang up, they too
adopted as their patron some one or other of the original tribal gods,
so that these came to have different seats of worship all over Egypt.
For this reason it is often hard to tell where the primitive cult-centre
of a particular deity is to be sought; thus Horus seems equally at home
both at Buto in the Delta and at Hieraconpolis in Upper Egypt, and the
earliest worship of Seth appears to have been claimed no less by Tanis
in the north than by Ombos in the south. The effect of the localization
of gods in many different places was to give them a double aspect; so,
for instance, Khnum the god of Elephantine could in one minute be
regarded as identical with Khnum the god of Esna, while in the next
minute and without any conscious sense of contradiction the two might be
looked upon as entirely separate beings. In order that there might be no
ambiguity as to what divinity was meant, it became usual, in speaking of
any local deity, to specify the place of which he was "lord." The
tendency to create new forms of a god by instituting his worship in new
local centres persisted throughout the whole course of Egyptian history,
unhindered by the opposite tendency which made national out of local
gods. Some of the cosmic gods, like the sun-god Re of Heliopolis and of
Hermonthis, early acquired a local in addition to their cosmic aspect.

In the innermost principle of their existence, as patrons and protectors
of restricted communities, the primitive tribal gods did not differ from
one another. But externally they were distinguishable by the various
shapes that their worshippers ascribed to them; and there can be little
doubt that even in the beginning each had his own special attributes and
particular mythical traits. These, however, may have borne little
resemblance to the later conceptions of the same gods with which we are
made familiar by the Pyramid texts. Thus we have no means of
ascertaining what the earliest people of Sais thought about their
goddess Neith, though her fetish would seem to point to her warlike
nature. Nor are we much wiser in respect of those primitive tribal gods
that are represented on the oldest monuments in animal form. For though
we may be sure that the shape of an animal was that in which these gods
were literally visible to their worshippers, yet it is impossible to
tell whether some one living animal was chosen to be the earthly
tenement of the deity, or whether he revealed himself in every
individual of a species, or whether merely the cult-image was roughly
hewn into the shape of an animal. Not too much weight must be attached
to later evidence on this point; for the New Kingdom and still more the
Graeco-Roman period witnessed a strange recrudescence of supposed
primitive cults, to which they gave a form that may or may not have been
historically exact. In some places whole classes of animals came to be
deemed sacred. Thus at Bubastis, where the cat-headed Bast (Ubasti) was
worshipped, vast cemeteries of mummified cats have been found; and
elsewhere similar funerary cults were accorded to crocodiles, lizards,
ibises and many other animals. In Elephantine Khnum was supposed to
become incarnate in a ram, at whose death the divinity left him and took
up his abode in another. So too the bull of Apis (a black animal with
white spots) was during its lifetime regarded as a reincarnation of
Ptah, the local god of Memphis, and similarly the Mnevis and Bacis bulls
were accounted to be "the living souls" of Etom of Heliopolis and of Re
of Hermonthis respectively; these latter cults are certainly secondary,
for Ptah himself was never, either early or late, depicted otherwise
than in human form, as a mummy or as a dwarf; and Etom and Re are but
different names of the sun-god. The form of a snake, attributed to many
local goddesses, especially in later times (e.g. Meresger of the Theban
necropolis), was borrowed from the very ancient deity Outo (Buto); the
semblance of a snake became so characteristic of female divinities that
even the word "goddess" was written with the hieroglyph of a snake.
Other animal shapes particularly affected by goddesses were those of a
lioness (Sakhmi, Pakhe) or a cow (Hathor, Isis). The primitive animal
gods are not to be confused with the animal forms ascribed to many
cosmic deities; thus when the sun-god Re was pictured as a scarabaeus,
or dung-beetle, rolling its ball of dung behind it, this was certainly
mere poetical imagery. Or else a cosmic god might assume an animal shape
through assimilation with some tribal god, as when Re was identified
with Horus and therefore depicted as a falcon.

With the advance of civilization and the transformation of the tribal
gods into national divinities, the beliefs held about them must have
become less crude. At a very early date the anthropomorphizing tendency
caused the animal deities to be represented with human bodies, though as
a rule they retained their animal heads; so in the case of Seth as early
as the IInd Dynasty. The other gods carry their primitive fetishes in
their hands (like Neith, who is depicted holding arrows) or on their
heads (so Nefertem [Iphthimis] with his lotus-flower). At the same time
the gods began to acquire human personalities. In a few instances this
may have come about by the emphasizing of a really primitive trait; as
when the wolf Ophois, in consonance with the predatory nature of that
animal, developed into a god of war. In other cases the transitional
steps are shrouded in mystery; we do not know, for example, why the ibis
Thoth subsequently became the patron of the fine arts, the inventor of
writing, and the scribe of the gods. But the main factor in this
evolutionary process was undoubtedly the formation of myths, which
brought gods of independent origin into relation with one another, and
thus imbued them with human passions and virtues. Here dim historic
recollections often determined the features of the story, and in one
famous legend that knits together a group of gods all seemingly local in
origin we can still faintly trace how the tale arose, was added to, and
finally crystallized in a coherent form.

Osiris was a wise and beneficent king, who reclaimed the Egyptians from
savagery, gave them laws and taught them handicrafts. The prosperous
reign of Osiris was brought to a premature close by the machinations of
his wicked brother Seth, who with seventy-two fellow-conspirators
invited him to a banquet, induced him to enter a cunningly-wrought
coffin made exactly to his measure, then shut down the lid and cast the
chest into the Nile. Isis, the faithful wife of Osiris, set forth in
search of her dead husband's body, and after long and adventure-fraught
wanderings, succeeded in recovering it and bringing it back to Egypt.
Then while she was absent visiting her son Horus in the city of Buto,
Seth once more gained possession of the corpse, cut it into fourteen
pieces, and scattered them all over Egypt. But Isis collected the
fragments, and wherever one was found, buried it with due honour; or,
according to a different account, she joined the limbs together by
virtue of her magical powers, and the slain Osiris, thus resurrected,
henceforth reigned as king of the dead in the nether world. When Horus
grew up he set out to avenge his father's murder, and after terrible
struggles finally conquered and dispossessed his wicked uncle; or, as
another version relates, the combatants were separated by Thoth, and
Egypt divided between them, the northern part falling to Horus and the
southern to Seth. Such is the story as told by Plutarch, with certain
additions and modifications from older native sources. There existed,
however, a very ancient tradition according to which Horus and Seth were
hostile brothers, not nephew and uncle; and many considerations may be
urged in support of the thesis which regards their struggles as
reminiscences of wars between two prominent tribes or confederations of
tribes, one of which worshipped the falcon Horus while the other had the
okapi (?) Seth as its patron and champion. The Horus-tribes were the
victors, and it was from them that the dynastic line sprang; hence the
Pharaoh always bore the name of Horus, and represented in his own
hallowed person the ancient tribal deity. Of Osiris we can only state
that he was originally the local god of Busiris, whatever further
characteristics he primitively possessed being quite obscure. Isis was
perhaps the local goddess of Buto, a town not far distant from Busiris;
this geographical proximity would suffice to explain her connexion with
Osiris in the tale. A legend now arose, we know not how or why, which
made Seth the brother and murderer of Osiris; and this led to a fusion
of the Horus-Seth and the Seth-Isis-Osiris _motifs_. The relationships
had now to be readjusted, and the most popular view recognized Horus as
the son and avenger of Osiris. The more ancient account survived,
however, in the myth that Osiris, Horus, Seth, Isis and Nephthys (a
goddess who plays but a minor part in the Osiris cycle) were all
children of the earth-god Keb and the sky-goddess Nut, born on the five
consecutive days added on at the end of the year (the so-called
epagomenal days). Later generations reconciled these contradictions by
assuming the existence of two Horuses, one, the brother of Osiris, Seth
and Isis, being named Haroeris, i.e. Horus the elder, while the other,
the child of Isis and Osiris, was called Harpocrates, i.e. Horus the
child.


  Cosmic deities.

The second main class of divinities that entered into the composition of
the Egyptian pantheon was due to that innate and universal speculative
bent which seeks, and never fails to find, an explanation of the facts
of the external world. Behind the great natural phenomena that they
perceived all around them, the Egyptians, like other primitive folk,
postulated the existence of divine wills not dissimilar in kind to their
own, though vastly superior in power. Chief among these cosmic deities
was the sun-god Re, whose supremacy seemed predestined under the
cloudless sky of Egypt. The oldest conceptions represented Re as sailing
across the heavens in a ship called "Manzet," "the bark of the dawn"; at
sunset he stepped aboard another vessel named "Mesenktet," "the bark of
the dusk," which bore him back from west to east during the night. Later
theories symbolized Re in many different ways. For some he was identical
with Horus, and then he was falcon-headed and was called Hor-akhti, the
Horus of the horizons. Others pictured him to themselves as a tiny
infant in the early dawn, as full-grown at noon, and as an infirm old
man in the evening. When the sky was imagined as a cow, he was a calf
born anew every morning. The moon was a male deity, who likewise fared
across the heavens in a boat; hence he was often named Chons, "the
sailor." The ibis-god Thoth was early identified with the moon. The
stars and planets were likewise gods. Among them the bright star Sirius
was held in special esteem; it was a goddess Sothis (Sopde), often
identified by the Egyptians with Isis. The constellations that seemed
unceasingly to speed across the sky were named "the never-resting ones,"
and the circumpolar stars, which never sink beneath the horizon, were
known as "the imperishables." Concerning earth and sky there were many
different opinions. Some thought that the sky was a goddess Nut, whom
the god Show held aloof from her husband Keb the earth, on whose back
the plants and trees grew. Others believed in a celestial ocean,
personified under the name of Nun, over which the heavenly bodies sailed
in boats. At a later date the sky was held to be a cow (Hathor) whose
four feet stood firm upon the soil; or else a vast face, in which the
right eye was the sun and the left eye the moon. Alongside these
fanciful conceptions there existed a more sober view, according to which
the earth was a long oval plain, and the sky an iron roof supported by
the tops of mountains or by four pillars [HRG] at the cardinal points.
Beneath the ground lay a dark and mysterious region, now conceived as an
inverse heaven (Nenet), now as a vast series of caverns whose gates were
guarded by demons. This nether world was known as the Duat (Dat, Tei),
and through it passed the sun on his journey during the hours of night;
here too, as many thought, dwelt the dead and their king Osiris. That
great natural feature of Egypt, the Nile, was of course one of the gods;
his name was Hapi, and as a sign of his fecundity he had long pendulous
breasts like a woman. In contradistinction to the tribal gods, it rarely
happened that the cosmic deities enjoyed a cult. But there are a few
important exceptions: Re in Heliopolis (here identified with a local god
Etom) and in Hermonthis; Hathor at Dendera and elsewhere. Certain of the
tribal gods early became identified with cosmic divinities, and the
latter thus became the objects of a cult; so, for instance, the Horus of
Edfu was a sun-god, and Thoth in Hermopolis Magna was held to be the
moon.


  Minor deities and demons.

An extension of the principle that created the cosmic gods gave rise to
a large number of minor deities and demons. Day and night, the year, the
seasons, eternity, and many similar conceptions were each represented by
a god or goddess of their own, who nevertheless possessed but a shadowy
and doubtful existence. Human attributes like Taste, Knowledge, Joy and
so forth were likewise personified, no less than abstract ideas such as
Fate, Destiny and others; rather more clearly defined than the rest was
Maat, the goddess of Truth and Right, who was fabled to be the daughter
of Re and may even have had a cult. Certain gods were purely functional,
that is to say, they appeared at special times to perform some
appointed task, at the completion of which they vanished. Such were
Nepri, the god of the corn-harvest; Meskhonit, the goddess who attended
every child-bed; Tait, the goddess of weaving. Numberless semi-divine
beings had no other purpose than to fill out the myths, as, for
instance, the chattering apes that greeted the sun-god Re as he rose
above the eastern horizon, and the demons who opened the gates of the
nether world at the approach of the setting sun.


  Foreign deities.

We take this opportunity of mentioning sundry other divinities who were
later introduced to swell the already overcrowded ranks of the pantheon.
Contact with foreign lands brought with it several new deities, Baal,
Anat and Resheph from Syria, and the misshapen dwarf Bes from the south;
earlier than these, the Astarte of Byblus, whom the Egyptians identified
with Hathor. In Thebes Amenophis I. and his spouse Nefertari were
worshipped as patron gods of the necropolis many centuries after their
death. Two men of exceptional wisdom received divine honours, and had
temples of their own in the Ptolemaic period; these were Imouthes, who
had lived under Zoser of the IIIrd Dynasty, and Amenophis son of Hapu, a
contemporary of the third king of the same name (XVIIIth Dyn.). The hill
of Sheikh Abd-el-gurna at Thebes was looked upon as a particularly holy
place, and was revered as a goddess. Almost anything that was regarded
with awe, any object used in the divine ritual could at a given moment
be envisaged as a deity. Thus the boat of Osiris (Neshemet) and those of
the sun-god were goddesses; and various wands and sceptres belonging to
certain gods were imagined as harbouring the divine being. Truly it
might have been said in ancient Egypt: of the making of gods there is no
end!


  Theological combinations.

For such order as can be discerned in the mythological conceptions of
the Egyptians the priesthood was largely responsible. At a very early
date the theological school of Heliopolis undertook the task of
systematizing the gods and the myths, and it is mainly to them that is
due the Egyptian religion as we find it in the Pyramid texts. Their
influence is particularly conspicuous in the prominent place accorded to
the sun-god Re, and in the creation-legend that made him the father of
gods and men. First of all living things was Re; legend told how he
arose as a naked babe from a lotus-flower that floated on the primeval
ocean Nun. Others held the view that he crept from an egg that lay on a
hill in the midst of a lake called Desdes; and a third, more barbarous,
tale related his obscene act of self-procreation. Re became the father
of the pair of gods Show and Tefnut (Tphenis), who emanated from his
spittle. They again gave birth to Keb and Nut, from whom in their turn
sprang Osiris and Seth, Isis and Nephthys. These nine gods were together
known as the great Ennead or cycle of nine. A second series of nine
deities, with Horus as its first member, was invented at the same time
or not long afterwards, and was called the Lesser Ennead. In later times
the theory of the Ennead became very popular and was adopted by most of
the local priesthoods, who substituted their own favourite god for Re,
sometimes retaining and sometimes changing the names of the other eight
deities. Thus locally many different gods came to be viewed as the
creators of the world. Only in two instances, however, did a local god
ever obtain wide acceptance in the capacity of demiurge: Ptah of
Memphis, who was famed as an artist and master-builder, and Khnum of
Elephantine, who was said to have moulded mankind on the potter's wheel.

Already in the Pyramid texts the importance of Osiris almost rivals that
of Re. His worship does not seem to have been due to Heliopolitan
influence, and may possibly have been propagated by active missionary
effort. It is apparently through the funeral cult that Osiris so early
took a firm hold on the imagination of the people; for at a very ancient
date he was identified with every dead king, and it needed but a slight
extension of this idea to make him into a king of the dead. In later
times the moral aspect of his tale was doubtless the main cause of its
continued popularity; Osiris was named Onnophris, "the good Being" _par
excellence_, and Seth was contrasted with him as the author and the root
of all evil. Still the Egyptians themselves seem to have been somewhat
at a loss to account for the great veneration that they paid to Osiris.
Successive theories interpreted him as the god of the earth, as the god
of the Nile, as a god of vegetation, as a moon-god and as a sun-god; and
nearly every one of these theories has been claimed to be the primitive
truth by some scholar or another.

Nowhere is the conservatism of the Egyptians more clearly displayed than
in the tenacity with which they clung to the old forms of the theology,
such as we have essayed to describe. Neither the influx of new deities
nor the diligence of the priestly authors and commentators availed to
break down the cast-iron traditions with which the compilers of the
Pyramid texts were already familiar. It is true that with the
displacement of the capital town certain local deities attained a degree
of power that, superficially regarded, seems to alter the entire
perspective of the religion. Thus Ammon, originally the obscure local
god of Thebes, was raised by the Theban monarchs of the XIIth and of the
XVIIIth to XXIst Dynasties to a predominant position never equalled by
any other divinity; and, by similar means, Suchos of the Fayum, Ubasti
of Bubastis, and Neith of Sais, each enjoyed for a short space of time a
consideration that no other cause would have secured to them. But
precisely the example of Ammon proves the hopelessness of any attempt to
change the time-honoured religious creed; his priests identified him
with the sun-god Re, whose cult-centre was thus merely transferred a few
hundred miles to the South. Nor could even the violent religious
revolution of Akhenaton (Amenophis IV.), of which we shall later have
occasion to speak, sweep away for ever beliefs that had persisted for so
many generations.

But if the facts of the religion, broadly viewed, never underwent a
change, the interpretation of those facts did so in no small degree. The
religious books were for the most part written in archaic language,
which was only imperfectly understood by the priests of later times; and
hence great scope was given to them to exercise their ingenuity as
commentators. By the time of the XVIIIth Dynasty some early chapters of
the Book of the Dead had been provided with a triple commentary.
Unfortunately the methods pursued were as little reasonable as those
adopted by the medieval Jewish Rabbis; instead of the context being
studied as a whole, with a view to the recovery of its literal sense,
each single verse was considered separately, and explained as an
allusion to some obscure myth or as embodying some mystical meaning.
Thus so far from simplifying or really elucidating the religion, these
priestly labours tended rather to confuse one legend with another and to
efface the personality of individual gods. The ease with which one god
could be identified with another is perhaps the most striking
characteristic of later Egyptian theology. There are but few of the
greater deities who were not at some time or another identified with the
solar god Re. His fusion with Horus and Etom has already been noted;
further we find an Ammon-Re, a Sobk-Re, a Khnum-Re; and Month, Onouris,
Show and Osiris are all described as possessing the attributes of the
sun. Ptah was early assimilated to the sepulchral gods Sokaris and
Osiris. Pairs of deities whose personalities are often blended or
interchanged are Hathor and Nut, Sakhmi and Pakhe, Seth and Apophis. So
too in Abydos, his later home, Osiris was identified with Khante-Amentiu
(Khentamenti, Khentamenthes), "the chief of those who are in the West,"
a name that was given to a vaguely-conceived but widely-venerated
divinity ruler of the dead. Many factors helped in the process of
assimilation. The unity of the state was largely influential in bringing
about the suppression of local differences of belief. The less important
priesthoods were glad to enhance the reputation of the deity they served
by identifying him with some more important god. And the mystical bent
of the Egyptians found satisfaction in the multiplicity of forms that
their gods could assume; among the favourite epithets which the hymns
apply to divinities are such as "mysterious of shapes," "multiple of
faces."


  Monotheistic tendency.

The goal towards which these tendencies verged was monotheism; and
though this goal was only once, and then quite ephemerally, reached,
still the monotheistic idea was at most periods, so to speak, in the
air. Sometimes the qualities common to all the gods were abstracted, and
the resultant notion spoken of as "the god." At other times, and
especially in the hymns addressed to some divinity, all other gods were
momentarily forgotten, and he was eulogized as "the only one," "the
supreme," and so forth. Or else several of the chief deities were
consciously combined and regarded as different emanations or aspects of
a Sole Being; thus a Ramesside hymn begins with the words "Three are all
the gods, Ammon, Re and Ptah," and then it is shown how these three
gods, each in his own particular way, gave expression and effect to a
single divine purpose.


  Akhenaton.

For a brief period at the end of the XVIIIth Dynasty a real monotheism,
as exclusive as that of Judaism or of Islam, was adopted as the state
religion of Egypt. The young Pharaoh Amenophis IV. seems to have been
fired by genuine fanatical enthusiasm, though political motives, as well
as doctrinal considerations, may have prompted him in the planning of
his religious revolution (see also S History). The Theban god Ammon-Re
was then supreme, and the ever-growing power of his priesthood may well
have inflamed the jealousy of their Heliopolitan rivals. Amenophis began
his reign in Thebes as an adherent of the traditional faith, but after a
few years he abandoned that town and built a new capital for his god
Aton 200 m. farther north, at a place now called El Amarna. The new
deity was a personification of the sun's disk. The name Re was
suppressed, as too intimately associated with that of Ammon; and Ammon,
together with all the other gods, was put to the ban. Amenophis even
changed his own name, of which the name of Ammon formed an element, to
Akhenaton, "the brilliancy of the Aton," and the capital was called
Khitaton, "The Horizon of the Aton." The new dogmas were known as "the
Teaching," and their tenets, as revealed in the poems composed in honour
of the Aton, breathe the purest and most exalted monotheistic spirit.
The movement had, no doubt, met with serious opposition from the very
start, and the reaction soon set in. The immediate successors of
Akhenaton strove to follow in his footsteps, but the conservative nature
of Egypt quickly asserted itself. Not sixty years after the accession of
Akhenaton, his city was abandoned, its rulers branded as heretics, and
the old religion restored in Thebes as completely as if the Aton had
never existed.

Having thus failed to become rational, Egyptian theology took refuge in
learning. The need for a more spiritual and intellectual interpretation
of the pantheon still remained, and gave rise to a number of theological
sciences. The names of the gods and the places of their worship were
catalogued and classified, and manuals were devoted to the topography of
mythological regions. Much ingenuity was expended on the development of
a history of the gods, the groundwork of which had been laid in much
earlier times. Re was not only the creator of the world, but he was also
the first king of Egypt. He was followed on the throne by the other
eight members of his Ennead, then by the lesser Ennead and by other
gods, and finally by the so-called "worshippers of Horus." The latter
were not wholly mythical personages, though they were regarded as
demigods (Manetho calls them "the dead," [Greek: nekues]); they have
been shown to be none other than the dim rulers of the predynastic age.
The Pharaohs of the historic period were thus divine, not only by virtue
of their connexion with Horus (see above), but also as descendants of
Re; and the king of Egypt was called "the good god" during his lifetime,
and "the great god" after his death. The later religious literature is
much taken up with the mythical and semi-mythical dynasties of kings,
and the priests compiled, with many newly-invented details, the
chronicles of the wars they were supposed to have waged.


  Later developments.

In a similar manner, the ethical and allegorical methods of
interpretation came into much greater prominence towards the end of the
New Kingdom. The Osirian legend, as we have already seen, was early
accepted as symbolizing the conflict between good and evil. So too the
victories of Re over the serpent named Apophis were more or less clearly
understood as a simile of the antithetical nature of light and darkness.
In one text at least as ancient as the XVIIIth Dynasty (the copy that we
have dates only from the Ethiopian period) an ingenious attempt is made
to represent Ptah as the source of all life: from him, it is said,
emanated Horus as "heart" or "mind" and Thoth as "tongue," and through
the conjoint action of these two, the mind conceiving the design and the
tongue uttering the creative command, all gods and men and beasts
obtained their being. Of this kind of speculation much more must have
existed than has reached us. It is doubtless such explanations as these
that the Greeks had in view when they praised the wisdom of the ancient
Egyptians; and in the classical period similar semi-philosophical
interpretations altogether supplanted, among the learned at least, the
naive literal beliefs of earlier times. Plutarch in his treatise on Isis
and Osiris well exemplifies this standpoint: for him every god and every
rite is symbolic of some natural or moral truth.

The final stages of the Egyptian religion are marked by a renewed
popularity of all its more barbarous elements. Despairing, as it would
seem, of discovering the higher wisdom that the more philosophic of the
priests supposed that religion to conceal, the simpler-minded sought to
work out their own salvation by restoring the worship of the gods to its
most primitive forms. Hence came the fanatical revival of animal-worship
which led to feud and bloodshed between neighbouring towns--a feature of
Egyptian religion that at once amused and scandalized contemporary Greek
and Latin authors (Plut. De Iside, 72; Juv. xv. 33). Nevertheless
Egyptian cults, and particularly those of Serapis and Isis, found
welcome acceptance on European soil; and the shrines of Egyptian deities
were established in all the great cities of the Roman Empire. Serapis
was a god imported by the first Ptolemy from Sinope on the Black Sea,
who soon lost his own identity by assimilation with Osiris-Apis, the
bull revered in Memphis. Far down into the Roman age the worship of
Serapis persisted and flourished, and it was only when the Serapeum of
Alexandria was razed to the ground by order of Theodosius the Great
(A.D. 391) that the death-blow of the old Egyptian religion was struck.

  Notes are here added on some divinities who have received inadequate
  or no attention in the preceding pages. For information as to Ammon,
  Anubis, Apis, Bes, Bubastis, Buto, Isis and Thoth, reference must be
  made to the special articles on these gods.

  ARSAPHES, in Egyptian _Harshafe_, "he who is upon his lake," the
  ram-headed god of Heracleopolis Magna, gained an ephemeral importance
  during the IXth Dynasty, which arose from his town. Outwardly, he
  resembles Khnum. Little is known about him, and he is seldom
  mentioned. The burial-place of his priests in later times was in 1904
  discovered at Abusir el Meleq.

  CHONS, "he who travels by boat," perhaps originally a mere epithet of
  the moon-god Ioh or Thoth, is chiefly familiar as the third member of
  the Theban triad. As such he is represented as a youthful god, wearing
  a skull-cap surmounted by the moon. His cult was revived and became
  popular in Ptolemaic times. A curious story about the sending of his
  statue to Mesopotamia to heal a daughter of the king of Bakhtan is
  related upon a stele that purports to date from the Ramesside period:
  it has been proved to be a pious fraud invented by the priests not
  earlier than the Greek period.

  HATHOR, whose name means "house of Horus," was at all times a very
  important deity. She is depicted as a cow, or with a broad human
  countenance, the cow's ears just showing from under a massive wig.
  Probably at first a goddess of the sky, she is early mentioned in
  connexion with Re. Later she was often identified with Isis, and her
  name was used to designate foreign goddesses like those of Puoni and
  Byblus. Unlike most cosmic deities, she was worshipped in many
  localities, chief among which was Dendera, where her magnificent
  temple, of Ptolemaic date, still stands. "The seven Hathors" is a name
  given to certain fairies, who appeared shortly after the birth of an
  infant, and predicted his future.

  KHNUM or KHNOUM, a ram-headed god, whose principal place of worship
  was the island of Elephantine (there associated with Satis and
  Anukis), but also revered elsewhere, e.g. together with Nebtu in Esna.
  He enjoyed great repute as a creator, and was supposed to use the
  potter's wheel for the purpose. In this capacity he is sometimes
  accompanied by the frog-headed goddess Heket.

  MONTH, a hawk-headed god of the Thebaid: in Thebes itself his cult was
  superseded by that of Ammon, but it persisted in Hermonthis. He was
  often given the solar attributes, and was credited as a great warrior.

  MIN, the god of Coptos and Panopolis (Akhmim), seems to have been
  early looked upon as a deity of the harvest and crops. His cult dates
  from the earliest times. Represented as ithyphallic, with two tall
  plumes on his head, the right arm upraised and bearing a scourge. In
  old times he is identified with Horus: later Ammon was confused with
  him, and depicted in his image.

  NECHBET (Nekhbi, Nekhebi), the vulture-goddess of El Kab, called
  Eileithyia by the Greeks. She gained an ascendancy as patroness of the
  south at the time when the two kingdoms were striving for the mastery.
  It is as such, in opposition to Buto the goddess of the north, that
  she is most often named on the monuments.

  NEITH, the very ancient and important goddess of Sais, the Greek
  Athene. On the earliest monuments she is represented by a shield
  transfixed by arrows. Later she wears the crown of Lower Egypt, and
  carries in her hands a bow and arrows, a sign of her warlike
  character. In the XXVIth Dynasty, when a line of Pharaohs sprang from
  Sais, she regained a prominent position, and was given many cosmogonic
  attributes, including the title of mother of Re.

  NEPHTHYS, the sister of Osiris and wife of Seth, daughter of Keb and
  Nut, plays a considerable role in the Osiris story. She sided with
  Isis and aided her to bring Osiris back to life. Isis and Nephthys are
  often mentioned together as protectresses of the dead.

  ONOURIS, Egyptian _En-huri_, "sky-bearer," the god of Thinis. Later
  identified with Shu (Show), who holds heaven and earth apart.

  PTAH, the Hephaestus of the Greeks, a demiurgic and creative god,
  special patron of hand-workers and artisans. Worshipped in Memphis, he
  perhaps owed his importance more to the political prominence of that
  town than to anything else. He was early identified with an ancient
  but obscure god Tenen, and further with the sepulchral deity Sokaris.
  He is represented either as a closely enshrouded figure whose
  protruding hands grasp a composite sceptre, the whole standing on a
  pedestal within a shrine; or else as a misshapen dwarf.

  SAKHMI, a lion-headed goddess of war and strife, whose name signifies
  the mighty. She was worshipped at Latopolis (Esna), but also at a late
  date as a member of the Memphite triad, with Ptah as husband and
  Nefertem (Iphthimis) as son: often, too, confounded with Ubasti.

  SETH (Egyptian Set, Sth or Sts), by the Greeks called Typhon, was
  depicted as an animal [HRG] that has been compared with the jerboa by
  some, and with the okapi by others, but which the Egyptians themselves
  occasionally conceived to be nothing but a badly drawn ass. In
  historic times his cult was celebrated at Tanis and Ombos. He regained
  a certain prestige as god of the Hyksos rulers, and two Pharaohs of
  the XIXth Dynasty derived their name Sethos (Seti) from him. But,
  generally speaking, he was abominated as a power of evil, and his
  figure was often obliterated on the monuments. He is named in similes
  as a great warrior, and as such and "son of Nut" he is identified with
  the Syrian Baal.

4. _The Divine Cult._--In the midst of every town rose the temple of the
local god, a stately building of stone, strongly contrasting with the
mud and plaster houses in which even the wealthiest Egyptians dwelt. It
was called the "house of the god" [HRGs], and in it the deity was
supposed to reside, attended by his "servants" [HRGs] the priests. There
was indeed a certain justification for this contention, even when a
contrary theory assigned to the divinity a place in the sky, as in the
case of the lunar divinity Thoth; for in the inmost sanctuary stood a
statue of the god, which served as his representative for the purposes
of the cult. Originally each temple was dedicated to one god only; but
it early became usual to associate with him a mate of the opposite sex,
besides a third deity who might be represented either as a second wife
or as a child. As examples of such triads, as they are called, may be
mentioned that of Thebes, consisting of Ammon, Mut and Chons, father,
mother and child; and as typical of the other kind, where a god was
accompanied by two goddesses, that of Elephantine, consisting of Khnum,
Satis and Anukis. The needs of the god were much the same as those of
mortals; no more than they could he dispense with food and drink,
clothes for his apparel, ointment for his limbs, and music and dancing
to rejoice his heart. The only difference was that the divine statue was
half-consciously recognized as a lifeless thing that required carefully
regulated rites and ceremonies to enable it to enjoy the good things
offered to it. Early every morning the officiating priest proceeded to
the holy of holies, after the preliminaries of purification had cleansed
him from any miasma that might interfere with the efficacy of the rites.
Then with the prescribed gestures, and reciting appropriate formulae all
the while, he broke the seal upon the door of the shrine, loosed the
bolts, and at last stood face to face with the god. There followed a
series of prostrations and adorations, culminating in the offering of a
small image of Maat, the goddess of Truth. This seems to have been the
psychological moment of the entire service: hitherto the statue had been
at best a god in _posse_; now the symbolical act placed him in
possession of all his faculties, he was a god in truth, and could
participate like any mortal in the food and luxuries that his servants
put before him. The daily ceremony closed with ablutions, anointings and
a bountiful feast of bread, geese, beer and oxen; having taken his fill
of these, the god returned to his shrine until the next morning, when
the ritual was renewed. The words that accompanied the manual gestures
are, in the rituals that have come down to us, wholly dominated by the
myth of Osiris: it is often hard to discern much connexion between the
acts and the formulae recited, but the main thought is clearly that the
priest represents Horus, the pious son of the dead divinity Osiris. That
this conception is very old is proved by the fact that even in the
Pyramid texts "the eye of Horus" is a synonym for all offerings: an
ancient tale of which only shreds have reached us related how Seth had
torn the eye of Horus from him, though not before he himself had
suffered a still more serious mutilation; and by some means, we know not
how, the restoration of the eye was instrumental in bringing about the
vindication of Osiris. As to the manual rites of the daily cult, all
that can here be said is that incense, purifications and anointings with
various oils played a large part; the sacrifices consisted chiefly of
slaughtered oxen and geese; burnt offerings were a very late innovation.

At an early date the rites practised in the various temples were
conformed to a common pattern. This holds good not only for the daily
ritual, but also for many festivals that were celebrated on the same day
throughout the whole length of the land. Such were the calendrical
feasts, called "the beginnings of the seasons," and including, for
example, the monthly and half-monthly festivals, that of the New Year
and that of the rising of Sirius (Sothis). But there were also local
feast days like that of Neith in Sais (Hdt. ii. 62) or that of Ammon in
southern Opi (Luxor). These doubtless had a more individual character,
and often celebrated some incident supposed to have occurred in the
lifetime of the god. Sometimes, as in the case of the feast of Osiris in
Abydos, a veritable drama would be enacted, in which the whole history
of the god, his sufferings and final triumph were represented in mimic
form. At other times the ceremonial was more mysterious and symbolical,
as in the feast of the raising of the Ded-column [HRG] when a column of
the kind was drawn by cords into an upright position. But the most
common feature of these holy days was the procession of the god, when he
was carried on the shoulders of the priests in his divine boat far
beyond the precincts of his temple; sometimes, indeed, even to another
town, where he paid a visit to the god of the place. These occasions
were public holidays, and passed amid great rejoicings. The climax was
reached when at a given moment the curtains of the shrine placed on the
boat were withdrawn, and the god was revealed to the eyes of the
awe-struck multitude. Music and dancing formed part of the festival
rites.


  Temples.

As with the rites and ceremonies, so also the temples were early
modelled upon a common type. Lofty enclosure walls, adorned with scenes
from the victorious campaigns of the Pharaoh, shut off the sacred
buildings from the surrounding streets. A small gateway between two
massive towers or pylons gave admittance to a spacious forecourt open to
the sky, into which the people were allowed to enter at least on feast
days. Farther on, separated from the forecourt by smaller though still
massive pylons, lay a hypostyle hall, so called from its covered
colonnades; this hall was used for all kinds of processions. Behind the
hypostyle hall, to which a second similar one might or might not be
added, came the holy of holies, a dark narrow chamber where the god
dwelt; none but the priests were admitted to it. All around lay the
storehouses that contained the treasures of the god and the
appurtenances of the divine ritual. The temples of the earliest times
were of course far more primitive than this: from the pictures that are
all that is now left to indicate their nature, they seem to have been
little more than huts or sheds in which the image of the god was kept.
One temple of a type different from that above described has survived at
Abusir, where it has been excavated by German explorers. It was a
splendid edifice dedicated to the sun-god Re by a king of the Vth
Dynasty, and was probably a close copy of the famous temple of
Heliopolis. The most conspicuous feature was a huge obelisk on a broad
superstructure [HRG]: the obelisk always remained closely connected with
the solar worship, and probably took the place of the innermost shrine
and statue of other temples. The greater part of the sanctuary was left
uncovered, as best befitted a dwelling-place of the sun. Outside its
walls there was a huge brick model of the solar bark in which the god
daily traversed the heavens.


  Power of the priests.

As the power of the Pharaohs increased, the maintenance of the cult
became one of the most important affairs of state. The most illustrious
monarchs prided themselves no less on the buildings they raised in
honour of the gods than on the successful wars they waged: indeed the
wars won a religious significance through the gradual elevation of the
god of the capital to god of the nation, and a large part of the spoils
was considered the rightful perquisite of the latter. Countless were the
riches that the kings heaped upon the gods in the hope of being requited
with long life and prosperity on the throne of the living. It became the
theory that the temples were the gifts of the Pharaoh to his fathers the
gods, and therefore in the scenes of the cult that adorn the inner walls
it is always he who is depicted as performing the ceremonies. As a
matter of fact the priesthoods were much more independent than was
allowed to appear. Successive grants of land placed no small portion of
the entire country in their hands, and the administration of the temple
estates gave employment to a large number of officials and serfs. In the
New Kingdom the might of the Theban god Ammon gradually became a serious
menace to the throne: in the reign of Rameses III. he could boast of
more than 80,000 dependants, and more than 400,000 cattle. It is not
surprising that a few generations later the high priests of Ammon
supplanted the Pharaohs altogether and founded a dynasty of their own.

At no period did the priests form a caste that was quite distinctly
separated from the laity. In early times the feudal lords were
themselves the chief priests of the local temples. Under them stood a
number of subordinate priests, both professional and lay. Among the
former were the _kher-heb_, a learned man entrusted with the conduct of
the ceremonies, and the "divine fathers," whose functions are obscure.
The lay priests were divided into four classes that undertook the
management of the temple in alternate months; their collective name was
the "hour-priesthood." Perhaps it was to them that the often recurring
title _oueb_, "the pure," should properly be restricted, though strict
rules as to personal purity, dress and diet were demanded of all
priests. The personnel of the temple was completed by various
subordinate officials, doorkeepers, attendants and slaves. In the New
Kingdom the leading priests were more frequently mere clerics than
theretofore, though for instance the high priest of Ammon was often at
the same time the vizier of southern Egypt. In some places the highest
priests bore special names, such as the _Ouer maa_, "the Great Seer," of
Re in Heliopolis, or the _Khorp himet_, "chief artificer," of the
Memphite Ptah. Women could also hold priestly rank, though apparently in
early times only in the service of goddesses; "priestess of Hathor" is a
frequent title of well-born ladies in the Old Kingdom. At a later date
many wealthy dames held the office of "musicians" (_shemat_) in the
various temples. In the service of the Theban Ammon two priestesses
called "the Adorer of the God" and the "Wife of the God" occupied very
influential positions, and towards the Saite period it was by no means
unusual for the king to secure these offices for his daughters and so to
strengthen his own royal title.

5. _The Dead and their Cult._--While the worship of the gods tended
more and more to become a monopoly of the state and the priests, and
provided no adequate outlet for the religious cravings of the people
themselves, this deficiency was amply supplied by the care which they
bestowed upon their dead: the Egyptians stand alone among the nations of
the world in the elaborate precautions which they took to secure their
own welfare beyond the tomb. The belief in immortality, or perhaps
rather the incapacity to grasp the notion of complete annihilation, is
traceable from the very earliest times: the simplest graves of the
prehistoric period, when the corpses were committed to the earth in
sheepskins and reed mats, seldom lack at least a few poor vases or
articles of toilet for use in the hereafter. In proportion as the
prosperity of the land increased, and the advance of civilization
afforded the technical means, so did these primitive burials give place
to a more lavish funereal equipment. Tombs of brick with a single
chamber were succeeded by tombs of stone with several chambers, until
they really merited the name of "houses of eternity" that the Egyptians
gave to them. The conception of the tomb as the residence of the dead is
the fundamental notion that underlies all the ritual observances in
connexion with the dead, just as the idea of the temple as the
dwelling-place of the god is the basis of the divine cult. The
parallelism between the attitude of the Egyptians towards the dead and
their attitude towards the gods is so striking that it ought never to be
lost sight of: nothing can illustrate it better than the manner in which
the Osirian doctrines came to permeate both kinds of cult.


  Tombs.

The general scheme of Egyptian tombs remained the same throughout the
whole of the dynastic period, though there were many variations of
detail. By preference they were built in the Western desert, the Amente,
near the place where the sun was seen to go to rest, and which seemed
the natural entrance to the nether world. A deep pit led down to the
sepulchral chamber where the dead man was deposited amid the funereal
furniture destined for his use; and no device was neglected that might
enable him to rest here undisturbed. This aim is particularly
conspicuous in the pyramids, the gigantic tombs which the Pharaohs of
the Old Kingdom constructed for themselves: the passages that lead to
the burial chamber were barred at intervals by vast granite blocks, and
the narrow opening that gave access to them was hidden from view beneath
the stone casing of the pyramid sides. Quite separate from this part of
the tomb lay the rooms employed for the cult of the dead: their walls
were often adorned with pictures from the earthly life of the deceased,
which it was hoped he might still continue to enjoy after death. The
innermost chamber was the chapel proper: on its western side was
sculptured an imitation door for the dead man to pass through, when he
wished to participate in the offerings brought by pious relatives. It
was of course only the few who could afford elaborate tombs of the kind:
the poor had to make shift with an unpretentious grave, in which the
corpse was placed enveloped only by a few rags or enclosed in a rough
wooden coffin.


  Embalming and burial.

The utmost care was taken to preserve the body itself from decay. Before
the time of the Middle Kingdom it became usual for the rich to have
their bodies embalmed. The intestines were removed and placed in four
vases (the so-called Canopic jars) in which they were supposed to enjoy
the protection of the four sons of Horus, the man-headed Mesti, the
ape-headed Hapi, the jackal Duamutef and the falcon Kebhsenuf. The
corpse was treated with natron and asphalt, and wound in a copious
swathing of linen bandage, with a mask of linen and stucco on the face.
The "mummy" thus prepared was then laid on its side like a sleeper, the
head supported by a head-rest, in a sarcophagus of wood or stone. The
operations in connexion with the mummy grow more and more elaborate
towards the end of the Pharaonic period: already in the New Kingdom the
wealthiest persons had their mummies laid in several coffins, each of
which was gaudily painted with mythological scenes and inscriptions. The
costliest process of embalmment lasted no less than seventy days. Many
superstitious rites had to be observed in the course of the process: a
late book has preserved to us the magical formulae that were repeated by
the wise _kher-heb_ priest (who in the necropolis performed the
functions of taricheutes, "embalmer"), as each bandage was applied.

A large number of utensils, articles of furniture and the like were
placed in the burial-chamber for the use of the dead--jars, weapons,
mirrors, and even chairs, musical instruments and wigs. In the early
times statuettes of servants, representing them as engaged in their
various functions (brewers, bakers, &c.), were included for the same
purpose; they were supposed to perform their menial functions for their
deceased lord in the future life. In the Middle Kingdom these are
gradually replaced by small models of the mummy itself, and the belief
arose that when their owner was called upon to perform any distasteful
work in the nether world, they would answer to his name and do the task
for him. The later _ushebti_-figures, little statuettes of wood, stone
or faience, of which several hundreds are often found in a single tomb,
are confused survivals of both of the earlier classes of statuettes.
Still more important than all such funereal objects are the books that
were placed in the grave for the use of the dead: in the pyramids they
are written on the walls of the sepulchral chamber and the passages
leading to it; in the Middle Kingdom usually inscribed on the inner
sides of the sarcophagus; in later times contained in rolls of papyrus.
The Pyramid texts and the _Book of the Dead_ are the most important of
these, and teach us much about the dangers and needs that attended the
dead man beyond the tomb, and about the manner in which it was thought
they could be counteracted.

The burial ceremony itself must have been an imposing spectacle. In many
cases the mummy had to be conveyed across the Nile, and boats were gaily
decked out for this purpose. On the western bank a stately procession
conducted the deceased to his last resting-place. At the door of the
tomb the final ceremonies were performed; they demanded a considerable
number of actors, chief among whom were the _sem_-priest and the
_kher-heb_ priest. It was a veritable drama that was here enacted, and
recalled in its incidents the story of Osiris, the divine prototype of
all successive generations of the Egyptian dead.


  The soul.

  However carefully the preliminary rites of embalmment and burial might
  have been performed, however sumptuous the tomb wherein the dead man
  reposed, he was nevertheless almost entirely at the mercy of the
  living for his welfare in the other world: he was as dependent on a
  continued cult on the part of the surviving members of his family as
  the gods were dependent on the constant attendance of their priests.
  That portion of a man's individuality which required, even after
  death, food and drink, and the satisfaction of sensuous needs, was
  called by the Egyptians the _ka_, and represented in hieroglyphs by
  the uplifted hands [HRG]. This _ka_ was supposed to be born together
  with the person to whom it belonged, and on the very rare occasions
  when it is depicted, wears his exact semblance. The conception of this
  psychical entity is too vaguely formulated by the Egyptians and too
  foreign to modern thought to admit of exact translation: of the many
  renderings that have been proposed, perhaps "double" is the most
  suitable. At all events the _ka_ has to be distinguished from the
  soul, the _bai_ (in hieroglyphs [HRG] or [HRG]), which was of more
  tangible nature, and might be descried hovering around the tomb in the
  form of a bird or in some other shape; for it was thought that the
  soul might assume what shape it would, if the funerary rites had been
  duly attended to. The gods had their _ka_ and _bai_, and the forms
  attributed to the latter are surprising; thus we read that the soul of
  the sky Nun is Re, that of Osiris the Goat of Mendes, the souls of
  Sobk are crocodiles, and those "of all the gods are snakes"; similarly
  the soul of Ptah was thought to dwell in the Apis bull, so that each
  successive Apis was during its lifetime the reincarnation of the god.
  Other parts of a man's being to which at given moments and in
  particular contexts the Egyptians assigned a certain degree of
  separate existence are the "name" [HRG] _ran_, the "shadow" [HRG],
  _khaibet_, and the "corpse" [HRG], _khat_.

It was, however, the _ka_ alone to which the cult of the dead was
directly addressed. This cult was a positive duty binding on the
children of a dead man, and doubtless as a rule discharged by them with
some regularity and conscientiousness; at least, on feast-days offerings
would be brought to the tomb, and the ceremonies of purification and
opening the mouth of the deceased would be enacted. But there could be
little guarantee that later generations would perpetuate the cult. It
therefore became usual under the Old Kingdom for the wealthiest persons
to make testamentary dispositions by which certain other persons agreed
for a consideration to observe the required rites at stated periods:
they received the name of "servants of the _ka_," and stood in the same
relation to the deceased as the priests to the gods. Or again, contracts
might be made with a neighbouring temple, the priesthood of which bound
itself to reserve for the contracting party some portion of the
offerings that had already been used for the divine cult. There is
probably a superstitious reason for the preference shown by the dead for
offerings of this kind; no wish is commoner than that one may receive
"bread and beer that had gone up on to the altar of the local god," or
"with which the god had been sated"; something of the divine sanctity
still clung about such offerings and made them particularly desirable.
In spite of all the precautions they took and the contracts they made,
the Egyptians could never quite rid themselves of the dread that their
tombs might decay and their cult be neglected; and they sought therefore
to obtain by prayers and threats what they feared they might lose
altogether. The occasional visitor to the tomb is reminded by its
inscriptions of the many virtues of the dead man while he yet lived, and
is charged, if he be come with empty hands, at least to pronounce the
funerary formula; it will indeed cost him nothing but "the breath of his
mouth"! Against the would-be desecrator the wrath of the gods is
invoked: "with him shall the great god reckon there where a reckoning is
made."

The funerary customs that have been described are meaningless except on
the supposition that the tomb was the regular dwelling-place of the
dead. But just as the Egyptians found no contradiction between the view
of the temple as the residence of the god and the conception of him as a
cosmic deity, so too they often attributed to the dead a continued
existence quite apart from the tomb. According to a widely-spread
doctrine of great age the deceased Egyptian was translated to the
heavens, where he lived on in the form of a star. This theme is
elaborated with great detail in the Pyramid texts, where it is the dead
king to whom this destiny is promised. It was perhaps only a restricted
aristocracy who could aspire to such high honour: the [HRG] _ikh_, or
"glorified being," who has his place in the sky seems often to hold an
intermediate position between the gods and the rank and file of the
dead. But in a few early passages the required qualification appears to
be rather moral integrity than exalted station. The life of the dead man
in the sky is variously envisaged in different texts: at one moment he
is spoken of as accompanying the sun-god in his celestial bark, at
another as a mighty king more powerful than Re himself; the crudest
fancy of all pictures him as a hunter who catches the stars and gods,
and cooks and eats them. According to another conception that persisted
in the imagination of the Egyptians longer than any of the ideas just
mentioned, the home of the dead in the heavens was a fertile region not
very different from Egypt itself, intersected by canals and abounding in
corn and fruit; this place was called the Sokhet Earu or "field of
Reeds."

Even in the oldest texts these beliefs are blended inextricably with the
Osirian doctrines. It is not so much as king of the dead that Osiris
here appears, but every deceased Egyptian was regarded as himself an
Osiris, as having undergone all the indignities inflicted upon the god,
but finally triumphant over the powers of death and evil impersonated by
Seth. This notion became so popular, that beside it all other views of
the dead sink into insignificance; it permeates the funerary cult in all
its stages, and from the Middle Kingdom onwards the dead man is
regularly called "the Osiris so-and-so," just as though he were
completely identical with the god. One incident of the tale of Osiris
acquired a deep ethical meaning in connexion with the dead. It was
related how Seth had brought an accusation against Osiris in the great
judgment hall of Heliopolis, and how the latter, helped by the skilful
speaker Thoth, had emerged from the ordeal acquitted and triumphant. The
belief gradually grew up that every dead man would have to face a
similar trial before he could be admitted to a life of bliss in the
other world. A well-known vignette in the _Book of the Dead_ depicts the
scene. In a shrine sits Osiris, the ruler and judge of the dead,
accompanied by forty-two assessors; and before him stands the balance on
which the heart of the deceased man is to be weighed against Truth;
Thoth stands behind and registers the result. The words that accompany
this picture are still more remarkable: they form a long negative
confession, in which the dead man declares that he has sinned neither
against man nor against the gods. Not all the sins named are equally
heinous according to modern conceptions; many of them deal with petty
offences against religious usages that seem to us but trifling. But it
is clear that by the time this chapter was penned it was believed that
no man could attain to happiness in the hereafter if he had not been
upright, just and charitable in his earthly existence. The date at which
these conceptions became general is not quite certain, but it can hardly
be later than the Middle Kingdom, when the dead man has the epithet
"justified" appended to his name in the inscriptions of his tomb.

It was but a natural wish on the part of the Egyptians that they should
desire to place their tombs near the traditional burying-place of
Osiris. By the time of the XIIth Dynasty it was thought that this lay in
Abydos, the town where the kings of the earliest times had been
interred. But it was only in a few cases that such a wish could be
literally fulfilled. It therefore became customary for those who
possessed the means to dedicate at least a tombstone in the
neighbourhood of "the staircase of the great god," as the sacred spot
was called. And those who had found occasion to visit Abydos in their
lifetime took pleasure in recalling the part that they had there taken
in the ceremonies of Osiris. Such pilgrims doubtless believed that the
pious act would stand to their credit when the day of death arrived.

6. _Magic._--Among the rites that were celebrated in the temples or
before the statues of the dead were many the mystical meaning of which
was but imperfectly understood, though their efficacy was never doubted.
Symbolical or imitative acts, accompanied by spoken formulae of set form
and obscure content, accomplished, by some peculiar virtues of their
own, results that were beyond the power of human hands and brain. The
priests and certain wise men were the depositaries of this mysterious
but highly useful art, that was called _hik_ or "magic"; and one of the
chief differences between gods and men was the superior degree in which
the former were endowed with magical powers. It was but natural that the
Egyptians should wish to employ magic for their own benefit or
self-gratification, and since religion put no veto on the practice so
long as it was exercised within legal bounds, it was put to a widespread
use among them. When magicians made figures of wax representing men whom
they desired to injure, this was of course an illegal act like any
other, and the law stepped in to prevent it: one papyrus that has been
preserved records the judicial proceedings taken in such a case in
connexion with the harem conspiracy against Rameses III.

One of the chief purposes for which magic was employed was to avert
diseases. Among the Egyptians, as in other lands, illnesses were
supposed to be due to evil spirits or the ghosts of dead men who had
taken up their abode in the body of the sufferer, and they could only be
driven thence by charms and spells. But out of these primitive notions
arose a real medical science: when the ailment could be located and its
nature roughly determined, a more materialistic view was taken of it;
and many herbs and drugs that were originally used for some
superstitious reason, when once they had been found to be actually
effective, easily lost their magical significance and were looked upon
as natural specifics. It is extremely hard to draw any fixed line in
Egypt between magic and medicine; but it is curious to note that simple
diagnoses and prescriptions were employed for the more curable diseases,
while magical formulae and amulets are reserved for those that are
harder to cope with, such as the bites of snakes and the stings of
scorpions.

The formulae recited for such purposes are not purely cabalistic, though
inasmuch as mystery is of the very essence of magic, foreign words and
outlandish names occur in them by preference. Often the magician relates
some mythical case where a god had been afflicted with a disease similar
to that of the patient, but had finally recovered: a number of such
tales were told of Horus, who was usually healed by some device of his
mother Isis, she being accounted as a great enchantress. The mere
recitation of such similar cases with their happy issue was supposed to
be magically effective; for almost unlimited power was supposed to be
inherent in mere words. Often the demon is directly invoked, and
commanded to come forth. At other times the gods are threatened with
privations or even destruction if they refuse to aid the magician: the
Egyptians seem to have found little impiety in such a use of the divine
name, though to us it would seem the utmost degree of profanity when,
for instance, a magician declares that if his spell prove ineffective,
he "will cast fire into Mendes and burn up Osiris."

The verbal spells were always accompanied by some manual performance,
the tying of magical knots or the preparation of an amulet. In these
acts particular significance was attached to certain numbers: a
sevenfold knot, for example, was more efficacious than others. Often the
formula was written on a strip of rag or a scrap of papyrus and tied
round the neck of the person for whom it was intended. Beads and all
kinds of amulets could be infused with magical power so as to be potent
phylacteries to those who wore them.

In conclusion, it must be emphasized that in Egypt magic stands in no
contrast or opposition to religion, at least as long as it was
legitimately used. The religious rites and ceremonies are full of it.
When a pretence was made of opening, with an iron instrument, the mouth
of the divine statue, to the accompaniment of recited formulae, this can
hardly be termed anything but magic. Similarly, the potency attributed
to _ushebti_-figures and the copies of the _Book of the Dead_ deposited
in the tombs is magical in quality. What has been considered under this
heading, however, is the use that the same principles of magic were put
to by men in their own practical life and for their own advantage.

  AUTHORITIES.--An excellent list of books and articles on the various
  topics connected with Egyptian Religion will be found in H. O. Lange's
  article on the subject in P. D. Chantepie de la Saussaye, _Lehrbuch
  der Religionsgeschichte_ (Tubingen, 1905), vol. i. pp. 172-245. Among
  general works may be especially recommended A. Erman, _Die agyptische
  Religion_ (Berlin, 1905); and chapters 2 and 3 in G. Maspero,
  _Histoire ancienne des peuples de l'Orient, les origines_, vol. i.
  (Paris, 1895).     (A. H. G.)

D. _Egyptian Language and Writing.--Decipherment._--Although attempts
were made to read Egyptian hieroglyphs so far back as the 17th century,
no promise of success appeared until the discovery of the Rosetta stone
in 1799 by the French engineers attached to Napoleon's expedition to
Egypt. This tablet was inscribed with three versions, in hieroglyphic,
demotic and Greek, of a long decree of the Egyptian priests in honour of
Ptolemy V., Epiphanes and his wife Cleopatra. The Greek and demotic
versions were still almost perfect, but most of the hieroglyphic text
had been broken away with the top of the tablet; portions of about half
of the lines remained, but no single line was complete. In 1802 J. D.
Akerblad, a Swedish orientalist attached to the embassy in Paris,
identified the proper names of persons which occurred in the demotic
text, being guided to them by the position of their equivalents in the
Greek. These names, all of them foreign, were written in an alphabet of
a limited number of characters, and were therefore analysed with
comparative ease.

The hieroglyphic text upon the Rosetta stone was too fragmentary to
furnish of itself the key to the decipherment. But the study of this
with the other scanty monuments and imperfect copies of inscriptions
that were available enabled the celebrated physicist Thomas Young
(1773-1829) to make a beginning. In an article completed in 1819 and
printed (over the initials I. J.) in the supplement to the 4th, 5th and
6th editions of the _Encyclopaedia Britannica_ (vol. iv., 1824), he
published a brief account of Egyptian research, with five plates
containing the "rudiments of an Egyptian vocabulary." It appears that
Young could place the hieroglyphic, demotic and Greek texts of the
Rosetta stone very correctly parallel; but he could not accurately break
up the Egyptian sentences into words, much less could he attribute to
the words their proper sounds. Yet he recognized correctly the names of
Apis and Re, with many groups for words such as "assembly," "good,"
"name," and important signs such as those which distinguish feminine
words. In a bad copy of another monument he rightly guessed the royal
name of Berenice in its cartouche by the side of that of Ptolemy, which
was already known from its occurrence on the Rosetta stone. He
considered that these names must be written in phonetic characters in
the hieroglyphic as in demotic, but he failed to analyse them correctly.
It was clear, however, that with more materials and perseverance such
efforts after decipherment must eventually succeed.

Meanwhile J. F. Champollion "le Jeune" (see CHAMPOLLION; and Hartleben,
_Champollion, sein Leben und sein Werk_, Berlin, 1906) had devoted his
energies whole-heartedly since 1802, when he was only eleven years old,
to preparing himself for the solution of the Egyptian problem, by wide
linguistic and historical studies, and above all by familiarizing
himself with every scrap of Egyptian writing which he could find. By
1818 he made many equations between the demotic and the hieroglyphic
characters, and was able to transcribe the demotic names of Ptolemy and
Cleopatra into hieroglyphics. At length, in January 1822, a copy of the
hieroglyphic inscription on the Bankes obelisk, which had long been
fruitlessly in the hands of Young, reached the French savant. On the
base of this obelisk was engraved a Greek inscription in honour of
Ptolemy Euergetes II. and Cleopatra; of the two cartouches on the
obelisk one was of Ptolemy, the other was easily recognized as that of
Cleopatra, spelt nearly as in Champollion's experimental transcript of
the demotic name, only more fully. This discovery, and the recognition
of the name Alexander, gave fourteen alphabetic signs, including
homophones, with ascertained values. Starting from these, by the
beginning of September Champollion had analysed a long series of
Ptolemaic and Roman cartouches. His next triumph was on the 14th of
September, when he read the names of the ancient Pharaohs Rameses and
Tethmosis in some drawings just arrived from Egypt, proving that his
alphabetic characters were employed, in conjunction with syllabic signs,
for spelling native names; this gave him the assurance that his
discovery touched the essential nature of the Egyptian writing and not
merely, as had been contended, a special cipher for the foreign words
which might be quite inapplicable to the rest of the inscriptions. His
progress continued unchecked, and before the end of the year the
connexion of ancient Egyptian and Coptic was clearly established.
Subsequently visits to the museums of Italy and an expedition to Egypt
in 1828-1829 furnished Champollion with ample materials. The _Precis du
systeme hieroglyphique_ (1st ed. 1823, 2nd ed. 1828) contained the
philological results of his decipherments down to a certain point. But
his MS. collections were vast, and his illness after the strenuous
labours of the expedition and his early death in 1832 left all in
confusion. The _Grammaire egyptienne_ and _Dictionnaire egyptien_,
edited from these MSS. by his brother, precious as they were, must be a
very imperfect register of the height of his attainments. In his last
years he was able to translate long texts in hieroglyphic and in
hieratic of the New Kingdom and of the later periods with some
accuracy, and his comprehension of demotic was considerable. Champollion
outdistanced all his competitors from the first, and had practically
nothing to thank them for except material to work on, and too often that
had been intentionally withheld from him. In eleven years he broke
ground in all directions; if the ordinary span of life had been allowed
him, with twenty or thirty more years of labour he might have brought
order into the chaos of different ages and styles of language and
writing; but, as it was, the task of co-ordination remained to be done
by others. For one year, before his illness incapacitated him,
Champollion held a professorship in Paris; but of his pupils and
fellow-workers, F. P. Salvolini, insincere and self-seeking, died young,
and Ippolito Rosellini (1800-1843) showed little original power. From
1832 to 1837 there was a pause in the march of Egyptology, and it seemed
as if the young science might be overwhelmed by the storm of doubts and
detraction that was poured upon it by the enemies of Champollion. Then,
however, Lepsius in Germany and Samuel Birch in England took up the
thread where the master had dropped it, and E. de Rouge, H. Brugsch,
Francois Joseph Chabas and a number of lesser lights quickly followed.
Brugsch (q.v.) was the author of a hieroglyphic and demotic dictionary
which still holds the field, and from time to time carried forward the
study of demotic by a giant's stride. De Rouge (d. 1872) in France was a
brilliant translator of hieroglyphic texts and the author of an
important grammatical work. Chabas (1817-1882) especially addressed
himself to the reading of the hieratic texts of the New Kingdom. By such
labours after forty years the results attained by Champollion in
decipherment were entirely superseded. Yet, while the values of the
signs were for the most part well ascertained, and the meanings of most
works fixed with some degree of accuracy, few grammatical rules had as
yet been established, the varieties of the language at different periods
had not been defined, and the origins of the hieroglyphs and of their
values had not been investigated beyond the most obvious points. At this
time a rare translator of Egyptian texts in all branches was arising in
G. Maspero (q.v.), while E. Revillout addressed himself with success to
the task of interpreting the legal documents of demotic which had been
almost entirely neglected for thirty years. But the honour of
inaugurating an epoch marked by greater precision belongs to Germany.
The study of Coptic had begun in Europe early in the 17th century, and
reached a high level in the work of the Dane Georg Zoega (1755-1809) at
the end of the 18th century. In 1835, too late for Champollion to use
it, Amadeo Peyron (1785-1870) of Turin published a Coptic lexicon of
great merit which is still standard, though far from satisfying the
needs of scholars of the present day. In 1880 Ludwig Stern (_Koptische
Grammatik_) admirably classified the grammatical forms of Coptic. The
much more difficult task of recovering the grammar of Egyptian has
occupied thirty years of special study by Adolf Erman and his school at
Berlin, and has now reached an advanced stage. The greater part of
Egyptian texts after the Middle Kingdom having been written in what was
even then practically a dead language, as dead as Latin was to the
medieval monks in Italy who wrote and spoke it, Erman selected for
special investigation those texts which really represented the growth of
the language at different periods, and, as he passed from one epoch to
another, compared and consolidated his results.

  The _Neuagyptische Grammatik_ (1880) dealt with texts written in the
  vulgar dialect of the New Kingdom (Dyns. XVIII. to XX.). Next
  followed, in the _Zeitschrift fur agyptische Sprache und
  Alterthumskunde_, studies on the Old Kingdom inscription of Una, and
  the Middle Kingdom contracts of Assiut, as well as on an "Old Coptic"
  text of the 3rd century A.D. At this point a papyrus of stories
  written in the popular language of the Middle Kingdom provided Erman
  with a stepping-stone from Old Egyptian to the Late Egyptian of the
  _Neuagyptische Grammatik_, and gave the connexions that would bind
  solidly together the whole structure of Egyptian grammar (see _Sprache
  des Papyrus Westcar_, 1889). The very archaic pyramid texts enabled
  him to sketch the grammar of the earliest known form of Egyptian
  (_Zeitschrift d. Deutsch. Morgenl. Gesellschaft_, 1892), and in 1894
  he was able to write a little manual of Egyptian for beginners
  (_Agyptische Grammatik_, 2nd ed., 1902), centring on the language of
  the standard inscriptions of the Middle and New Kingdoms, but
  accompanying the main sketch with references to earlier and later
  forms. Of the work of Erman's pupils we may mention G. Steindorff's
  little _Koptische Grammatik_ (1894, ed. 1904), improving greatly on
  Stern's standard work in regard to phonology and the relationship of
  Coptic forms to Egyptian, and K. Sethe's _Das Agyptische Verbum_
  (1899). The latter is an extensive monograph on the verb in Egyptian
  and Coptic by a brilliant and laborious philologist. Owing to the very
  imperfect notation of sound in the writing, the highly important
  subject of the verbal roots and verbal forms was perhaps the obscurest
  branch of Egyptian grammar when Sethe first attacked it in 1895. The
  subject has been reviewed by Erman, _Die Flexion des agyptischen
  Verbums_ in the _Sitzungsberichte_ of the Berlin Academy, 1900. The
  Berlin school, having settled the main lines of the grammar, next
  turned its attention to lexicography. It has devised a scheme, founded
  on that for the Latin Thesaurus of the Berlin Academy, which almost
  mechanically sorts the whole number of occurrences of every word in
  any text examined. Scholars in England, America and Denmark, as well
  as in Germany, have taken part in this great enterprise, and though
  the completion of it may be far off, the collections of classified
  material already made are very valuable for consultation.[11] At
  present Egyptologists depend on Heinrich Brugsch's admirable but
  somewhat antiquated _Worterbuch_ and on Levi's useful but entirely
  uncritical _Vocabolario_. Though demotic has not yet received serious
  attention at Berlin, the influence of that great school has made
  itself felt amongst demotists, especially in Switzerland, Germany,
  America and England. The death of Heinrich Brugsch in 1895 was a very
  severe blow to demotic studies; but it must be admitted that his
  brilliant gifts lay in other directions than exact grammatical
  analysis. Apart from their philological interest, as giving the
  history of a remarkable language during a period of several thousand
  years, the grammatical studies of the last quarter of the 19th century
  and afterwards are beginning to bear fruit in regard to the exact
  interpretation of historical documents on Egyptian monuments and
  papyri. Not long ago the supposed meaning of these was extracted
  chiefly by brilliant guessing, and the published translations of even
  the best scholars could carry no guarantee of more than approximate
  exactitude, where the sense depended at all on correct recognition of
  the syntax. Now the translator proceeds in Egyptian with some of the
  sureness with which he would deal with Latin or Greek. The meaning of
  many words may be still unknown, and many constructions are still
  obscure; but at least he can distinguish fairly between a correct text
  and a corrupt text. Egyptian writing lent itself only too easily to
  misunderstanding, and the writings of one period were but half
  intelligible to the learned scribes of another. The mistaken readings
  of the old inscriptions by the priests at Abydos (Table of Abydos),
  when attempting to record the names of the kings of the 1st Dynasty on
  the walls of the temple of Seti I., are now admitted on all sides; and
  no palaeographer, whether his field be Greek, Latin, Arabic, Persian
  or any other class of MSS., will be surprised to hear that the
  Egyptian papyri and inscriptions abound in corruptions and mistakes.
  The translator of to-day can, if he wishes, mark where certainty ends
  and mere conjecture begins, and it is to be hoped that advantage will
  be taken more widely of this new power. The Egyptologist who has long
  lived in the realm of conjecture is too prone to consider any series
  of guesses good enough to serve as a translation, and forgets to
  insert the notes of interrogation which would warn workers in other
  fields from implicit trust.

_Language and Writing._--The history of the Egyptian language is
evidenced by documents extending over a very long range of time. They
begin with the primitive inscriptions of the Ist Dynasty (not later than
3300 B.C.) and end with the latest Coptic compositions of about the 14th
century A.D. The bulk of the hieroglyphic inscriptions are written in a
more or less artificial literary language; but in business documents,
letters, popular tales, &c., the scribes often adhered closely to the
living form of the tongue, and thus reveal its progressive changes.

The stages of the language are now distinguished as follows:--

_Old Egyptian._--This is properly the language of the Old Kingdom. In it
we have (a) the recently discovered inscriptions of the Ist Dynasty, too
brief and concise to throw much light on the language of that time; and
the great collections of spells and ritual texts found inscribed in the
Pyramids of the Vth and VIth Dynasties, which must even then have been
of high antiquity, though they contain later additions made in the same
style. (b) A few historical texts and an abundance of short inscriptions
representing the language of the IVth, Vth and VIth Dynasties. The
ordinary _literary language_ of the later monuments is modelled on Old
Egyptian. It is often much affected by contemporary speech, but
preserves in the main the characteristics of the language of the Old
Kingdom.

_Middle and Late Egyptian._--These represent the vulgar speech of the
Middle and New Kingdoms respectively. The former is found chiefly in
tales, letters, &c., written in hieratic on papyri of the XIIIth Dynasty
to the end of the Middle Kingdom; also in some inscriptions of the
XVIIIth Dynasty. Late Egyptian is seen in hieratic papyri of the XVIIIth
to the XXIst Dynasties. The spelling of Late Egyptian is very
extraordinary, full of false etymologies, otiose signs, &c., the old
orthography being quite unable to adapt itself neatly to the profoundly
modified language; nevertheless, this clumsy spelling is expressive, and
the very mistakes are instructive as to the pronunciation.

_Demotic._--Demotic Egyptian seems to represent approximately the vulgar
speech of the Saite period, and is written in the "demotic" character,
which may be traced back to the XXVIth Dynasty, if not to a still
earlier time. With progressive changes, this form of the language is
found in documents reaching down to the fall of Paganism in the 4th
century A.D.[12] Under the later Ptolemies and the Roman rule documents
in Greek are more abundant than in demotic, and the language of the
ruling classes must have begun to penetrate the masses deeply.

_Coptic._--This, in the main, represents the popular language of early
Christian Egypt from the 3rd to perhaps the 10th century A.D., when the
growth of Coptic as a literary language must have ceased. The Greek
alphabet, reinforced by a few signs borrowed from demotic, rendered the
spoken tongue so accurately that four distinct, though closely allied,
dialects are readily distinguishable in Coptic MSS.; ample remains are
found of renderings of the Scriptures into all these dialects. The
distinctions between the dialects consist largely in pronunciation, but
extend also to the vocabulary, word-formation and syntax. Such
interchanges are found as _l_ for _r_, [Coptic: qima] (_k_, _ch_) for
[Coptic: dandia] (_dj_), final _i_ for final _e_, _a_ for _e_, _a_ for
_o_. Early in the 2nd century A.D., pagan Egyptians, or perhaps
foreigners settled in Egypt, essayed, as yet unskilfully, to write the
native language in Greek letters. This _Old Coptic_, as it is termed,
was still almost entirely free from Greek loan-words, and its strong
archaisms are doubtless accounted for by the literary language, even in
its most "vulgar" forms, having moved more slowly than the speech of the
people. Christian Coptic, though probably at first contemporary with
some documents of Old Coptic, contrasts strongly with the latter. The
monks whose task it was to perfect the adaptation of the alphabet to the
dialects of Egypt and translate the Scriptures out of the Greek, flung
away all pagan traditions. It is clear that the basis which they chose
for the new literature was the simplest language of daily life in the
monasteries, charged as it was with expressions taken from Greek,
pre-eminently the language of patristic Christianity. There is evidence
that the amount of stress on syllables, and the consequent length of
vowels, varied greatly in spoken Coptic, and that the variation gave
much trouble to the scribes; the early Christian writers must have taken
as a model for each dialect the deliberate speech of grave elders or
preachers, and so secured a uniform system of accentuation. The remains
of Old Coptic, though very instructive in their marked peculiarities,
are as yet too few for definite classification. The main divisions of
Christian Coptic as recognized and named at present are: Sahidic
(formerly called Theban), spoken in the upper Thebais; Akhmimic, in the
neighbourhood of Akhmim, but driven out by Sahidic about the 5th
century; Fayumic, in the Fayum (formerly named wrongly "Bashmuric," from
a province of the Delta); Bohairic, the dialect of the "coast district"
(formerly named "Memphite"), spoken in the north-western Delta. Coptic,
much alloyed with Arabic, was spoken in Upper Egypt as late as the 15th
century, but it has long been a dead language.[13] Sahidic and Bohairic
are the most important dialects, each of these having left abundant
remains; the former spread over the whole of Upper Egypt, and the latter
since the 14th century has been the language of the sacred books of
Christianity throughout the country, owing to the hierarchical
importance of Alexandria and the influence of the ancient monasteries
established in the north-western desert.

The above stages of the Egyptian language are not defined with absolute
clearness. Progress is seen from dynasty to dynasty or from century to
century. New Egyptian shades off almost imperceptibly into demotic, and
it may be hoped that gaps which now exist in the development will be
filled by further discovery.

Coptic is the only stage of the language in which the spelling gives a
clear idea of the pronunciation. It is therefore the mainstay of the
scholar in investigating or restoring the word-forms of the ancient
language. Greek transcriptions of Egyptian names and words are valuable
as evidence for the vocalization of Egyptian. Such are found from the
6th century B.C. in the inscription of Abu Simbel, from the 5th in
Herodotus, &c., and abound in Ptolemaic and later documents from the
beginning of the 3rd century B.C. onwards. At first sight they may seem
inaccurate, but on closer examination the Graecizing is seen to follow
definite rules, especially in the Ptolemaic period. A few cuneiform
transcriptions, reaching as far back as the XVIIIth Dynasty, give
valuable hints as to how Egyptian was pronounced in the 15th century
B.C. Coptic itself is of course quite inadequate to enable us to restore
Old Egyptian. In it the Old Egyptian verbal forms are mostly replaced by
periphrases; though the strong roots are often preserved entire, the
weaker consonants and the [Hebrew: ts] have largely or entirely
disappeared, so that the language appears as one of biliteral rather
than triliteral roots. Coptic is strongly impregnated with Greek words
adopted late; moreover, a certain number of Semitic loan-words flowed
into Egyptian at all ages, and especially from the 16th century B.C.
onwards, displacing earlier words. It is only by the most careful
scrutiny, or the exercise of the most piercing insight, that the
imperfectly spelled Egyptian has been made to yield up one grammatical
secret after another in the light brought to bear upon it from Coptic.
Demotic grammar ought soon to be thoroughly comprehensible in its forms,
and the study of Late Egyptian should not stand far behind that of
demotic. On the other hand, Middle Egyptian, and still more Old
Egyptian, which is separated from Middle Egyptian by a wide gap, will
perhaps always be to us little more than consonantal skeletons, the
flesh and blood of their vocalization being for the most part
irretrievably lost.[14]

In common with the Semitic languages, the Berber languages of North
Africa, and the Cushite languages of North-East Africa, Egyptian of all
periods possesses grammatical gender, expressing masculine and feminine.
Singularly few language groups have this peculiarity; and our own great
Indo-European group, which possesses it, is distinguished from those
above mentioned by having the neuter gender in addition. The
characteristic triliteral roots of all the Semitic languages seemed to
separate them widely from others; but certain traits have caused the
Egyptian, Berber and Cushite groups to be classed together as three
subfamilies of a Hamitic group, remotely related to the Semitic. The
biliteral character of Coptic, and the biliteralism which was believed
to exist in Egyptian, led philologists to suspect that Egyptian might be
a surviving witness to that far-off stage of the Semitic languages when
triliteral roots had not yet been formed from presumed original
biliterals; Sethe's investigations, however, prove that the Coptic
biliterals are themselves derived from Old Egyptian triliterals, and
that the triliteral roots enormously preponderated in Egyptian of the
earliest known form; that view is, therefore, no longer tenable. Many
remarkable resemblances have been observed in the grammatical structure
of the Berber and Cushite groups with Semitic (cf. H. Zimmern,
_Vergleichende Grammatik d. semitischen Sprachen_, Berlin, 1898,
especially pronouns and verbs); but the relationship must be very
distant, and there are no ancient documents that can take back the
history of any one of those languages more than a few centuries. Their
connexion with Semitic and Egyptian, therefore, remains at present an
obscure though probable hypothesis. On the other hand, Egyptian is
certainly related to Semitic. Even before the triliterality of Old
Egyptian was recognized, Erman showed that the so-called
pseudo-participle had been really in meaning and in form a precise
analogue of the Semitic perfect, though its original employment was
almost obsolete in the time of the earliest known texts. Triliteralism
is considered the most essential and most peculiar feature of Semitic.
But there are, besides, many other resemblances in structure between the
Semitic languages and Egyptian, so that, although the two vocabularies
present few points of clear contact, there is reason to believe that
Egyptian was originally a characteristic member of the Semitic family of
languages. See Erman, "Das Verhaltnis d. agyptischen zu d. semitischen
Sprachen" (_Zeitschrift d. deutschen morgenl. Gesellschaft_, 1892);
Zimmern, _Vergl. Gram._, 1898; Erman, "Flexion d. agyptischen Verbums"
(_Sitzungsberichte d. Berl. Akad._, 1900). The Egyptians proper are not,
and so far as we can tell never were, Semitic in physical feature. As a
possible explanation of the facts, Erman supposes that a horde of
conquering Semites, like the Arabs of a later day, imposed their
language on the country, but disappeared, being weakened by the climate
or absorbed by the native population. The latter acquired the Semitic
language imperfectly from their conquerors; they expressed the verbal
conjugations by periphrases, mispronounced the consonants, and so
changed greatly the appearance of the vocabulary, which also would
certainly contain a large proportion of native non-Semitic roots. Strong
consonants gave place to weak consonants (as [Arabic: Qaaf] has done to
[Arabic sign], in the modern Arabic of Egypt), and then the weak
consonants disappearing altogether produced biliterals from the
triliterals. Much of this must have taken place, according to the
theory, in the prehistoric period; but the loss of weak consonants, of
[ayin] and of one of two repeated consonants, and the development of
periphrastic conjugations continued to the end. The typical Coptic root
thus became biliteral rather than triliteral, and the verb, by means of
periphrases, developed tenses of remarkable precision. Such verbal
resemblances as exist between Coptic and Semitic are largely due to late
exchanges with Semitic neighbours.

  The following sketch of the Egyptian language, mainly in its earliest
  form, which dates from some three or four thousand years B.C., is
  founded upon Erman's works. It will serve to contrast with Coptic
  grammar on the one hand and Semitic grammar on the other.

  THE EGYPTIAN ALPHABET

    [HRG: M17] = _l_; so conventionally transcribed since it unites two
           values, being sometimes y but often [Hebrew: alef] (especially
           at the beginning of words), and from the earliest times used in
           a manner corresponding to the Arabic _hamza_, to indicate a
           prosthetic vowel. Often lost.

    [HRG: Z4] and [HRG: M17-M17] are frequently employed for _y_.

    [HRG: G1] = '([Hebrew: alef]); easily lost or changes to _y_.

    [HRG: D36] = '([Hebrew: ayin]); lost in Coptic. This rare sound, well
           known in Semitic, occurs also in Berber and Cushite languages.

    [HRG: G43] = _w_; often changes to _y_.

    [HRG: D58] = _b_.

    [HRG: Q3] = _p_.

    [HRG: I9] = _f_.

    [HRG: G17] = _m_.

    [HRG: N35] = _n_.

    [HRG] = _r_; often lost, or changes to _y_. _r_ and _l_ are
           distinguished in later demotic and in Coptic.

    [HRG] = _h_    } distinction lost in Coptic.
    [HRG] = _[h.]_ }

    [HRG] = _h_; in Coptic [Coptic: sai] (_sh_) or [Coptic: xai] (_kh_)
           correspond to it.

    [HRG] = _[h=]_; generally written with [HRG] (_[vs]_) in the Old
           Kingdom, but [HRG] corresponds to _kh_ in Coptic.

    [HRG] = _s_    } distinction lost at the end of the Old Kingdom.
    [HRG] = _[/s]_ }

    [HRG] = _[vs]_ (_sh_).

    [HRG] = _q_; Coptic [Coptic: kappa].

    [HRG] = _k_ } Coptic [Coptic: kappa]; or [Coptic: qima],
                }    [Coptic: dandia], according to dialect.
    [HRG] = _g_ } Coptic [Coptic: kappa]; or [Coptic: qima].

    [HRG] = _[t=]_; often lost at the end of words.

    [HRG] = _t_ ([theta]); often changes to _t_, otherwise Coptic
           [Coptic: tau]; or [Coptic: dandia], [Coptic: qima].

    [HRG] = _d_; in Coptic reduced to _t_.

    [HRG] = _d_ (_z_); often changes to _d_, Coptic [Coptic: tau];
           otherwise in Coptic [Coptic: dandia].


  _ROOTS_

  Egyptian roots consist of consonants and semi-consonants only, the
  inflexion being effected by internal vowel-change and the addition of
  consonants or vowels at the beginning or end. The Egyptian system of
  writing, as opposed to the Coptic, showed only the consonantal
  skeletons of words: it could not record internal vowel-changes; and
  semi-consonants, even when radicals, were often omitted in writing.


  _PERSONAL PRONOUNS_

  Sing. 1. c. _iw_ (?) later _wi_.     Pl. 1. c. _n_.                Du.
        2. m. _kw_.                        2. c. _tn_.               2. c. _tny_.
           f. _tn_.
        3. _m_. *_fy_, surviving only      3. m. _sn_, early lost,   3. c. _sny_.
                       in a special                    except as
                       verbal form.                    suffix.
           f. _sy_.                           f. *_st_ surviving
                                                       as 3. c.

  From these are derived the suffixes, which are shortened forms
  attached to nouns to express the possessor, and to verbs to express
  the subject. In the latter case the verb was probably in the
  participle, so that _sdmii-sn_, "they hear," is literally "hearing
  are they." The singular suffixes are: (1) c. _-i_; (2) m. _-k_, f.
  _-t_; (3) m. _-f_, f. _-[/s]_;--the dual and plural have no special
  forms.

  Another series of absolute pronouns is: (2) m. _twt_, _tw_; f. _tmt_,
  _tm_; (3) m. _swt_, _sw_; f. _stt_, _st_. Of these _twt_, _tmt_, &c.,
  are emphatic forms.

  Many of the above absolute pronouns were almost obsolete even in the
  Old Kingdom. In ordinary texts some survive, especially as objects of
  verbs, namely, _wi_, _tw_, _tn_, _sw_, _st_. The suffixes of all
  numbers and persons except the dual were in full use throughout, to
  Coptic; _sn_, however, giving way to a new suffix, _-w_, which
  developed first in the New Kingdom.

  Another absolute pronoun of the first person is _ink_, [Coptic: Anoch]
  like Heb. [Hebrew: Anochi]. It is associated with a series for the
  second and third persons: _nt-k_, _nt-t_, _nt-f_, _nt-sn_, &c.; but
  from their history, use and form, it seems probable that the last are
  of later formation, and are not to be connected with the Semitic
  pronouns (chiefly of the 2nd person) resembling them.


  _DEMONSTRATIVE PRONOUNS_

  There are several series based on m. _p_; f. _t_; pl. _n_; but _n_ as
  a plural seems later than the other two. From them are developed a
  weak demonstrative to which possessive suffixes can be attached,
  producing the definite and possessive articles (_p'_, _t'_, _n'_,
  "the," _p'y-f_, "his," _p'y-s_ "her," &c.) of Middle Egyptian and the
  later language.


  _NOUNS_

  Two genders, m. (ending _w_, or nothing), f. (ending _t_). Three
  numbers: singular, dual (m. _wi_, f. _ti_, gradually became obsolete),
  plural (m. _w_; f. _wt_). No case-endings are recognizable, but
  construct forms--to judge by Coptic--were in use. Masculine and
  feminine nouns of instrument or material are formed from verbal roots
  by prefixing _m_; e.g. _m.sdm.t_, "stibium," from _sdm_, "paint the
  eye." Substantives and adjectives are formed from substantives and
  prepositions by the addition of _y_ in the masculine; e.g. _n.t_,
  "city," _nt.y_, "belonging to a city," "citizen"; _hr_, "upon," _hr.y_
  (f. _hr.t_; pl. _hr.w)_, "upper." This is not unlike the Semitic
  _nisbe_ ending _iy_, _ay_ (e.g. Ar. _beled_, "city," _beledi_,
  "belonging to a city"). Adjectives follow the nouns they qualify.


  _NUMERALS_

  1, _w'_; 2, _sn_; 3, _hmt_; 4, _fdw_; 5, _dw'_; 6, _sis_ (or _sw'_ ?);
  7, _sfh_; 8, _hmn_; 9, _psd_; 10, _mt_. 2, 6, 7, 8 and 9 (?) resemble
  Semitic numerals. 20 and 30 (_m'b_) had special names; 40-90 were
  named as if plurals of the units 4-9, as in Semitic. 100, _snt_; 1000,
  _h'_; 10,000, _zb'_; 100,000, _hfnw_.


  _VERBS_

  The forms observable in hieroglyphic writing lead to the following
  classification:--

  STRONG VERBS.
         Biliteral      Often showing traces of an original III. inf.;
                                   in early times very rare.

         Triliteral     Very numerous.

                        { Generally formed by reduplication.
         Quadriliteral  {   In Late Egyptian they were no longer
         Quinqueliteral {   inflected, and were conjugated with the help
                        {   of _iry_, "do."

  WEAK VERBS.
         II. geminatae  Properly triliterals, but, with the 2nd or 3rd
                            radical alike, these coalesced in many forms
                            where no vowel intervened, and gave the word
                            the appearance of a biliteral.

         III. gem.      Rare.

         III. inf.      Numerous. III. _w_, and III. _i_ were
                            unified early. Some very common verbs, "do,"
                            "give," "come," "bring" are irregular.

         IV. inf.       Partly derived from adjectival formations in
                            _y_, from nouns and infinitives:--e.g. _s.ip_,
                            inf. _sipt_; adj. _sipty_; verb (4 lit.),
                            _sipty_.

  Many verbs with weak consonants--I_y_, I_w_, II. inf. (_m[w]t_), and
  those with [Hebrew: alef]--are particularly difficult to trace
  accurately, owing to defective writing.

  It seems that all the above classes may be divided into two main
  groups, according to the form of the infinitive:--with masculine
  infinitive the strong triliteral type, and with feminine infinitive
  the type of the III. inf. The former group includes all except III.
  inf., IV. inf., and the causative of the biliterals, which belong to
  the second group.

  It is probable that the verb had a special form denoting condition, as
  in Arabic. There was a causative form prefixing _s_, and traces of
  forms resembling _Pi'el_ and _Niphal_ are observed. Some roots are
  reduplicated wholly or in part with a frequentative meaning, and there
  are traces of gemination of radicals.

  _Pseudo-Participle._--In very early texts this is the past indicative,
  but more commonly it is used in sentences such as, _gm-n-f wi
  'h'.kwi_, "he found me I stood," i.e. "he found me standing." The
  indicative use was soon given up and the pseudo-participle was
  employed only as predicate, especially indicating a state; e.g. _ntr.t
  sm.ti_, "the goddess goes"; _iw-k wd'.ti_, "thou art prosperous." The
  endings were almost entirely lost in New Egyptian. For early times
  they stand thus:--

    Sing. 3. masc.   _i_, late _w_.  Dual _wii_.   Pl. _w_.
             fem.    _ti_.           _tiiw_            _ti_.
          2. masc.   _ti_                              _tiwny_.
             fem.    _ti_
          1. c.      _kwi_.                            _wyn_.

  The pseudo-participle seems, by its inflexion, to have been the
  perfect of the original Semitic conjugation. The simplest form being
  that of the 3rd person, it is best arranged like the corresponding
  tense in Semitic grammars, beginning with that person. There is no
  trace of the Semitic imperfect in Egyptian. The ordinary conjugation
  is formed quite differently. The verbal stem is here followed by the
  subject-suffix or substantive--_sdm-f_, "he hears"; _sdmw stn_,
  "the king hears." It is varied by the addition of particles, &c., _n_,
  _in_, _hr_, _tw_, thus:--

  _sdm-f_, "he hears"; _sdm-w-f_, "he is heard" (_pl. sdm-ii-sn_, "they
  are heard"); _sdm-tw-f_, "he is heard"; _sdm-n-f_, "he heard";
  _sdm-n-tw-f_, "he was heard"; also, _sdm-in-f_, _sdm-hr-f_,
  _sdm-k'-f_. Each form has special uses, generally difficult to
  define, _sdm-f_ seems rather to be imperfect, _sdm-n-f_ perfect, and
  generally to express the past. Later, _sdm-f_ is ordinarily expressed
  by periphrases; but by the loss of _n_, _sdm-n-f_ became itself
  _sdm-f_, which is the ordinary past in demotic. Coptic preserves
  _sdm-f_ forms of many verbs in its causative (e.g. [Coptic: tanchof]
  "cause him to live," from Egyptian _di.t.nh-f_), and, in its
  periphrastic conjugation, the same forms of _wn_, "be," and _iry_,
  "do." With _sdm-f_ (_sedmo-f_) was a more emphatic form (_esdomef_),
  at any rate in the weak verbs.

  The above, with the relative forms mentioned below, are supposed by
  Erman to be derived from the participle, which is placed first for
  emphasis: thus, _sdm.w stn_, "hearing is the king"; _sdm-f_, for
  _sdm-fy_, "hearing he is." This Egyptian paraphrase of Semitic is
  just like the Irish paraphrase of English, "It is hearing he is."

  The _imperative_ shows no ending in the singular; in the plural it has
  _y_, and later _w_; cf. Semitic imperative.

  The _infinitive_ is of special importance on account of its being
  preserved very fully in Coptic. It is generally of masculine form, but
  feminine in III. inf. (as in Semitic), and in causatives of
  biliterals.

  There are relative forms of _sdm-f_ and _sdm-n-f_, respectively
  _sdm.w-f_ (masc.), _sdm.t-n-f_ (fem.), &c. They are used when the
  relative is the object of the relative sentence, or has any other
  position than the subject. Thus _sdm.t-f_ may mean "she whom he
  hears," "she who[se praises] he hears," "she [to] whom he hears
  [someone speaking]," &c. There are close analogies between the
  function of the relative particles in Egyptian and Semitic; and the
  Berber languages possess a relative form of the verb.

  _Participles_.--These are active and passive, perfect and imperfect,
  in the old language, but all are replaced by periphrases in Coptic.

  _Verbal Adjectives_.--There is a peculiar formation, _sdm.ty-fy_, "he
  who shall hear," probably meaning originally "he is a hearer,"
  _sdm.ty_ being an adjective in _y_ formed from a feminine (_t_) form
  of the infinitive, which is occasionally found even in triliteral
  verbs; the endings are: sing., masc. _ty-fy_, fem. _ty-sy_; pl., masc.
  _ty-sn_, fem. _ty-st_. It is found only in Old Egyptian.

  _Particles_.--There seems to be no special formation for adverbs, and
  little use is made of adverbial expressions. Prepositions, simple and
  compound, are numerous. Some of the commonest simple prepositions are
  _n_ "for," _r_ "to," _m_ "in, from," _hr_ "upon." A few enclitic
  conjunctions exist, but they are indefinite in meaning--_swt_ a vague
  "but," _grt_ a vague "moreover," &c.

  Coptic presents a remarkable contrast to Egyptian in the precision of
  its periphrastic conjugation. There are two present tenses, an
  imperfect, two perfects, a pluperfect, a present and a past
  frequentative, and three futures besides future perfect; there are
  also conjunctive and optative forms. The negatives of some of these
  are expressed by special prefixes. The gradual growth of these new
  forms can be traced through all the stages of Egyptian. Throughout the
  history of the language we note an increasing tendency to periphrasis;
  but there was no great advance towards _precision_ before demotic. In
  demotic there are distinguishable a present tense, imperfect, perfect,
  frequentative, future, future perfect, conjunctive and optative; also
  present, past and future negatives, &c. The passive was extinct before
  demotic; demotic and Coptic express it, clumsily it must be confessed,
  by an impersonal "they," e.g. "they bore him" stands for "he was
  born."

  It is worth noting how, in other departments besides the verb, the
  Egyptian language was far better adapted to practical ends during and
  after the period of the Deltaic dynasties (XXII.-XXX.) than ever it
  was before. It was both simplified and enriched. The inflexions
  rapidly disappeared and little was left of the distinctions between
  masculine and feminine, singular, dual and plural--except in the
  pronouns. The dual number had been given up entirely at an earlier
  date. The pronouns, both personal and demonstrative, retained their
  forms very fully. As prefixes, suffixes and articles, they, together
  with some auxiliary verbs, provided the principal mechanism of the
  renovated language. An abundant supply of useful adverbs was gradually
  accumulated, as well as conjunctions, so far as the functions of the
  latter were not already performed by the verbal prefixes. These great
  improvements in the language correspond to great changes in the
  economic condition of the country; they were the result of active
  trade and constant intercourse of all classes of Egyptians with
  foreigners from Europe and Asia. Probably the best stage of Egyptian
  speech was that which immediately preceded Coptic. Though Coptic is
  here and there more exactly expressive than the best demotic, it was
  spoilt by too much Greek, duplicating and too often expelling native
  expressions that were already adequate for its very simple
  requirements. Above all, it is clumsily pleonastic.


  THE WRITING

  The ancient Egyptian system of writing, so far as we know, originated,
  developed and finally expired strictly within the limits of the Nile
  Valley. The germ of its existence may have come from without, but, as
  we know it, it is essentially Egyptian and intended for the expression
  of the Egyptian language. About the 1st century B.C., however, the
  semi-barbarous rulers of the Ethiopian kingdoms of Meroe and Napata
  contrived the "Meroitic" alphabet, founded on Egyptian writing, and
  comprising both a hieroglyphic and a cursive form (see ETHIOPIA). As
  yet both of these kinds of Nubian writing are undeciphered. Egyptian
  hieroglyphic was carried by conquest into Syria, certainly under the
  XVIIIth Dynasty, and again under the XXVIth for the engraving of
  Egyptian inscriptions; but in the earlier period the cuneiform
  syllabary, and in the later the "Phoenician" alphabet, had obtained a
  firm hold there, and we may be sure that no attempt was made to
  substitute the Egyptian system for the latter. Cuneiform tablets in
  Syria, however, seem almost confined to the period of the XVIIIth
  Dynasty. Although it cannot be proved it seems quite possible that the
  traders of Phoenicia and the Aegean adopted the papyrus and Egyptian
  hieratic writing together, before the end of the New Kingdom, and
  developed their "Phoenician" alphabet from the latter about 1000 B.C.
  In very early times a number of systems of writing already reigned in
  different countries forming a compact and not very large area--perhaps
  from South Arabia to Asia Minor, and from Persia to Crete and Egypt.
  Whether they all sprang from one common stock of picture-writing we
  shall perhaps never know, nor can we as yet trace the influence which
  one great system may have had on another, owing to the poverty of
  documents from most of the countries concerned.

  It is certain that in Egypt from the IVth Dynasty onwards the mode of
  writing was essentially the same as that which was extinguished by the
  fall of paganism in the 4th century A.D. Its elements in the
  hieroglyphic form are pictorial, but each hieroglyph had one or more
  well-defined functions, fixed by convention in such a manner that the
  Egyptian language was expressed in writing word by word. Although a
  picture sign may at times have embarrassed the skilled native reader
  by offering a choice of fixed values or functions, it was never
  intended to convey merely an idea, so as to leave to him the task of
  putting the idea into his own words. How far this holds good for the
  period before the IVth Dynasty it is difficult to say. The known
  inscriptions of the earlier times are so brief and so limited in range
  that the system on which they were written cannot yet be fully
  investigated. As far back as the Ist Dynasty, phonograms (see below)
  were in full use. But the spelling then was very concise: it is
  possible that some of the slighter words, such as prepositions, were
  omitted in the writing, and were intended to be supplied from the
  context. As a whole, we gain the impression that a really distinct and
  more primitive stage of hieroglyphic writing by a substantially vaguer
  notation of words lay not far behind the time of the Ist Dynasty.

  The employment of the signs are of three kinds: any given sign
  represents either (1) a whole word or root; or (2) a sound as part of
  a word; or (3) pictorially defines the meaning of a word the sound of
  which has already been given by a sign or group of signs preceding.
  The number of phonograms is very restricted, but some signs have all
  these powers. For instance, [HRG: mn] is the conventional picture of a
  draughtboard (shown in plan) with the draughtsmen (shown in elevation)
  on its edge:--this sign (1) signifies the root _mn_, "set," "firm"; or
  (2) in the group [HRG: mn:x], represents the same sound as part of the
  root _mnh_, "good"; or (3) added to the group _snt_ (thus: [HRG:
  z:n:t-mn]), shows that the meaning intended is "draught-board," or
  "draughts," and not any of the other meanings of _snt_. Thus signs,
  according to their employment, are said to be (1) "word-signs," (2)
  "phonograms," or (3) "determinatives."

  _Word-signs._--The word-sign value of a sign is, in the first place,
  the name of the object it represents, or of some material, or quality,
  or action, or idea suggested by it. Thus [HRG] is _hr_, "face"; [HRG],
  a vase of ointment, is _mrh.t_, "ointment"; [HRG] is _wdb_, "turn."
  Much investigation is still required to establish the origins of the
  values of the signs; in some cases the connexion between the pictures
  and the _primary_ values seems to be curiously remote. Probably all
  the signs in the hieroglyphic signary can be employed in their primary
  sense. The _secondary_ value expresses the consonantal root of the
  name or other primary value, and any, or almost any, derivative from
  that root: as when [HRG], a mat with a cake upon it, is not only
  _htp_, an "offering-mat," but also _htp_ in the sense of
  "conciliation," "peace," "rest," "setting" (of the sun), with many
  derivatives. In the third place, some signs may be _transferred_ to
  express another root having the same consonants as the first: thus
  [HRG], the ear, by a play upon words can express not only _sdm_,
  "hear," but also _sdm_, "paint the eyes."

  _Phonograms._--Only a limited number of signs are found with this use,
  but they are of the greatest importance. By searching throughout the
  whole mass of normal inscriptions, earlier than the periods of Greek
  and Roman rule when great liberties were taken with the writing,
  probably no more than one hundred different phonograms can be found.
  The number of those commonly employed in good writing is between
  seventy and eighty. The most important phonograms are the _uniliteral_
  or _alphabetic_ signs, twenty-four in number in the Old Kingdom and
  without any homophones: later these were increased by homophones to
  thirty. Of _biliteral_ phonograms--each expressing a combination of
  two consonants--there were about fifty commonly used: some fifteen or
  twenty were rarely used. As Egyptian roots seldom exceeded three
  letters, there was no need for _triliteral_ phonograms to spell them.
  There is, however, one triliteral phonogram, the eagle, [HRG], _tyw_,
  or _tiu_ (?), used for the plural ending of adjectives in _y_ formed
  from words ending in _t_ (whether radical or the feminine ending).

  The phonetic values of the signs are derived from their word-sign
  values and consist usually of the bare root, though there are rare
  examples of the retention of a flexional ending; they often ignore
  also the weaker consonants of the root, and on the same principle
  reduce a repeated consonant to a single one, as when the hoe [HRG],
  _hnn_, has the phonetic value _hn_. The history of some of the
  alphabetic signs is still very obscure, but a sufficient number of
  them have been explained to make it nearly certain that the values of
  all were obtained on the same principles.[15] Some of the ancient
  words from which the phonetic values were derived probably fell very
  early into disuse, and may never be discoverable in the texts that
  have come down to us. The following are among those most easily
  explained:--

    [HRG: i], reed flower, value _y_ and [Hebrew: alef]; from [HRGs:
    i-A-Hn], _y'_, "reed."

  (It seems as if the two values _y_ and [Hebrew: alef] were obtained
  by choosing first one and then the other of the two semi-consonants
  composing the name. They are much confused, and a conventional symbol
  _l_ has to be adopted for rendering [HRG: i].)

    [HRG: a], forearm,    value '([Hebrew: ayin]); from [HRGs: a:Z1],
        '([Hebrew: ayin]), "hand."

    [HRG: r], mouth,      value _r_; from [HRGs: r:Z1], _r_, "mouth."

    [HRG: X], belly and teats,      value _h_; from [HRGs: X:t*Z1],
        _h.t_, "belly." (The feminine ending is here, as usual,
        neglected.)

    [HRG: S], tank,       value _s_; from [HRGs: S:Z1], _s_,
        "tank."

    [HRG: q], slope of earth   value _q_; ''[HRGs: q-A-A-q], _q_'',
        "slope," or brickwork, "height." (The doubled weak consonant is
        here neglected.)

    [HRG: d], hand,       value _d_; from [HRGs: d:t*Z1], _d.t_, "hand."

    [HRG: D], cobra,      value _z_; from [HRGs: D:t*Z1], _z.t_, "cobra."

  For some alphabetic signs more than one likely origin might be found,
  while for others, again, no clear evidence of origin is yet
  forthcoming.

  It has already been explained that the writing expresses only
  consonants. In the Graeco-Roman period various imperfect attempts were
  made to render the vowels in foreign names and words by the
  semi-vowels as also by [HRGs: a], the consonant [Hebrew: ayin] which
  [HRGs: a] originally represented having been reduced in speech by that
  time to the power of [Hebrew: alef], only. Thus, [Greek: Ptolemaios]
  is spelt _Ptwrmys_, Antoninus, _'Nt'nynws_ or _Intnyns_, &c. &c. Much
  earlier, throughout the New Kingdom, a special "syllabic" orthography,
  in which the alphabetic signs for the consonants are generally
  replaced by groups or single signs having the value of a consonant
  followed by a semi-vowel, was used for foreign names and words, e.g.

    [Hebrew: merkevet], "chariot," was written [HRGs:
      m:a-r:Z1-k:A-b-W-ti-i-t:xt], in Coptic [Coptic: berechojt].

    [Hebrew: migdal], "tower," was written [HRGs: m:a-k-ti-i-r:Z1],
      [HRGs: m:a-g-A-d:y-r:Z1-niwt], [Coptic: mechtod].

    [Hebrew: kinor], "harp," was written [HRGs: k-n:Z2-i-n-i-w-l:Z1-xt].

    [Hebrew: hamath], "Hamath," was written [HRGs:
      HA-A-mA-A-ti-i-qmA:xAst ].

  According to W. Max Muller (_Asien und Europa_, 1893, chap, v.), this
  represents an endeavour to express the vocalization; but, if so, it
  was carried out with very little system. In practice, the semi-vowels
  are generally negligible. This method of writing can be traced back
  into the Middle Kingdom, if not beyond, and it greatly affected the
  spelling of native words in New Egyptian and demotic.

  _Determinatives._--Most signs can on occasion be used as
  determinatives, but those that are very commonly employed as
  phonograms or as secondary word-signs are seldom employed as
  determinatives; and when they are so used they are often somewhat
  differentiated. Certain generic determinatives are very common,
  e.g.:--

    [HRG: D54]; of motion.

    [HRG: A24], [HRG: D40]; of acts involving force.

    [HRG: A40]; of divinity.

    [HRG: A1]; of a person or a man's name.

    [HRG: pr]; of buildings.

    [HRG: niwt]; of inhabited places.

    [HRG: xAst]; of foreign countries.

    [HRG: qmA]; club; of foreigners.

    [HRG: A2]; of all actions of the mouth--eating and speaking,
        likewise silence and hunger.

    [HRG: N35B]; ripple-lines; of liquid.

    [HRG: F27]; hide; of animals, also leather, &c.

    [HRG: Hn]; of plants and fibres.

    [HRG: N33:Z5]; of flesh.

    [HRG: mDAt]; a sealed papyrus-roll; of books, teaching, law, and of
        abstract ideas generally.

  In the earliest inscriptions the use of determinatives is restricted
  to the [HRG: A1], [HRG: B1], &c., after proper names, but it developed
  immensely later, so that few words beyond the particles were written
  without them in the normal style after the Old Kingdom.

  Some few signs ideographic of a group of ideas are made to express
  particular words belonging to that group by the aid of phonograms
  which point out the special meaning. In such cases the ideogram is not
  merely a determinative nor yet quite a word-sign. Thus [HRG: qmA-m] =
  [HRG: a-A-m-qmA] "Semite," [HRG: qmA-nw] = [HRG: T-H-n:nw-qmA]
  "Libyan," &c., but [HRG: qmA] cannot stand by itself for the name of
  any particular foreign people. So also in monogram [HRG: Sm] is
  _sm_ "go," [HRG: zb] is "conduct."

  _Orthography._--The most primitive form of spelling in the
  hieroglyphic system would be by one sign for each word, and the
  monuments of the Ist Dynasty show a decided tendency to this mode.
  Examples of it in later times are preserved in the royal cartouches,
  for here the monumental style demanded special consciseness. Thus, for
  instance, the name of Tethmosis III.--MN-HPR-R'--is spelled [HRG:
  hrw-mn-xpr] (as R' is the name of the sun-god, with customary
  deference to the deity it is written first though pronounced last). A
  number of common words--prepositions, &c.--with only one consonant are
  spelled by single alphabetic signs in ordinary writing. Word-signs
  used singly for the names of objects are generally marked with | in
  classical writing, as [HRG: Z91-ib:Z1], _ib_, "heart," [HRG: Hr:Z1],
  _hr_, "face," &c.

  But the use of bare word-signs is not common. Flexional consonants are
  almost always marked by phonograms, except in very early times; as
  when the feminine word [HRG: D] = _z.t_, "cobra," is spelled [HRG:
  D:t*Z1]. Also, if a sign had more than one value, a phonogram would be
  added to indicate which of its values was intended: thus [HRG: sw] in
  [HRG: sw-w] is _sw_, "he," but in [HRG: sw:t] it is _stn_, "king."
  Further, owing to the vast number of signs employed, to prevent
  confusion of one with another in rapid writing they were generally
  provided with "phonetic complements," a group being less easily
  misread than a single letter. E.g. [HRG: wD], _wz_, "command," is
  regularly written [HRG: wD-w], _wz_ (_w_); but [HRG: HD], _hz_,
  "white," is written [HRG: HD-D], _hz_(_z_). This practice had the
  advantage also of distinguishing determinatives from phonograms. Thus
  the root or syllable _hn_ is regularly written [HRG: H-Hn:n] to avoid
  confusion with the determinative [HRG: Hn]. Redundance in writing is
  the rule; for instance, _b_ is often spelled [HRG: b-G26A-A]
  (_b_)_b_'('). Biliteral phonograms are very rare as phonetic
  complements, nor are two biliteral phonograms employed together in
  writing the radicals of a word.

  Spelling of words purely in phonetic or even alphabetic characters is
  not uncommon, the determinative being generally added. Thus in the
  pyramidal texts we find _hpr_, "become," written [HRG: xpr] in one
  copy of a text, in another [HRG: x*p:r]. Such variant spellings are
  very important for fixing the readings of word-signs. It is noteworthy
  that though words were so freely spelled in alphabetic characters,
  especially in the time of the Old Kingdom, no advance was ever made
  towards excluding the cumbersome word-signs and biliteral phonograms,
  which, by a judicious use of determinatives, might well have been
  rendered quite superfluous.

  _Abbreviations._--We find [HRG: anx-DA-s], strictly _'nh z_' _s_
  standing for the ceremonial _viva! 'nh wz, snb_. "Life, Prosperity
  and Health," and in course of time [HRG: mDAt] was used in accounts
  instead of [HRG: dmD] _dmz_, "total."

  _Monograms_ are frequent and are found from the earliest times. Thus
  [HRG: Sm], [HRG: zb] mentioned above are monograms, the association of
  [HRG: S] and [HRG: D54] having no pictorial meaning. Another common
  monogram is [HRG: O10], i.e. [HRG: Hwt] and [HRG: G5] for _H.t-Hrw_
  "Hathor." A word-sign may be compounded with its phonetic complement,
  as [HRG: T5] _hz_ "white," or with its determinative, as [HRG: S14]
  _hz_ "silver."

  The table on the opposite page shows the uses of a few of the commoner
  signs.

  The decorative value of hieroglyphic was fully appreciated in Egypt.
  The aim of the artist-scribe was to arrange his variously shaped
  characters into square groups, and this could be done in great measure
  by taking advantage of the different ways in which many words could be
  spelt. Thus _hs_ could be written [HRG: H*Hz:z], _hsy_ [HRG: Hz-i-i],
  _hs-f_ [HRG: Hz-z:f], _hs-n-f_ [HRG: Hz-n:f]. But some words in the
  classical writing were intractable from this point of view. It is
  obvious that the alphabetic signs played a very important part in the
  formation of the groups, and many words could only be written in
  alphabetic signs. A great advance was therefore made when several
  homophones were introduced into the alphabet in the Middle and New
  Kingdoms, partly as the result of the wearing away of old phonetic
  distinctions, giving the choice between [HRG: z] and [HRG: s], [HRG:
  t-T] and [HRG: ti], [HRG: m] and [HRG: M], [HRG: n] and [HRG: N],
  [HRG: w] and [HRG: W]. In later times the number of homophones in use
  increased greatly throughout the different classes, the tendency being
  much helped by the habit of fanciful writing; but few of these
  homophones found their way into the cursive script. Occasionally a
  scribe of the old times indulged his fancy in "sportive" or
  "mysterious" writing, either inventing new signs or employing old ones
  in unusual meanings. Short sportive inscriptions are found in tombs of
  the XIIth Dynasty; some groups are so written cursively in early
  medical papyri, and certain religious inscriptions in the royal tombs
  of the XIXth and XXth Dynasties are in secret writing. Fanciful
  writing abounds on the temples of the Ptolemaic and Roman periods.


  PALAEOGRAPHY

  _Hieroglyphic._--The main division is into monumental or epigraphic
  hieroglyphs and written hieroglyphs. The former may be rendered by the
  sculptor or the painter in stone, on wood, &c., with great delicacy of
  detail, or may be simply sunk or painted in outline. When finely
  rendered they are of great value to the student investigating the
  origins of their values. No other system of writing bears upon its
  face so clearly the history of its development as the Egyptian; yet
  even in this a vast amount of work is still required to detect and
  disentangle the details. Monumental hieroglyphic did not cease till
  the 3rd century A.D. (Temple of Esna). The written hieroglyphs, formed
  by the scribe with the reed pen on papyrus, leather, wooden tablets,
  &c., have their outlines more or less abbreviated, producing
  eventually the cursive scripts hieratic and demotic. The written
  hieroglyphs were employed at all periods, especially for religious
  texts.

  _Hieratic._--A kind of cursive hieroglyphic or hieratic writing is
  found even in the Ist Dynasty. In the Middle Kingdom it is well
  characterized, and in its most cursive form seems hardly to retain
  any definable trace of the original hieroglyphic pictures. The style
  varies much at different periods.

    +------------+-------------+-----------------+-----------+----------+-----------------+
    |    Sign.   | Description.|      Name.      | Word-sign | Phonetic |  Determinative  |
    |            |             |                 |   Value.  |  Value.  |      Value.     |
    +------------+-------------+-----------------+-----------+----------+-----------------+
    | [HRG: Xrd] | child       |   hrd (khrod)   |           |          | youth           |
    |            |             |                 |           |          |                 |
    | [HRG: Hr]  | face        |     hr (hor)    |    hr     |   [hr]   |                 |
    |            |             |                 |           |          |                 |
    | [HRG: ir]  | eye         |  ir.t (yori.t)  |    ir     |    ir    | see, &c.        |
    |            |             |                 |           |          |                 |
    | [HRG: r]   | mouth       |      r (ro)     |    r      |    r     |                 |
    |            |             |                 |           |          |                 |
    | [HRG: a]   | forearm     |      '('ei)     |    '      |    '     | [action of hand |
    |            |             |                 |           |          |    or arm]      |
    |            |             |                 |           |          |                 |
    | [HRG: D40] | arm with    | nht "be strong" |    nht    |          | violent action  |
    |            |   stick     |                 |           |          |                 |
    |            |             |                 |           |          |                 |
    | [HRG: A24] | man with    | nht "be strong" |    nht    |          | violent action  |
    |            |   stick     |                 |           |          |                 |
    |            |             |                 |           |          |                 |
    | [HRG: zmA] | lungs and   |        sm;      |    sm;    |          |                 |
    |            |   windpipe  |                 |           |          |                 |
    |            |             |                 |           |          |                 |
    | [HRG: ib]  | heart       |        ib       |           |          | heart           |
    |            |             |                 |           |          |                 |
    | [HRG: nfr] | heart and   |        ?        |    nfr    |          |                 |
    |            |   windpipe  |                 |           |          |                 |
    |            |             |                 |           |          |                 |
    | [HRG: wr]  | sparrow     |        ?        |    sr     |          | evil, worthless-|
    |            |             |                 |           |          |  ness, smallness|
    |            |             |                 |           |          |                 |
    | [HRG: zA]  | widgeon     |       s;.t      |    s;     |    s;    |                 |
    |            |             |                 |           |          |                 |
    | [HRG: in]  | bolti-fish  |       in.t      |    in     |    in    |                 |
    |            |             |                 |           |          |                 |
    | [HRG: Hw]  | tusk        | (1) ibh "tooth" |    bh     |    bh    | bite, &c.       |
    |            |             | (2) hw "taste"  |    hw     |          |                 |
    |            |             |                 |           |          |                 |
    | [HRG: xt]  | cut branch  |        ht       |    ht     |   [ht]   | wood, tree      |
    |            |             |                 |           |          |                 |
    | [HRG: zp]  | threshing-  |       sp.t      |    sp     |          |                 |
    |            |   floor     |                 |           |          |                 |
    |            |             |                 |           |          |                 |
    | [HRG: hrw] | sun         | (1) r' "sun"    |           |          | (1) sun         |
    |            |             | (2) hrw "day"   |           |          | (2) division of |
    |            |             |                 |           |          |     time        |
    |            |             |                 |           |          |                 |
    | [HRG: pr]  | chamber,    |        pr       |    pr     |          |                 |
    |            |   house     |                 |           |          |                 |
    |            |             |                 |           |          |                 |
    | [HRG: N17] | flat land   |         t'      |    t'     |    t'    | boundless hori- |
    |            |             |                 |           |          |  zon, eternity  |
    |            |             |                 |           |          |                 |
    | [HRG: Hz]  | libation    |       hs.t      |    hs     |    hs    |                 |
    |            |   vase      |                 |           |          |                 |
    |            |             |                 |           |          |                 |
    | [HRG: wD]  | cord on     |        wz       |    wz     |    wz    |                 |
    |            |   stick     |                 |           |          |                 |
    |            |             |                 |           |          |                 |
    | [HRG: nb]  | basket      |       nb.t      |    nb     |          |                 |
    |            |             |                 |           |          |                 |
    | [HRG: k]   | looped      |        ?        |    k      |    k     |                 |
    |            |   basket    |                 |           |          |                 |
    |            |             |                 |           |          |                 |
    | [HRG: mA]  | sickle      |        ?        |    m'     |    m'    |                 |
    |            |             |                 |           |          |                 |
    | [HRG: U7]  | composite   |      [mr?]      |    mr     |    mr    | tillage         |
    |            |   hoe       |                 |           |          |                 |
    |            |             |                 |           |          |                 |
    | [HRG: U29] | fire-drill  |     z'.t(?)     |    z'     |    z'    |                 |
    |            |             |                 |           |          |                 |
    | [HRG: Sms] | attendant's | sms "follow"    |    sms    |          |                 |
    |            |   equipment |                 |           |          |                 |
    |            |             |                 |           |          |                 |
    | [HRG: T30] | knife       |        ds       |    ds     |          | cut, prick, cut-|
    |            |             |                 |           |          | ting instrument |
    +------------+-------------+-----------------+-----------+----------+-----------------+

  _Demotic._--Widely varying degrees of cursiveness are at all periods
  observable in hieratic; but, about the XXVIth Dynasty, which
  inaugurated a great commercial era, there was something like a
  definite parting between the uncial hieratic and the most cursive form
  afterwards known as demotic. The employment of hieratic was
  thenceforth almost confined to the copying of religious and other
  traditional texts on papyrus, while demotic was used not only for all
  business but also for writing literary and even religious texts in the
  popular language. By the time of the XXVth Dynasty the cursive of the
  conservative Thebais had become very obscure. A better form from Lower
  Egypt drove this out completely in the time of Amasis II. and is the
  true demotic. Before the Macedonian conquest the cursive ligatures of
  the old demotic gave birth to new symbols which were carefully and
  distinctly formed, and a little later an epigraphic variety was
  engraved on stone, as in the case of the Rosetta stone itself. One of
  the most characteristic distinctions of later demotic is the
  minuteness of the writing.

  Hieroglyphic is normally written from right to left, the signs facing
  to the commencement of the line; hieratic and demotic follow the same
  direction. But monumental hieroglyphic may also be written from left
  to right, and is constantly so arranged for purposes of symmetry, e.g.
  the inscriptions on the two jambs of a door are frequently turned in
  opposite directions; the same is frequently done with the short
  inscriptions scattered over a scene amongst the figures, in order to
  distinguish one label from another.

  In modern founts of type, the hieroglyphic signs are made to run from
  left to right, in order to facilitate the setting where European text
  is mixed with the Egyptian. The table on next page shows them in their
  more correct position, in order to display more clearly their relation
  to the hieratic and demotic equivalents.

  Clement of Alexandria states that in the Egyptian schools the pupils
  were first taught the "epistolographic" style of writing (i.e.
  demotic), secondly the "hieratic" employed by the sacred scribes, and
  finally the "hieroglyphic" (_Strom._ v. 657). It is doubtful whether
  they classified the signs of the huge hieroglyphic syllabary with any
  strictness. The only native work on the writing that has come to light
  as yet is a fragmentary papyrus of Roman date which has a table in
  parallel columns of hieroglyphic signs, with their hieratic
  equivalents and words written in hieratic describing them or giving
  their values or meanings. The list appears to have comprised about 460
  signs, including most of those that occur commonly in hieratic. They
  are to some extent classified. The bee [HRGs: bit] heads the list as a
  royal sign, and is followed by figures of nobles and other human
  figures in various attitudes, more or less grouped among themselves,
  animals, reptiles and fishes, scorpion, animals again, twenty-four
  alphabetic characters, parts of the human body carefully arranged from
  [HRGs: tp] to [HRGs: D54], thirty-two in number, parts of animals,
  celestial signs, terrestrial signs, vases. The arrangement down to
  this point is far from strict, and beyond it is almost impossible to
  describe concisely, though there is still a rough grouping of
  characters according to resemblance of form, nature or meaning. It is
  a curious fact that not a single bird is visible on the fragments, and
  the trees and plants, which might easily have been collected in a
  compact and well-defined section, are widely scattered. Why the
  alphabetic characters are introduced where they are is a puzzle; the
  order of these is:--[HRG Z91] [HRGs: r-H-kA-W] (?) [HRGs: wA] (?)
  [HRGs: s] (?) [HRGs: z-Db] (?) [HRGs: Z91-b-Z91-S-SA] (?) [HRGs: k]
  (?) [HRGs: xA-X-U29-p-a-g-x-t] (?) [HRGs: i-q].

  Three others, [HRGs: XA-D] and [HRGs: f], had already occurred amongst
  the fish and reptiles. There seems to be no logical aim in this
  arrangement of the alphabetic characters and the series is incomplete.
  Very probably the Egyptians never constructed a really systematic list
  of hieroglyphs. In modern lists the signs are classified according to
  the nature of the objects they depict, as human figures, plants,
  vessels, instruments, &c. Horapollon's _Hieroglyphica_ may be cited as
  a native work, but its author, if really an Egyptian, had no knowledge
  of good writing. His production consists of two elaborate
  complementary lists: the one describing sign-pictures and giving their
  meanings, the other cataloguing ideas in order to show how they could
  be expressed in hieroglyphic. Each seems to us to be made up of
  curious but perverted reminiscences eked out by invention; but they
  might some day prove to represent more truly the usages of mystics and
  magicians in designing amulets, &c., at a time approaching the middle
  ages.

  [Illustration: PLATE I. EARLIEST EGYPTIAN ART

     1. TATOOED FEMALE, LIMESTONE SLAG.
     2. 3. HEADS ON IVORY TUSKS.
     4. 5. ANIMALS ON BONE COMBS.
     6. IVORY HAWK.
     7. LIMESTONE LION.
     8. IVORY DOG AND GAZELLE.
     9. IVORY HANDLE OF KNIFE.
    10. 11. WHITE ON RED VASES; MEN AND ANIMALS.
    12. SHIP ON A VASE.
    13. SHIP ON A WALL PAINTING.
    14. IVORY KING.
    15. 16. ARCHAIC KING'S HEAD, STUDY IN LIMESTONE.
    17. HEAD OF KHASEKHEM.]

  [Illustration: PLATE II. EARLY EGYPTIAN ART.

    18. LIMESTONE RELIEF.
    19. ANIMALS ON SLATE PALETTE._Photo, Mansell._
    20. CONQUEROR AS A BULL.
    21. GAZELLES AND PALM, SLATE.
    22. ANIMALS, SLATE.
    23. KING NARMER, SLATE PALETTE.
    24. IVORY TUSK, WITH ANIMALS.
    25. IVORY WAND, WITH ANIMALS.
    26. WOODEN PANELS OF HESI.
    27. RAHOTP AND NEFERT.
    28. WOODEN FIGURE.]

    +---------------------+----------+-----------+---------------+---------------------+
    |                     | Demotic. | Hieratic. | Hieroglyphic. |                     |                 |
    +---------------------+----------+-----------+---------------+---------------------+
    | _ent_, "who"        |  [SGN]   |   [SGN]   |     [HRG]     |       _nty_         |
    |                     |          |           |               |                     |
    | _Perso_ ("Pharaoh") |  [SGN]   |   [SGN]   |     [HRG]     | _Per<o <nh wz, snb_ |
    |                     |          |           |               |                     |
    | _yot_, "father"     |  [SGN]   |   [SGN]   |     [HRG]     |       _itf_         |
    |                     |          |           |               |                     |
    | _'onkh_, "live"     |  [SGN]   |   [SGN]   |     [HRG]     |       _<nh_         |
    |                     |          |           |               |                     |
    | _ekh_, "know"       |  [SGN]   |   [SGN]   |     [HRG]     |       _rh_          |
    |                     |          |           |               |                     |
    | _ahe_, "stand"      |  [SGN]   |   [SGN]   |     [HRG]     |       _<h<_         |
    |                     |          |           |               |                     |
    | _eine_, "carry"     |  [SGN]   |   [SGN]   |     [HRG]     |       _in_          |
    |                     |          |           |               |                     |
    | _ms_ (phon.)        |  [SGN]   |   [SGN]   |     [HRG]     |       _ms_          |
    |                     |          |           |               |                     |
    | _s_ (alph.)         |  [SGN]   |   [SGN]   |     [HRG]     |       _s_           |
    |                     |          |           |               |                     |
    | _s_ (alph.)         |  [SGN]   |   [SGN]   |     [HRG]     |      _[/s]_         |
    |                     |          |           |               |                     |
    | _m_ (alph.)         |  [SGN]   |   [SGN]   |     [HRG]     |       _m_           |
    |                     |          |           |               |                     |
    | _n_ (alph.)         |  [SGN]   |   [SGN]   |     [HRG]     |       _n_           |
    +---------------------+----------+-----------+---------------+---------------------+

  The early scribe's outfit, often carried slung over his shoulder, is
  seen in the hieroglyph [HRG]. It consisted of frayed reed pens or
  brushes, a small pot of water, and a palette with two circular
  cavities in which black and red ink were placed, made of finely
  powdered colour solidified with gum. In business and literary
  documents red ink was used for contrast, especially in headings; in
  demotic, however, it is very rarely seen. The pen became finer in
  course of time, enabling the scribe to write very small. The split
  reed of the Greek penman was occasionally adopted by the late demotic
  scribes.

  Egypt had long been bilingual when, in papyri of the 2nd century A.D.,
  we begin to find transcripts of the Egyptian language into Greek
  letters, the latter reinforced by a few signs borrowed from the
  demotic alphabet: so written we have a magical text and a horoscope,
  probably made by foreigners or for their use. The infinite superiority
  of the Greek alphabet with its full notation of vowels was readily
  seen, but piety and custom as yet barred the way to its full adoption.
  The triumph of Christianity banished the old system once and for all;
  even at the beginning of the 4th century the native Egyptian script
  scarcely survived north of the Nubian frontier at Philae; a little
  later it finally expired. The following eight signs, however, had been
  taken over from demotic by the Copts:

    [Coptic: shai] = _s_, from [HRG] _si_, dem. [sign], [SGN].

    [Coptic: horee] = _h_, probably from [HRG] _hw_ (or [HRG] _hi_),
      dem. [sign].

    [Coptic: khai] (Boh.) = _h_, from [HRG] _hi_, dem. [SGN].

    [Coptic: eksee] (Akhm.) = _h_, from [HRG], [HRG] _hy_, _ht_, dem.
      [sign].

    [Coptic: fai] = _f_, from [HRG] _f_, dem. [SGN].

    [Coptic: cheema] = _c_ from [HRG] _k_ (or [HRG] _h_), dem.
      [sign], [sign].

    [Coptic: janja] = _g_, from [HRG] _di_ (or [HRG] _ti_), dem.
      [sign], [sign].

    [Coptic: tee] = _ti_, from [HRG] _dy.t_, dem. [SGN].

  For origins of hieroglyphs, see Petrie's _Medum_ (1892); F. Ll.
  Griffith, _A Collection of Hieroglyphs_ (1898); N. de G. Davies, _The
  Mastaba of Ptahhetep and Akhethetep_, pt. i. (1900); M. A. Murray,
  _Saqqara Mastabas_ (London, 1905); also Petrie and Griffith, _Two
  Hieroglyphic Papyri from Tanis_ (London, 1889) (native sign-list); G.
  Moller, _Hieratische Palaographie_ (Leipzig, 1909); Griffith,
  _Catalogue of Demotic Papyri in the J. Rylands Collection_
  (Manchester, 1909).     (F. Ll. G.)

E. _Art and Archaeology._--In the following sections a general history
of the characteristics of Ancient Egyptian art is first given, showing
the variation of periods and essentials of style; and this is followed
by an account of the use made of material products, of the tools and
instruments employed, and of the monuments. For further details see also
the separate topographical headings (for excavations, &c.), and the
general articles on the various arts and art-materials (for references
to Egypt); also PYRAMIDS; MUMMY, &c.


_General Characteristics._

The wide and complex subject of Egyptian art will be treated here in six
periods: Prehistoric, Early Kings, Pyramid Kings, XIIth Dynasty,
XVIIIth-XXth Dynasties, XXVIth Dynasty and later. In each age will be
considered the (A) statuary, (B) reliefs, (C) painting.

_Prehistoric._--The earliest civilized population of Egypt was highly
skilled in mechanical accuracy and regularity, but had little sense of
organic forms. They kept the unfinished treatment of the limbs and
extremities which is so characteristic of most barbaric art; and the
action was more considered than the form.

(A) In the round there are in the earlier graves female figures of two
races, the Bushman type and European, both probably representing
servants or slaves. These have the legs always united, sloping to a
point without feet (Plate I. fig. 1); the arms are only stumps. The face
has a beaky nose and some indication of eyes. Upon the surface is
colouring; red for the Bushman, with black whisker though female; white
for the European type, with black tattoo patterns. Other female figures
are modelled in a paste, upon a stick, and the black hair is sometimes
made separately to fit on as a wig over the red head, showing that wigs
were then used. Male figures are generally only heads in the earlier
times. Tusks with carved heads (Plate I. figs. 2, 3) are the earliest,
beginning at S.D. (sequence date) 33;[16] heads on the top of combs are
found, from S.D. 42 to the close of such combs in the fifties. All of
these heads show a high forehead and a pointed beard; and such
expression as may be discovered is grave but not savage. In later times
whole figures of ivory, stone and clay are found, with the legs united,
and the arms usually joined to the body. A favourite way of indicating
the eyes was by drilling two holes and inserting a white shell bead in
each. The figures of animals (Plate I. figs. 4, 5) are quite as rude as
the human figures: they only summarily indicate the mature, and often
hardly express the genus. They are most usual on combs and pins; but
sacred animals are also found. The lion is the most usual (Plate I. fig.
7), but the legs are roughly marked, if at all: the leonine air is
given, but the attitude is more distinct than the form. The hawk (Plate
I. fig. 6) is modelled in block without any legs. The slate palettes in
the form of animals are even more summary, and continually degraded
until they lost all trace of their origin. There are also curious
figures of animals chipped in flint, which show some character, but no
detail.

(B) Reliefs with animal figures belong to the later part of the
prehistoric age. The relief is low, and the form hatched across with
lines (Plate I. fig. 8), a style copied from drawing. There is more
animation than in the round figures. At the close of this age the
fashion of long processions of animals appears (Plate I. fig. 9); some
character is shown in these, but no sense of action.

(C) Drawing is found from the earliest civilization, done in white slip
on red vases. Figures of men are very rare (Plate I. fig. 10); they have
the body triangular, the waist being very narrow; the legs are two lines
linked by a zigzag, as if to express that they move to and fro. The
usual figures are goats and hippopotami; always having the body covered
with cross lines to express the connexion of the outlines (Plate I. fig.
11). This technique is in every way closely akin to that of the modern
Kabyle. An entirely different mode is common at a later time when
designs were painted in thin red colour on a light brown ware. The
subjects of the earlier of these examples are imitations of cordage, of
marbling, and of basket-work; later there are rows of men and animals,
and ships (Plate I. figs. 12, 13), with various minor signs. The figures
are never cross-hatched as in earlier drawing, but always filled in
altogether. The fact that the ships have oars and not sails makes it
probable that they were rather for the sea than for Nile traffic, and a
starfish among the motives on such pottery also points to the sea
connexion. The ulterior meaning of the decoration is probably religious
and funereal, but the objects which are figured must have been familiar.

  For this whole period see Jean Capart, _Debuts de l'art en Egypte_
  (1904; trans. _Primitive Art in Ancient Egypt_).

_The Early Kings._--The dynastic race wrought an entire transformation
in the art of Egypt; in place of the clumsy and undetailed
representations, there suddenly appears highly artistic work, full of
character, action and anatomical detail.

(A) The earliest statues of this age are the colossi of the god Min from
Coptos; that they belong to the artistic race is evident from the
spirited reliefs upon them (see below, B), but the figures were very
rude, the legs and arms being joined all in the mass. The main example
of this early art is a limestone head of a king (Plate I. figs. 15, 16),
which is a direct study from life, to serve as a model. For the accuracy
of the facial curves, and the grasp of character and type, it is equal
to any later work; and in its entire absence of conventions and its pure
naturalism there is no later sculpture so good: as Prof. A. Michaelis
says, "it renders the race type with astounding keenness, and shows an
excellent power of observation in the exact representation of the eyes."
By the portrait, it is probably of King Narmer or some king related to
him, that is, about the beginning of the Ist Dynasty. The ivory
statuette of an aged king (Plate I. fig. 14) is probably slightly later.
It shows the same subtle sense of character, and is unsurpassed in its
reality. Many ivory figures of men, women and animals are known from
Nekhen (Hieraconpolis) and Abydos; and they all show the same school of
work, simple, dignified, observant, and with an air which places them on
a higher plane of truthfulness and precision than later art. There is
none of the mannerism of a long tradition, but a nobility pervades them
which has no self-consciousness. The lower class of work of this age is
shown by great numbers of glazed pottery figures both human and animal.
Later in the IInd Dynasty, the head of Khasekhem (Plate I. fig. 17)
shows the beginning of convention, but yet has a delicacy about the
mouth which surpasses later works.

(B) Reliefs abound at this age, and include the most important evidences
of the development of the art. The earliest examples are those of
animals (Plate II. fig. 18) and shells on the colossi of Coptos. They
show a keen sense of form, and the stag's head, which is probably the
earliest, already bears an artistic feeling wholly different to that of
any of the prehistoric works (P.K. iii. iv.). The carvings on slate
palettes appear to begin with work crudely accurate and forceful, the
heavy limbs being ridged with tendons and muscles (Plate II. fig. 19),
but there is more proportion, with the same massive strength (Plate II.
fig. 20). Soon after, with a leap, the artist produced the first pure
work of art that is known (Plate II. fig. 21), a design for its own sake
without the tie of symbolism or history. The group of two long-necked
gazelles facing a palm tree is of extraordinary refinement, and shows
the artistic consciousness in every part; the symmetric rendering of the
palm tree, reduced to fit the scale of the animals, the dainty grace of
the smooth gazelles contrasted with the rugged stem, the delicacy of the
long flowing curves and the fine indications of the joints, all show a
sense of design which has rarely been equalled in the ceaseless
repetitions of the tree and supporters motive during every age since.
Passing the various palettes with hunting scenes and animals (Plate II.
fig. 22), we come to the great historical carving of King Narmer (Plate
II. fig. 23). Here the anatomy has reached its limits for such work; the
precision of the muscles on the inner and outer sides of the leg, of the
uniform grip in the left arm, and the tense muscle upholding the right
arm, prove that the artist knew that part of his work perfectly. The
large ceremonial mace-heads recording the _Sed_ festivals of the king
Narmer and another, belong also to this school; but owing to their
smaller size they have not such artistic detail. With them were found
many reliefs in ivory, on tusks, wands and cylinders. The main motive in
these is a long procession of animals (Plate II. figs. 24, 25) often
grotesquely crowded; but there is much observation shown and the figures
are expressive. No drawing of this age has survived.

_The Pyramid Kings._--A different ideal appears in the pyramid times; in
place of the naturalism of the earlier work there is more regularity,
some convention, and the sense of a school in the style. The prevailing
feeling is a noble spaciousness both in scale and in form, an equanimity
based upon knowledge and character, a grandeur of conception expressed
by severely simple execution. There is nothing superfluous, nothing
common, nothing trivial. The smallest as well as the largest work seems
complete, inevitable, immutable, without limitations of time, or labour
or thought.

(A) The statuette of Khufu or Cheops (Plate III. fig. 29) though only a
minute figure in ivory, shows the character of immense energy and will;
the face is an astonishing portrait to be expressed in a quarter of an
inch. The life-size statue of Khafre or Chephren (Plate III. fig. 30) is
a majestic work, serene and powerful; carved in hard diorite, yet
unhesitating in execution. The muscular detail is full, but yet kept in
harmony with the massive style of the figure. The private persons have
entirely different treatment according to the character of their
position. In place of the awful dignity of the kings there is the placid
high-bred Princess Nofri (Plate II. fig. 27, Plate III. fig. 31), the
calm conscientious dignitary Hemset (Plate III. fig. 32), the bustling,
active, middle-class official, Ka-aper (Plate II. fig. 28, Plate III.
fig. 33), and the kneeling figure of a servitor. The differences of
character are very skilfully rendered in all the sculpture of this age.
The whole figures are stiff in the earlier time, as the figure of Nes;
then square and massive, but true in form, as Rahotp and Nofri (Plate
II. fig. 27); and afterwards easier and less monumental, as Ka-aper
(Plate II. fig. 28). The skill in beaten copper work is shown by the
portrait of the Prince Mer-en-ra (Plate III. fig. 35).

(B) The reliefs are quite equal to the statuary. The wooden panels of
Hesi (Plate II. fig. 26) show the archaic style of great detail, with a
bold, stark vigour of attitude. Later work is abundant in the
tomb-sculptures of this age, with a fulness of variety and detail which
makes them the most interesting of all branches of the art. The general
effect cannot be judged without a large scene, but the figures of two
men and an ox (Plate III. fig. 37) show the freshness and vigour of the
style, which is even higher than this in some examples. The clear, noble
spacing of the surface work is well shown by a group of offerings and
inscribed titles (Plate III. fig. 36).

[Illustration: PLATE III. PYRAMID PERIOD.

  29. IVORY OF CHEOPS.
  30. DIORITE OF CHEPHREN.
  31. LIMESTONE OF NEFERT.
  32. HEMSET: LIMESTONE.
  33. WOOD (see Fig. 28).
  34. SCRIBE: LIMESTONE.
  35. MER-EN-RA: COPPER.
  36. LIMESTONE SLAB OF KHENT-ER-KA.
  37. THE OXHERDS: LIMESTONE. Photo, Bonfils
  38. GRANITE SPHINX.
  39. AMENEMHE III.
  40. 41. SENWOSRI I.: LIMESTONE RELIEFS: HOTEPA.]

[Illustration: PLATE IV. 1400 B. C. TO ROMAN.

  42. AMENOPHIS III.: GRANITE. Photo, Manseil.
  43. QUEEN TAIA: LIMESTONE.
  44. RAMESES II.: GRANITE. Photo, Anderson.
  45. NEGRESS: EBONY.
  46. QUEEN HATSHEPSUT.
  47. KHA-EM-HAT.
  48. SETI I.
  49. PRINCESSES: FRESCO.
  50. FOUR RACES OF MAN.
  51. TUMBLER.
  52. SCENE IN XXVI. DYNASTY.
  53. PTOLEMAIC RELIEF.
  54. MODELLED HEAD AND SKULL.]

(C) Flat drawings of this age are rare. Some fine examples, such as the
geese from Medum, show that such work kept pace with the reliefs; but
most of the fresco-work has perished, and there are few instances of
line drawing.

_The XIIth Dynasty._--This age overlaps the previous in its style. The
end of the last age was in the very degraded tomb work of the early XIth
Dynasty.

(A) The new style begins with the royal statues, which it seems we must
attribute to the foreign kings from whom the XIIth Dynasty was
descended. These statues were later appropriated by the Hyksos, and so
came to be called by their name, which is a misnomer. The type of face
(Plate III. fig. 38) is thick-featured, full of force, with powerful
masses of facial muscle covering the skull. The style is very vigorous
and impassioned, without any trace of relenting towards conventional
work. The surfaces are not in the least subdued by a general breadth of
style, as in the last period; but, on the contrary, revel in the full
detail of variety. There is perhaps no age where nature is so little
controlled by convention in either the living character or its
sculptured expression. One of these kings might well be the founder of
the IXth Dynasty, "Achthoes (Kheti), who did much injury to all the
inhabitants," "Khuther Taurus the tyrant"; the expression is that of a
Chlodwig or an Alboin. From this type evidently descended the milder and
more civilized kings of the XIIth Dynasty, the resemblance being so
strong that the fierce figures have even been identified with that
dynasty by some. A good example is that of the statue of Amenemhat
(Amenemhe) III. (Plate III. fig. 39). The style of the XIIth Dynasty may
be summed up as clean, highly-finished work, strong in facial detail;
but with neither the grandeur of the IVth nor the vivacity of the
XVIIIth Dynasty. This passed in the XIIIth Dynasty into a graceful but
weak manner, as in the statues of Sebkhotp (Sebek-hotep) III. and
Neferhotp.

(B) The relief work shows most clearly the rise of the new style. In the
middle of the XIth Dynasty an entirely fresh treatment appears; the Old
Kingdom work had died out in very bad sunk-reliefs, the fresh style
(Plate III. fig. 41) was a low relief with sharp edges above the field.
It was full of delicate variety in the surfaces, and of elaborated
close-packed lines of hair and ornaments. By the time of the early XIIth
Dynasty, this reached a perfection of refinement in the detail of facial
curves, with an ostentatiously low relief (P.K. ix. i.), rather on the
lines of modern French work; but the whole with clean, firm outlines,
severely restrained in the expression, and without any trace of emotion.
It is the work of a school, in which high training took the place of the
reliance on nature. Sunk relief was also well used, as by Senusert
(Senwosri) I. (Plate III. fig. 40). There was a steady decline during
the XIIth Dynasty and onward, but the same tone was followed.

(C) In some tombs painting only was used, and it followed the general
character of the relief treatment, being more rigid, detailed, and
scholastic than the older style.

_The XVIIIth-XXth Dynasties._--The obvious, not to say superficial,
character of this age has rendered it one of the most popular in
Egyptian art. The older breadth, fulness, and vigour have vanished,
those great qualities which stamp the immortal works of early times. The
difference is much like that between the Parthenon and the Niobids, or
between Jacopo Avanzi and Caracci. In this change is the whole
difference between the art of character and the art of emotion; and
though the emotional side is the more popular, as needing less thought
to understand it, yet the unfailing canon is that in every age and land
the true quality of art is proportionate to the expression of character
as apart from transient emotion. This may perhaps apply to other arts as
well as to sculpture and painting. If we accept frankly the emotional
nature of this age, we may admire its graceful outlines, its vivacious
manner, its romantic style, with an occasional sauciness which is
amusing and attractive. It revelled in rich detail, and close masses of
lines, as in wigs and ribbed dresses. It sported with a seductive Syrian
type of face, especially under Amenophis (Amenhotep) III.; but we find
the anatomy giving way to mere smoothness of surface, for the sake of
contrast with the masses of detail. The romantic element increased,
solemn funereal statues show husband and wife hand in hand; and it
culminated under Akhenaton, who is seen kissing his wife in the chariot,
or dancing her on his knee. An overwhelming naturalism swamped the older
reserves of Egyptian art, and the expression of the postures, actions
and familiarities of daily life, or the instantaneous attitudes of
animals, became the _dernier cri_ of fashion. It was all charming and
wonderful, but it was the end,--nothing could come after it. The XIXth
Dynasty, at its best under Seti I., could only excel in high finish of
smoothness and graceful curves; life, character, meaning, had vanished.
And soon after, under Rameses II., mere mechanical copying, hard
lifeless routine of stone-cutting, regardless of truth and of nature,
dominated the whole.

(A) In sculpture there is a certain baldness of style at first, as in
the Amenophis I. at Turin or Mutnefert at Cairo. More fulness and
richness of character succeeded, as in Tahutmes (Tethmosis) III. and
Amenophis III. (Plate IV. fig. 42, British Museum). And the feeling of
the age finds greater scope in private statues, many of which have a
personal fascination about them, as in the seated figures at Cairo and
Florence, and the freer work in wood, of which the ebony negress (Plate
IV. fig. 45) is the best example. The burst of naturalism under
Akhenaton resulted in some marvellous portraiture, of which the fragment
of a queen's head (Plate IV. fig. 43) is perhaps the most brilliant
instance; the fidelity in the delicate curves of the nose and around the
mouth is enhanced by the touch of artistic convention in the facing of
the lips. The only work of ability in the XIXth Dynasty is the black
granite figure (Plate IV. fig. 44) of Rameses II. at Turin. The ordinary
statuary of his reign is painfully stiff and poor, and there is no later
work in the period worth notice.

(B) The reliefs of the early XVIIIth Dynasty are closely like the scenes
of the tombs in the pyramid age, but soon carving was superseded by the
cheaper painting, and but few tombs in relief are known. The temples
were the principal places for reliefs; and they steadily deteriorate
from the first great example, Deir el Bahri (see ARCHITECTURE:
_Egyptian_), down to the late Ramessides. The portraiture is strong and
clear-cut (Plate IV. fig. 46), but somewhat mechanical and without
muscular detail: the sameness is rather more than is probable. There is
a good deal of repetition for mere effect, even in the fine work of
Kha-em-hat (Plate IV. fig. 47), under Amenophis III. That the artists
were conscious of their poverty of thought is shown by some precise
imitations of the style of early monuments. On reaching the age of
Akhenaton, the peculiar style of that school is obvious in every relief;
the older conventions were deserted, and, for good or for bad, a new
start from nature was attempted. After that the smooth finish of the
Seti reliefs at Abydos (Plate IV. fig. 48) shows no life or observation;
and only occasionally the artist triumphed over the stone-worker, as in
the portrait of Bantanta at Memphis, which is precisely like another
head of her found in Sinai. The innumerable reliefs of the XIXth-XXth
Dynasty temples are only of historic interest, and are all despicable in
comparison with earlier works.

(C) Painting was the art most congenial to this age; the lightness of
touch, abundance of incident, and even comedy, of the scenes are
familiar in the frescoes in the British Museum. And under Akhenaton this
was pervaded by an entire naturalism of posture, as seen in the two
little princesses (Plate IV. fig. 49). Drawing continued to be the
strong point of the art after the more laborious sculpture had lost all
vitality. The tomb of Seti shows exquisitely firm line drawing; and the
heads of four races (Plate IV. fig. 50), Western, Syrian, and two Negro,
here show the unfailing line-work which has never been matched in later
times. The artist habitually drew the long lines of whole limbs without
a single hesitation or revoke; and the drawing of a tumbling girl (Plate
IV. fig. 51) shows how credibly such contortions could be represented.
The comic papyri of the XXth Dynasty have also a very strong sense of
character, even through coarse drawing and some childish combinations.

The subsequent centuries show continuous decline, and in whatever branch
we compare the work, we see that each dynasty was poorer than that which
preceded it. The XXVIth Dynasty is often looked on as a renaissance; but
when we compare similar work we see that it was poorer than the XXIInd,
as that was poorer than the XIXth. The alabaster statue of Amenardus of
the XXVth is faulty in pose, and perfunctory in modelling; the
resemblance between this and the head of her nephew Tirhaka is perhaps
the best evidence of truthful work. After this there was a strong
archaistic fashion, much like that under Hadrian; in both cases it may
have arrested decay, but it did not lift the art up again. The work of
this age can always be detected by the faulty jointing (Plate IV. fig.
52) and muscular treatment. The elements are right enough, but there was
not the vital sense to combine them properly. Hence the monstrous
protuberances (Plate IV. fig. 53) on relief figures of this age; a fault
which the Greek fell into in his decline, as shown in the Farnese
Hercules.

Portraiture, with its limited demand on imagination and lack of ideals,
was the form of art which flourished latest. The Saitic heads in basalt
show a school of close observation, with fair power of rendering the
personal character; and even in Roman times there still were provincial
artists who could model a face very truthfully, as is shown in one case
in which the stucco head (Plate IV. fig. 54) from a coffin is here
superposed on the view of the actual skull to show the accuracy of the
work. The school of portrait-painting belongs entirely to Greek art, and
is therefore not touched upon here. (See Edgar, _Catalogue of
Graeco-Egyptian Coffins_, 48 plates, for this subject.)

Lastly we must recognize the different schools of Egyptian sculpture
which are as distinct as those of recent painting. The black-granite
school in every age is the finest; its seat we do not know, but its
vitality and finish always exceed those of contemporary works. The
limestone school was probably the next best, to judge from the reliefs,
but hardly any statues of this school have survived; it probably was
seated at Memphis. The quartzite work from Jebel Ahmar near Cairo stands
next, as often very fine design is found in this hard material. The red
granite school of Assuan comes lower, the work being usually clumsy and
with unfinished corners and details. And the lowest of all was the
sandstone school of Silsila, which is always the worst. Broadly
speaking, the Lower Egyptian was much better than the Upper Egyptian; a
conclusion also evident in the art of the tombs done on the spot. But
the secret of the black granite school, and its excellence, is the main
problem unsolved in the history of the art.     (W. M. F. P.)


_Tools and Material Products._

_Tools_ (see Illustrations 1 to 111).--The history of tools is a very
large subject which needs to be studied for all countries; the various
details of form are too numerous to specify here, but the general
outline of tools used in Egypt may be briefly stated under _general_ and
_special_ types. The _general_ include tools for striking, slicing and
scraping; the _special_ tools are for fighting, hunting, agriculture,
building and thread-work.

_Striking Tools._--The wooden mallet of club form (1) was used in the
VIth and XIIth Dynasties; of the modern mason's form (2) in the XIIth
and XVIIIth. The stone mace head was a sharp-edged disk (3), in the
prehistoric from 31-40 sequence date; of the pear shape (4) from S.D.
42, which was actually in use till the IVth Dynasty, and represented
down to Roman time. The metal or stone hammer with a long handle was
unknown till Greek or Roman times; but, for beating out metal,
hemispherical stones (5) were held in the hand, and swung at arm's
length overhead. Spherical hard stone hammers (6) were held in the hand
for dressing down granite. The axe was at the close of the prehistoric
age a square slab of copper (7) with one sharp edge; small projecting
tails then appeared at each end of the back (8), and increased until the
long tail for lashing on to the handle is more than half the length of
the axe in an iron one of Roman (?) age (13). Flint axes were made in
imitation of metal in the XIIth Dynasty (9). Battle-axes with rounded
outline started as merely a sharp edge of metal (10) inserted along a
stick (10, 11); they become semicircular (12) by the VIth Dynasty,
lengthen to double their width in the XIIth, and then thin out to a
waist in the middle by the XVIIIth Dynasty. Flint hoes (14) are common
down to the XIIth Dynasty. Small copper hoes (15) with a hollow socket
are probably of about the XXIInd Dynasty. Long iron picks (16), like
those of modern navvies, were made by Greeks in the XXVIth Dynasty.

_Slicing Tools._--The knife was originally a flint saw (17), having
minute teeth; it must have been used for cutting up animals, fresh or
dried, as the teeth break away on soft wood. The double-edged straight
flint knife dates from S.D. 32-45. The single-edged knife (18) is from
33-65. The flint knives of the time of Menes are finely curved (19),
with a handle-notch; by the end of the IInd Dynasty they were much
coarser (20) and almost straight in the back. In the XIth-XIIth Dynasty
they were quite straight in the back (21), and without any handle-notch.
The copper knives are all one-edged with straight back (22) down to the
XVIIIth Dynasty, when two-edged symmetrical knives (23) become usual.
Long thin one-edged knives of iron begin about 800 B.C. Various forms of
one-edged iron knives, straight (24) and curved (25), belong to Roman
times. A cutting-out knife, for slicing through textiles, began
double-edged (26) in the Ist Dynasty, and went through many single-edged
forms (27-29) until it died out in the XXth Dynasty (_Man_, 1901, 123).
A small knife hinged on a pointed backing of copper (31) seems to have
been made for hair curling and toilet purposes. Razors (30) are known of
the XIIth Dynasty, and became common in the XVIIIth. A curious blade of
copper (32), straight sided, and sharpened at both ends, belongs to the
close of the prehistoric age. Shears are only known of Roman age and
appear to have been an Italian invention: there is a type in Egypt with
one blade detachable, so that each can be sharpened apart. Chisels of
bronze began of very small size (33) at S.D. 38, and reached a full size
at the close of the prehistoric age. In historic times the chisels are
about 1 x 1/2, x 6 to 8 in. long (34). Small chisels set in wooden handles
are found (35) of the XIIth and XVIIIth Dynasties. Ferrules first appear
in the Assyrian iron of the 7th century B.C. The rise of stone work led
to great importance of heavy chisels (36) for trimming limestone and
Nubian sandstone; such chisels are usually round rods about 3/4 in. thick
and 6 in. long. The cutting edge was about 1/2 in. wide for flaking tools
(36), which were not kept sharp, and 1 in. wide for facing tools (37)
which had a good edge. In Greek times the iron chisels are shorter and
merge into wedges (39). The socketed or mortising chisel (38) is unknown
till the Italian bronze of the 8th century B.C., and the Naucratis iron
of the 6th century. Adzes begin in S.D. 56, as plain slips of copper
(40) 4 to 6 in. long, about 1 wide and 1/8th thick. The square end was
rounded in the early dynastic times, and went through a series of
changes down to the XIXth Dynasty. Adzes of iron are probably of Greek
times. A fine instance of a handle about 4 ft. long is represented in
the IIIrd Dynasty (P.M. XI.). The adze (41) was used not only for
wood-work but also for dressing limestone.

_Scraping Tools._--Flint scrapers are found from S.D. 40 and onward. The
rectangular scraper (42) began in S.D. 63, and continued into the IInd
Dynasty: the flake with rounded ends (43) was used from the Ist to the
IVth Dynasty (P. Ab. i. xiv., xv.). Round scrapers were also made (44).
Flint scrapers were used in dressing down limestone sculpture in the
IIIrd Dynasty. Rasps of conical form (45), made of a sheet of bronze
punched and coiled round, were common in the XVIIIth Dynasty, apparently
as personal objects, possibly used for rasping dried bread. In the
Assyrian iron tools of the 7th century B.C. the long straight rasp (46)
is exactly of the modern type. The saw is first found as a notched
bronze knife of the IIIrd Dynasty. Larger toothed saws (47) are often
represented in the IVth-VIth Dynasty, as used by carpenters. There are
no dated specimens till the Assyrian iron saws (48) of the 7th century
B.C. Drills were of flint (49) for hard material and bead-making, of
bronze for woodwork. In the Assyrian tools iron drills are of slightly
twisted scoop form (50), and of centre-bit type with two scraping edges
(51). In Roman times the modern V drill (52) is usual. The drill was
worked by a stock with a loose cap (53), rotated by a drill bow, in the
XIIth to Roman dynasties. The pump drill with cords twisted round it was
in Roman use. The bow drill (56) was used as a fire drill to rotate wood
(55) on wood (57); and the cap (54) for such use was of hard stone with
a highly polished hollow. The drill brace appears to have been used by
Assyrians in the 7th century B.C. Piercers of bronze tapering (58), to
enlarge holes in leather, &c., were common in all ages.

_Fighting Weapons._--The battle-axe has been described above with axes.
The flint dagger (59) is found from S.D. 40-56. A very finely made
copper dagger (60) with deep midrib is dated to between 55 and 60 S.D.
Copper daggers with parallel ribbing (61) down the middle are common in
the XIth-XIVth Dynasties; and in the XVIIIth-XXth Dynasties they are
often shown in scenes and on figures. The falchion with a curved blade
(62) belongs to the XVIIIth-XXth Dynasty. The rapier (63) or lengthened
dagger is rarely found, and is probably of prehistoric Greek origin. The
sword is of Greek and Roman age, always double-edged and of iron. The
spear is not commonly found in Egypt, until the Greek age, but it is
represented from the XIth Dynasty onward; it belonged to the Semitic
people (L.D. ii. 133). The bow was always of wood, in one piece in the
prehistoric and early times, also of two horns in the Ist Dynasty; but
the compound bow of horn is rarely found, only as an importation, in the
XVIIIth Dynasty. The arrow-heads of flint (64-66) and of bone (68-69)
were pointed, and also square-ended (67) for hunting (P.R.T. ii. vi.;
vii. A., 7; xxxiv.). The copper arrow-heads appear in the XIXth Dynasty,
of blade form with tang (70); the triangular form (72), and leaf form
with socket (71), are of the XXVIth Dynasty. Triangular iron arrows with
tang are of the same age. Tangs show that the shaft was a reed, sockets
show that it was of wood. Many early arrows (XIIth) have only hard wood
points of conical form. The sling is rarely shown in the XIXth-XXth
Dynasties; and the only known example is probably of the XXVIth.

_Hunting Weapons._--The forked lance of flint was at first wide with
slight hollow (73) from S.D. 32-43; then the hollow became a V notch
(74) in 38 S.D. and onward. The lance was fixed in a wooden shaft for
throwing, and held in by a check-cord from flying too far if it missed
the animal (P.N. LXXIII.). The harpoon for fishing was at first of bone
(75), and was imitated in copper (76, 77) from S.D. 36 onwards. The
boomerang or throw-stick (78) was used from the Ist to the XXIInd
Dynasty, and probably later. Fish-hooks of copper (79-82) are found from
the Ist Dynasty to Roman times. A trap for animals' legs, formed by
splints of palm stick radiating round a central hole, is figured in S.D.
60, and one was found of probably the XXth Dynasty. Fishing nets were
common in all historic times, and the lead sinkers (83) and stone
sinkers (84) are often found under the XVIIIth-XXth Dynasties.

_Agricultural Tools._--The hoe of wood (85) is the main tool from the
late prehistoric time, and many have been found of the XVIIIth Dynasty.
With the handle lengthened (86) and turned forward, this became the
plough (87 is the hieroglyph, 88 the drawing, of a plough); this was
always sloping, and never the upright post of the Italic type. The rake
of wood (89) is usual in the XIIth and XVIIIth Dynasties. The fork (90),
used for tossing straw, was common in the Old Kingdom, but none has been
found. The sickle was of wood (92), with flints (91) inserted,
apparently a copy of the ox-jaw and teeth. The notched flints for it are
common from the Ist to the XVIIIth Dynasty. In Roman times the same
principle was followed, by making an iron sickle with a deep groove, in
which was inserted the cutting blade of steel (P.E. XXIX.).
Shovel-boards, to hold in right (93) or left hand for scraping up the
grain in winnowing, are usual in the XVIIIth Dynasty, and are figured in
use in the Old Kingdom Pruning knives with curved blades (94) are
Italic, and were made of iron by the Romans. Corn grinders were flat
oval stones, with a smaller one lying cross-ways (95), and slid from end
to end. Such were used from the Old Kingdom down to late times. In the
Roman period a larger stone was used, with a rectangular slab (96)
sliding on it, in which a long trough held the grain and let it slip out
below for grinding. The quern with rotary motion is late Roman, and
still used by Arabs. The large circular millstones of Roman age worked
by horse-power are usually made from slices of granite columns.

_Building Tools._--The adze described above was used for dressing blocks
of limestone. The brick-mould was an open frame, with one side prolonged
into a handle (97), exactly as the modern mould. The plasterers' floats
(98) were entirely cut out of wood. The mud rake for mixing mortar is
rather narrower than the modern form. The square (99) and plummet (100,
101) have remained unchanged since the XIXth Dynasty. For dressing flat
surfaces three wooden pegs (102) of equal length were used; a string was
stretched between the tops of two, and the third peg was set on the
point to be tested and tried against the string.

_Thread-Work._--Stone spindle whorls (103) are common in the prehistoric
age; wooden ones were usual, of a cylindrical form (104) in the XIIth,
and conical (105) in the XVIIIth Dynasty. The thread was secured by a
spiral notch in the stick. In Roman times an iron hook on the top held
the thread (106) as in modern spindles. Needles of copper were made in
the prehistoric, as early as S.D. 48, and very delicate ones by S.D. 71.
Gold needles are found of the Ist Dynasty. Fine ones of bronze are
common in the XVIIIth Dynasty, and some with two eyes at right angles,
one above the other, to carry two different threads. The copper bodkin
is found in S.D. 70. Netters are common, of rib bones, pointed (107);
the thread was wound round them. Long netting needles were probably
brought in by the dynastic people as they figure in the hieroglyphs.
Finely-made ones are found in the XVIIIth Dynasty and later. Reels were
also commonly used for net making, of pottery (108) or even pebbles
(109) with a groove chipped around. The flint vase-grinders were used in
the early dynasties (110), and also sandstone grinders for hollowing
larger vases (111).

_Stone-Work._--In the prehistoric ages stone building was unknown, but
many varieties of stones were used for carving into vases, amulets and
ornaments. The stone vases were at first of cylindrical forms, with a
foot, and ears for hanging. These are worked in brown basalt, syenite,
porphyry, alabaster and limestone. In the second prehistoric
civilization barrel-shaped vases became usual; and to the former
materials were added slate, grey limestone and breccia. Serpentine
appears later, and diorite towards the close of the prehistoric ages.
Flat dishes were used in earlier times; gradually deeper forms appear,
and lastly the deep bowl with turned-in edge belongs to the close of the
prehistoric time and continued common in the earlier dynasties (P.D.P.
19). This stone-work was usually formed on the outside with rotary
motion, but sometimes the vase was rotated upon the grinder (Q. H. 17).
The interior was ground out by cutters (figs. 110, 111) fixed in the end
of a stick and revolved with a weight on the top, as shown in scenes on
the tombs of the Vth Dynasty. The cutters were sometimes flints of a
crescent shape (P. Ab. ii. liii. 24), but more usually grinders blocks
of quartzite sandstone (26-34), and occasionally of diorite (Q. H.
xxxii. lxii.). These blocks were fed with sand and water to give the
bite on the stone (P. Ab. i. 26). The outsides of the vases were
entirely wrought by handwork, with the polishing lines crossing
diagonally. Probably the first forming was done by chipping and
hammer-dressing, as in later times; the final facing of the hard stones
was doubtless by means of emery in block or powder, as emery grinding
blocks are found.

In the early dynasties the hard stones were still worked, and the Ist
dynasty was the most splendid age for vases, bowls, and dishes of the
finest stones. The royal tombs have preserved an enormous quantity of
fragments, from which five hundred varied forms have been drawn (P.R.T.
ii. xlvi.-liii. 6). The materials are quartz crystal, basalt, porphyry,
syenite, granite, volcanic ash, various metamorphics, serpentine, slate,
dolomite marble, alabaster, many coloured marbles, saccharine marble,
grey and white limestones. The most splendid vase is one from Nekhen
(Hieraconpolis), of syenite, 2 ft. across and 16 in. high, hollowed so
as to be marvellously light and highly polished (Q.H. xxxvii). Another
branch of stone-work, surface carving, was early developed by the
artistic dynastic race. The great palettes of slate covered with
elaborate reliefs are probably all of the pre-Menite kings; the most
advanced of them having the figure of Narmer, who preceded Menes. Other
carving full of detail is on the great mace-heads of Narmer and the
Scorpion king, where scenes of ceremonials are minutely engraved in
relief. In the Ist Dynasty the large tombstones of the kings are of bold
work, but the smaller stones of private graves vary much in the style,
many being very coarse. All of this work was by hammer-dressing and
scraping. The scrapers seem to have always been of copper.

The earliest use of stone in buildings is in the tomb of King Den (Ist
Dynasty), where some large flat blocks of red granite seem to have been
part of the construction. The oldest stone chamber known is that of
Khasekhemui (end of the IInd Dynasty). This is of blocks of limestone
whose faces follow the natural cleavages, and only dressed where
needful; part is hammer-dressed, but most of the surfaces are
adze-dressed. The adze was of stone, probably flint, and had a short
handle (P.R.T. ii. 13). The same king also wrought granite with
inscriptions in relief. In the close of the IIIrd Dynasty a great
impetus was given to stone-work, and the grandest period of refined
masonry is at the beginning of the IVth Dynasty under Cheops. The tombs
of Medum under Snefru are built with immense blocks of limestone of 20
and 33 tons weight. The dressing of the face between the hieroglyphs was
done partly with copper and partly with flint scrapers (P.M. 27). The
most splendid masonry is that of the Great Pyramid of Cheops. The blocks
of granite for the roofing are 56 in number, of an average weight of 54
tons each. These were cut from the water-worn rocks at the Cataract--the
soundest source for large masses, as any incipient flaws are well
exposed by wear. The blocks were quarried by cleavage; a groove was run
along the line intended, and about 2 ft. apart holes about 4 in. wide
were jumped downward from it in the intended plane; this prevented a
skew fracture (P.T. 93). In shallower masses a groove was run, and then
holes, apparently for wedges, were sunk deeper in the course of it;
whether wetted wood was used for the expansive force is not known, but
it is probable, as no signs are visible of crushing the granite by hard
wedges. The facing of the cloven surfaces was done by hammer-dressing,
using rounded masses of quartzose hornstone, held in the hand without
any handle. In order to get a hold for moving the blocks without
bruising the edges, projecting lumps or bosses were left on the faces,
about 6 or 8 in. across and 1 or 2 in. thick. After the block was in
place the boss was struck off and the surface dressed and polished (P.T.
78, 82). In the pyramid of Cheops the blocks were all faced before
building; but the later granite temple of Chephren and the pyramid of
Mycerinus (Menkaura, Menkeure) show a system of building with an excess
of a few inches left rough on the outer surface, which was dressed away
when in position (P.T. 110, 132).

The flatness of faces of stone or rock (both granite and limestone) was
tested by placing a true-plane trial plate, smeared with red ochre,
against the dressed surface, as in modern engineering. The contact being
thus reddened showed where the face had to be further dressed away; and
this process was continued until the ochre touched points not more than
an inch apart all over the joint faces, many square feet in area. On
stones too large for facing-plates a diagonal draft was run, so as to
avoid any wind in the plane (P.T. 83).

The cutting of granite was not only by cleavage and hammer dressing, but
also by cutting with harder materials than quartz such as emery. Long
saws of copper were fed with emery powder, and used to saw out blocks
as much as 7-1/2 ft. long (P.T. Plate XIV.). In other cases the very deep
scores in the sides of the saw-cut suggest that fixed cutting points
were inserted in the copper saws; and this would be parallel to the
saw-cuts in the very hard limestone of the Palace of Tiryns, in which a
piece of a copper saw has been broken, and where may be yet found large
chips of emery, too long and coarse to serve as a powder, but suited for
fixed teeth. A similar method was common for circular holes, which were
cut by a tube, either with powder or fixed teeth. These tubular drills
were used from the IVth Dynasty down to late times, in all materials
from alabaster up to carnelian. The resulting cores are more regular
than those of modern rock-drilling.

Limestone in the Great Pyramid, as elsewhere, was dressed by chopping it
with an adze, a tool used from prehistoric to Roman times for all soft
stones and wood. This method was carried on up to the point of getting
contact with the facing-plate at every inch of the surface; the cuts
cross in various directions. For removing rock in reducing a surface to
a level, or in quarrying, cuts were made with a pick, forming straight
trenches, and the blocks were then broken out between these. In
quarrying the cuts are generally 4 or 5 in. wide, just enough for the
workman's arm to reach in; for cutting away rock the grooves are 20 in.
wide, enough to stand in, and the squares of rock about 9 ft. wide
between the grooves (P.T. 100). The accuracy of the workmanship in the
IVth Dynasty is astonishing. The base of the pyramid of Snefru had an
average variation of 6 in. on 5765 and 10' of squareness. But,
immediately after, Cheops improved on this with a variation of less than
6 in. on 9069 in. and 12" of direction. Chephren fell off, having 1.5
error on 8475, and 33" of variation; and Mycerinus (Menkeure) had 3 in.
error on 4154 and 1' 50" variation of direction (P.M. 6; P.T. 39, 97,
111). Of perhaps later date the two south pyramids of Dahshur show
errors of 3.7 on 7459 and 1.1 on 2065 in., and variation of direction of
4' and 10' (P.S. 28, 30). The above smallest error of only 1 in 16,000
in lineal measure, and 1 in 17,000 of angular measure, is that of the
rock-cutting for the foundation of Khufu, and the masonry itself (now
destroyed) was doubtless more accurate. The error of flatness of the
joints from a straight line and a true square is but 1/100th in. on 75
in. length; and the error of level is only 1/50th in. along a course, or
about 10" on a long length (P.T. 44). We have entered thus fully on the
details of this period, as it is the finest age for workmanship in every
respect. But in the XIIth Dynasty the granite sarcophagus of Senwosri
II. is perhaps the finest single piece of cutting yet known; the
surfaces of the granite are all dull-ground, the errors from straight
lines and parallelism are only about 1/200th inch (P. 1, 3).

In later work we may note that copper scrapers were used for facing the
limestone work in the VIth, the XIIth and the XVIIIth Dynasties. In the
latter age granite surfaces were ground, hieroglyphs were chipped out
and polished by copper tools fed with emery; outlines were graved by a
thick sheet of copper held in the hand, and sawed to and fro with emery.
Corners of signs and intersections of lines were first fixed by minute
tube-drill holes, into which the hand tool butted, so that it should not
slip over the outer surface.

The marking out of work was done by fine black lines; and supplemental
lines at a fixed distance from the true one were put in to guard against
obliteration in course of working (P.T. 92); similarly in building a
brick pyramid the axis was marked, and there were supplemental marks two
cubits to one side (P.K. 14). When cutting a passage in the rock a rough
drift-way was first made, the roof was smoothed, a red axis line was
drawn along it, and then the sides were cut parallel to the axis. For
setting out a mastaba with sloping sides, on an irregular foundation at
different levels, hollow corner walls were built outside the place of
each corner; the distances of the faces at the above-ground level were
marked on the inner faces of the walls; the above-ground level was also
marked; then sloping lines at the intended angle of the face were drawn
downward from the ground-level measures, and each face was set out so as
to lie in the plane thus defined by two traces at the ends (P.M.
VIII.).

[Illustration: Ancient Egyptian Tools.

  _Note._ _The objects are drawn to a scale of 1/6 unless otherwise
     described._

  MALLETS 1 2
  MACES 3 4
  HAMMERS 5 6
  AXES 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
  HOES 14 15
  PICK 16
  FLINT KNIVES 17 18 19 20 21
  METAL KNIVES 22 23 24 25
  CUTTING-OUT KNIVES 26 27 28 29
  RAZORS 30 31 32
  CHISELS 33 34 35 36 37 38 39
  ADZES 40 41
  SCRAPERS 42 44 45 46
  SAWS 47 (1/30) 48
  BORERS 49 50 51 52 53 (1/10) 54 55 (1/10) 56 57 58]

[Illustration: Ancient Egyptian Tools.

  _Note._ _The objects are drawn to a scale of 1/6 unless otherwise
     described._

  FIGHTING 59 60 61 62 (1/12) 63 (1/12) 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72
  HUNTING 73 74 75 76 77 78 (1/10) 79 80 81 82 83 84
  AGRICULTURE all 1/20 85 86 87 88 89 90 (1/20) 91 92 (1/10) 93 94
              95 (1/12) 96 (1/12)
  BUILDING 97 98 99 100 101
  THREAD WORK 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109
  VASE GRINDING 110 111]

_Metal-Work._--Copper was wrought into pins, a couple of inches long,
with loop heads, as early as the oldest prehistoric graves, before the
use of weaving, and while pottery was scarcely developed. The use of
harpoons and small chisels of copper next arose, then broad flaying
knives, needles and adzes, lastly the axe when the metal was commoner.
On these prehistoric tools, when in fine condition, the original
highly-polished surface remains. It shows no trace of grinding lines or
attrition, nor yet of the blows of a hammer. Probably it was thus highly
finished by beating between polished stone hammers which were almost
flat on the face. Most likely the forms of the tools were cast to begin
with, and then finished and polished by fine hammering. A series of
moulds for casting in the XIIth Dynasty show that the forms were carved
out in thick pieces of pottery, and then lined with fine ashy clay. The
mould was single, so that one side of the tool was the open face of
metal. As early as the pyramid times solid casting by _cire perdue_ was
already used for figures: but the copper statues of Pepi and his son
seem, by their thinness and the piecing together of the parts, to have
been entirely hammered out. The portraiture in such hammer work is
amazingly life-like. By the time of the XIIth Dynasty, and perhaps
earlier, _cire perdue_ casting over an ash core became usual. This was
carried out most skilfully, the metal being often not 1/50th in. thick,
and the core truly centred in the mould. Casting bronze over iron rods
was also done, to gain more stiffness for thin parts.

In gold work the earliest jewelry, that of King Zer of the Ist Dynasty,
shows a perfect mastery of working hollow balls with minute threading
holes, and of soldering with no trace of excess nor difference of
colour. Thin wire was hammered out, but there is no ancient instance of
drawn wire. Castings were not trimmed by filing or grinding, but by
small chisels and hammering (P.R.T. ii. 17). In the XIIth Dynasty the
soldering of the thin cells for the _cloisonnee_ inlaid pectorals, on to
the base plate, is a marvellous piece of delicacy; every cell has to be
perfectly true in form, and yet all soldered, apparently simultaneously,
as the heat could not be applied to successive portions (M.D. i.). Such
work was kept up in the XVIIIth and XXVIth Dynasties. There is nothing
distinctive in later jewelry different from Greek and Roman work
elsewhere.

_Glaze and Glass._--From almost the beginning of the prehistoric age
there are glazed pottery beads found in the graves: and glazing on
amulets of quartz or other stones begins in the middle of the
prehistoric. Apparently then glazing went together with the working of
the copper ores, and probably accidental slags in the smelting gave the
first idea of using glaze intentionally. The development of glazing at
the beginning of the dynasties was sudden and effective. Large tiles, a
foot in length, were glazed completely all over, and used to line the
walls of rooms; they were retained in place by deep dovetails and ties
of copper wire. Figures of glazed ware became abundant; a kind of
visiting card was made with the figure of a man and his titles to
present in temples which he visited; and glazed ornaments and toggles
for fastening dresses were common (P. Ab. ii.). Further, besides thus
using glaze on a large scale, differently coloured glazes were used, and
even fused together. A piece of a large tile, and part of a glazed vase,
have the royal titles and name of Menes, originally in violet inlay in
green glaze. There was no further advance in the art until the great
variety of colours came into use about 4000 years later. In the XIIth
Dynasty a very thin smooth glaze was used, which became rather thicker
in the XVIIIth. The most brilliant age of glazes was under Amenophis
III. and his son Akhenaton. Various colours were used; beside the old
green and blue, there were purple, violet, red, yellow and white. And a
profusion of forms is shown by the moulds and actual examples, for
necklaces, decorations, inlay in stone and applied reliefs on vases.
Under Seti II. cartouches of the king in violet and white glaze are
common; and under Rameses III. there were vases with relief figures,
with painted figures, and tiles with coloured reliefs of captives of
many races. The latter development of glazing was in thin delicate
apple-green ware with low relief designs, which seem to have originated
under Greek influence at Naucratis. The Roman glaze is thick and coarse,
but usually of a brilliant Prussian blue, with dark purple and
apple-green; and high reliefs of wreaths, and sometimes figures, are
common.

Though glaze begins so early, the use of the glassy matter by itself
does not occur till the XVIIIth Dynasty; the earlier reputed examples
are of stone or frit. The first glass is black and white under Tethmosis
(Tahutmes) III. It was not fused at a high point, but kept in a pasty
state when working. The main use of it was for small vases; these were
formed upon a core of sandy paste, which was modelled on a copper rod,
the rod being the core for the neck. Round this core threads of glass
were wound of various colours; the whole could be reset in the furnace
to soften it for moulding the foot or neck, or attaching handles, or
dragging the surface into various patterns. The colours under later
kings were as varied as those of the glazes. Glass was also wheel-cut in
patterns and shapes under Akhenaton. In later times the main work was in
mosaics of extreme delicacy. Glass rods were piled together to form a
pattern in cross-section. The whole was then heated until it perfectly
adhered, and the mass was drawn out lengthways so as to render the
design far more minute, and to increase the total length for cutting up.
The rod was then sliced across, and the pieces used for inlaying.
Another use of coloured glass was for cutting in the shapes of
hieroglyphs for inlaying in wooden coffins to form inscriptions. Glass
amulets were also commonly placed upon Ptolemaic mummies. Blown glass
vessels are not known until late Greek and Roman times, when they were
of much the same manufacture as glass elsewhere. The supposed figures of
glass-blowers in early scenes are really those of smiths, blowing their
fires by means of reeds tipped with clay. The variegated glass beads
belonging to Italy were greatly used in Egypt in Roman times, and are
like those found elsewhere. A distinctively late Egyptian use of glass
was for weights and vase-stamps, to receive an impress stating the
amount of the weight or measure. The vase-stamps often state the name of
the contents (always seeds or fruits), probably not to show what was in
them, but to show for what kind of seed the vessel was a true measure.
These measure stamps bear names dating them from A.D. 680 to about 950.
The large weights of ounces and pounds are disks or cuboid blocks; they
are dated from 720 to 785 for the lesser, and to A.D. 915 for larger,
weights. The greater number are, however, small weights for testing gold
and silver coins of later caliphs from A.D. 952 to 1171. The system was
not, however, Arab, as there are a few Roman vase-stamps and weights. Of
other medieval glass may be noted the splendid glass vases for lamps,
with Arab inscriptions fused in colours on the outsides. No enamelling
was ever done by Egyptians, and the few rare examples are all of Roman
age due to foreign work.

The manufacture of glass is shown by examples in the XVIIIth Dynasty.
The blue or green colour was made by fritting together silica, lime,
alkaline carbonate and copper carbonate; the latter varied from 3% in
delicate blues to 20% in deep purple blues. The silica was needed quite
pure from iron, in order to get the rich blues, and was obtained from
calcined quartz pebbles; ordinary sand will only make a green frit.
These materials were heated in pans in the furnace so as to combine in a
pasty, half-fused condition. The coloured frit thus formed was used as
paint in a wet state, and also used to dissolve in glass or to fuse over
a surface in glazing. The brown tints often seen in glazed objects are
almost always the result of the decomposition of green glazes containing
iron. The blue glazes, on the other hand, fade into white. The essential
colouring materials are, for blue, copper; green, copper and iron;
purple, cobalt; red, haematite; white, tin. An entirely clear colourless
glass was made in the XVIIIth Dynasty, but coloured glass was mainly
used. After fusing a panful of coloured glass, it was sampled by taking
pinches out with tongs; when perfectly combined it was left to cool in
the pan, as with modern optical glass. When cold the pan was chipped
away, and the cake of glass broken up into convenient pieces, free of
sediment and of scum. A broken lump would then be heated to softness in
the furnace; rolled out under a bar of metal, held diagonally across the
roll; and when reduced to a rod of a quarter of an inch thick, it was
heated and pulled out into even rods about an eighth of an inch thick.
These were used to wind round glass vases, to form lips, handles, &c.;
and to twist together for spiral patterns. Glass tube was similarly
drawn out. Beads were made by winding thin threads of glass on copper
wires, and the greater contraction of the copper freed the bead when
cold. The coiling of beads can always be detected by (1) the little
tails left at the ends, (2) the streaks, (3) the bubbles, seen with a
magnifier. Roman glass beads are always drawn out, and nicked off hot,
with striation lengthways; except the large opaque variegated beads
which are coiled. Modern Venetian beads are similarly coiled. In the
XXIIIrd Dynasty beads of a rich transparent Prussian blue glass were
made, until the XXVIth. About the same time the eyed beads, with white
and brown eyes in a blue mass, also came in (P.A. 25-27, Plate XIII.).

_Pottery_ (see fig. 112).--The earliest style of pottery is entirely
hand made, without any rotary motion; the form being built up with a
flat stick inside and the hand outside, and finally scraped and
burnished in a vertical direction. The necks of vases were the first
part finished with rotation, at the middle and close of the prehistoric
age. Fully turned forms occur in the Ist Dynasty; but as late as the
XIIth Dynasty the lower part of small vases is usually trimmed with a
knife. In the earlier part of the prehistoric age there was a soft brown
ware with haematite facing, highly burnished. This was burnt mouth-down
in the oven, and the ashes on the ground reduced the red haematite to
black magnetic oxide of iron; some traces of carbonyl in the ash helped
to rearrange the magnetite as a brilliant mirror-like surface of intense
black. The lower range of jars in the oven had then black tops, while
the upper ranges were entirely red. A favourite decoration was by lines
of white clay slip, in crossing patterns, figures of animals, and,
rarely, men. This is exactly of the modern Kabyle style in Algeria, and
entirely disappeared from Egypt very early in the prehistoric age. Being
entirely hand made, various oval, doubled and even square forms were
readily shaped.

The later prehistoric age is marked by entirely different pottery, of a
hard pink-brown ware, often with white specks in it, without any applied
facing beyond an occasional pink wash, and no polishing. It is decorated
with designs in red line, imitating cordage and marbling, and drawings
of plants, ostriches and ships. The older red polished ware still
survived in a coarse and degraded character, and both kinds together
were carried on into the next age (P.D.P.).

The early dynastic pottery not only shows the decadent end of the
earlier forms, but also new styles, such as grand jars of 2 or 3 ft.
high which were slung in cordage, and which have imitation lines of
cordage marked on them. Large ring-stands also were brought in, to
support jars, so that the damp surfaces should not touch the dusty
ground. The pyramid times show the great jars reduced to short rough
pots, while a variety of forms of bowls are the most usual types
(P.R.T.; P.D.; P. Desh.)

In the XIIth Dynasty a hard thin drab ware was common, like the modern
_qulleh_ water flasks. Drop-shaped jars with spherical bases are
typical, and scrabbled patterns of incised lines. Large jars of light
brown pottery were made for storing liquids and grain, with narrow necks
which just admit the hand (P.K.).

The XVIIIth Dynasty used a rather softer ware, decorated at first with a
red edge or band around the top, and under Tethmosis (Tahutmes) III.
black and red lines were usual. Under Amenophis III. blue frit paint was
freely used, in lines and bands around vases; it spread to large
surfaces under Amenophis IV., and continued in a poor style into the
Ramesside age. In the latter part of the XVIIIth and the XIXth Dynasties
a thick hard light pottery, with white specks and a polished drab-white
facing, was generally used for all fine purposes. The XIXth and XXth
Dynasties only show a degradation of the types of the XVIIIth; and even
through to the XXVth Dynasty there is no new movement (P.K.; P.I.; P.A.;
P.S.T.).

The XXVIth Dynasty was largely influenced by Greek amphorae imported
with wine and oil. The native pottery is of a very fine paste, smooth
and thin, but poor in forms. Cylindrical cups, and jars with cylindrical
necks and no brim, are typical. The small necks and trivial handles
begin now, and are very common in Ptolemaic times (P.T. ii.).

The great period of Roman pottery is marked by the ribbing on the
outsides. The amphorae began to be ribbed about A.D. 150, and then
ribbing extended to all the forms. The ware is generally rather rough,
thick and brown for the amphorae, thin and red for smaller vessels. At
the Constantine age a new style begins, of hard pink ware, neatly made,
and often with "start-patterns" made by a vibrating tool while the
vessel rotated: this was mainly used for bowls and cups (P.E.). Of the
later pottery of Arab times we have no precise knowledge.

The abbreviations used above refer to the following sources of
information:--

  M.D. Morgan,  _Dahshur_;
  P.A. Petrie,  _Tell el Amarna_;
  P. Ab.   "    _Abydos_;
  P.D.     "    _Dendereh_;
  P. Desh. "    _Deshasheh_;
  P.D.P.   "    _Diospolis Parva_;
  P.E.     "    _Ehnasya_;
  P.I.     "    _Illahun_;
  P.K.     "    _Kahun_;
  P.M.     "    _Medum_;
  P.N.     "    _Naqada_;
  P.R.T.   "    _Royal Tombs_;
  P.S.     "    _Season in Egypt_;
  P.S.T.   "    _Six Temples_;
  P.T.     "    _Pyramids and Temples of Gizeh_;
  P.T. ii. "    _Tanis, ii._;
  Q.H. Quibell, _Hieraconpolis_.    (W. M. F. P.)

_Monuments._--The principal monuments that are yet remaining to
illustrate the art and history of Egypt may be best taken in historical
order. Of the prehistoric age there are many rock carvings, associated
with others of later periods: they principally remain on the sandstone
rocks about Silsila, and their age is shown by the figures of ostriches
which were extinct in later times. One painted tomb was found at Nekhen
(Hieraconpolis), now in the Cairo Museum; the brick walls were
colour-washed and covered with irregular groups of men, animals and
ships, painted with red, black and green. The cemeteries otherwise only
contain graves, cut in gravel or brick lined, and formerly roofed with
poles and brushwood. The Ist to IIIrd Dynasties have left at Abydos
large forts of brickwork, remains of two successive temples, and the
royal tombs (see ABYDOS). Elsewhere are but few other monuments; at Wadi
Maghara in Sinai is a rock sculpture of Semerkhet of the Ist Dynasty in
perfect state, at Giza is a group of tombs of a prince and retinue of
the Ist Dynasty, and at Giza and Bet Khallaf are two large brick
mastabas with extensive passages closed by trap-doors, of kings of the
IIIrd Dynasty. The main structure of this age is the step-pyramid of
Sakkara, which is a mastaba tomb with eleven successive coats of
masonry, enlarging it to about 350 by 390 ft. and 200 ft. high. In the
interior is sunk in the rock a chamber 24 x 23 ft. and 77 ft. high, with
a granite sepulchre built in the floor of it, and various passages and
chambers branching from it. The doorway of one room (now in Berlin
Museum) was decorated with polychrome glazed tiles with the name of King
Neterkhet. The complex original work and various alterations of it need
thorough study, but it is now closed and research is forbidden.

[Illustration: FIG. 112.--Principal Types of Pottery of Ancient Egypt.
  (Scale 1:20.)

  EARLY PREHISTORIC 7000-6000 B.C.
  LATER PREHISTORIC 6000-5000 B.C.
  I^ST DYNASTY 4800-4500 B.C.
  IV^TH-VI^TH DYNASTY 4000-3300 B.C.
  XII^TH DYNASTY 2800-2500 B.C.
  XVIII^TH DYNASTY 1500-1350 B.C.
  XIX^TH DYNASTY 1300-1100 B.C.
  XXVI^TH DYNASTY 700-500 B.C.]

The IVth to VIth Dynasties are best known by the series of pyramids (see
PYRAMID) in the region of Memphis. Beyond these tombs, and the temples
attached to them, there are very few fixed monuments; of Cheops and Pepi
I. there are temple foundations at Abydos (q.v.), and a few blocks on
other sites; of Neuserre (Raenuser) there is a sun temple at Abusir; and
of several kings there were tablets in Sinai, now in the Cairo Museum. A
few tablets of the IXth Dynasty have been found at Sakkara, and a tomb
of a prince at Assiut. Of the XIth Dynasty is the terrace-temple of
Menthotp III. recently excavated at Thebes: also foundations of this
king and of Sankhkere at Abydos. In the XIIth Dynasty there is the
celebrated red granite obelisk of Heliopolis, one of a pair erected by
Senwosri (Senusert) I. in front of his temple which has now vanished.
Another large obelisk of red granite, 41 ft. high, remains in the Fayum.
The most important pictorial tombs of Beni Hasan belong to this age; the
great princes appear to have largely quarried stone for their palaces,
and to have cut the quarry in the form of a regular chamber, which
served for the tomb chapel. These great rock chambers were covered with
paintings, which show a large range of the daily life and civilization.
The pyramids and temples of Senwosri II. and III. and Amenemhe III.
remain at Illahun, Dahshur and Hawara. The latter was the celebrated
Labyrinth, which has been entirely quarried away, so that only banks of
chips and a few blocks remain. At the first of these sites is the most
perfect early town, of which hundreds of houses still remain. Of
Senwosri III. there are the forts and temples above the second cataract
at Semna and Kumma. Of the Hyksos age there are the scanty remains of a
great fortified camp at Tell el-Yehudia.

In the XVIIIth to XXth Dynasties we reach the great period of monuments.
Of Amasis (Aahmes) and Amenophis I. there are but fragments left in
later buildings; and of the latter a great quantity of sculpture has
been recovered at Karnak. The great temple of Karnak had existed since
the XIth Dynasty or earlier, but the existing structure was begun under
Tethmosis (Tahutmes) I., and two of the great pylons and one obelisk of
his remain in place. He also built the simple and dignified temple of
Medinet Habu at Thebes, which was afterward overshadowed by the
grandiose work of Rameses III. The next generation--Tethmosis II. and
Hatshepsut--added to their father's work; they also built another pylon
and some of the existing chambers at Karnak, set up the great obelisks
there and carved some colossi. The obelisks are exquisitely cut in red
granite, each sign being sawn in shape by copper tools fed with emery,
and the whole finished with a perfection of proportion and delicacy not
seen on other granite work. One obelisk being overthrown and broken we
can examine the minute treatment of the upper part, which was nearly a
hundred feet from the ground. The principal monument of this period is
the temple of Deir el Bahri, the funeral temple of Hatshepsut, on which
she recorded the principal event of her reign, the expedition to Punt.
The erasures of her name by Tethmosis III., and reinsertions of names
under later kings, the military scenes, and the religious groups showing
the sacred kine of Hathor, all add to the interest of the remarkable
temple. It stands on three successive terraces, rising to the base of
the high limestone cliffs behind it. The rock-cut shrine at Speos
Artemidos, and the temple of Serabit in Sinai are the only other large
monuments of this queen yet remaining. Tethmosis III. was one of the
great builders of Egypt, and much remains of his work, at about forty
different sites. The great temple of Karnak was largely built by him;
most of the remaining chambers are his, including the beautiful
botanical walls showing foreign plants. Of his work at Heliopolis there
remain the obelisks of London and New York; and from Elephantine is the
obelisk at Sion House. On the Nubian sites his work may still be seen at
Amada, Ellesia, Ibrim, Semna and in Sinai at Serabit el Khadem. Of
Amenophis II. and Tethmosis IV. there are no large monuments, they being
mainly known by additions at Karnak. The well known stele of the sphinx
was cut by the latter king, to commemorate his dream there and his
clearing of the sphinx from sand. Amenophis III. has left several large
buildings of his magnificent reign. At Karnak the temple had a new front
added as a great pylon, which was later used as the back of the hall of
columns by Seti I. But three new temples at Karnak, that of Month
(Mentu), of Mut and a smaller one, all are due to this reign, as well as
the long avenue of sphinxes before the temple of Khons; these indicate
that the present Ramesside temple of Khons has superseded an earlier one
of this king. The great temple of Luxor was built to record the divine
origin of the king as son of Ammon; and on the western side of Thebes
the funerary temple of Amenophis was an immense pile, of which the two
colossi of the Theban plain still stand before the front of the site,
where yet lies a vast tablet of sandstone 30 ft. high. The other
principal buildings are the temples of Sedenga and of Solib in Nubia.
Akhenaton has been so consistently eclipsed by the later kings who
destroyed his work, that the painted pavement and the rock tablets of
Tell el Amarna are the only monuments of his still in position, beside a
few small inscriptions. Harmahib (Horemheb) resumed the work at Karnak,
erecting two great pylons and a long avenue of sphinxes. The rock temple
at Silsila and a shrine at Jebel Adda are also his.

In the XIXth Dynasty the great age of building continued, and the
remains are less destroyed than the earlier temples, because there were
subsequently fewer unscrupulous rulers to quarry them away. Seti I.
greatly extended the national temple of Karnak by his immense hall of
columns added in front of the pylon of Amenophis III. His funerary
temple at Kurna is also in a fairly complete condition. The temple of
Abydos is celebrated owing to its completeness, and the perfect
condition of its sculptures, which render it one of the most interesting
buildings as an artistic monument; and the variety of religious subjects
adds to its importance. The very long reign and vanity of Rameses II.
have combined to leave his name at over sixty sites, more widely spread
than that of any other king. Yet very few great monuments were
originated by him; even the Ramesseum, his funerary temple, was begun by
his father. Additions, appropriations of earlier works and scattered
inscriptions are what mark this reign. The principal remaining buildings
are part of a court at Memphis, the second temple at Abydos, and the six
Nubian temples of Bet el-Wali, Jerf Husein, Wadi es-Sebua, Derr, and the
grandest of all--the rock-cut temple of Abu Simbel, with its
neighbouring temple of Hathor. Mineptah has left few original works; the
Osireum at Abydos is the only one of which much remains, his funerary
temple having been destroyed as completely as he destroyed that of
Amenophis III. The celebrated Israel stele from this temple is his
principal inscription. The rock shrines at Silsila are of small
importance. There is no noticeable monument of the dozen troubled years
of the end of the dynasty.

The XXth Dynasty opened with the great builder Rameses III. Probably he
did not really exceed other kings in his activity; but as being the last
of the building kings at the western side of Thebes, his temple has
never been devastated for stone by the claims of later work. The whole
building of Medinet Habu is about 500 ft. long and 160 wide, entirely
the work of one reign. The sculptures of it are mainly occupied with the
campaigns of the king against the Libyans, the Syrians and the negroes,
and are of the greatest importance for the history of Egypt and of the
Mediterranean lands. Another large work was the clearance and rebuilding
of much of the city of Tell el Yehudia, the palace hall of which
contained the celebrated coloured tiles with figures of captives. At
Karnak three temples, to Ammon, Khonsu and Mut, all belong to this
reign. The blighted reigns of the later Ramessides and the priest-kings
did not leave a single great monument, and they are only known by
usurpations of the work of others. The Tanite kings of the XXIst Dynasty
rebuilt the temple of their capital, but did little else. The XXIInd
Dynasty returned to monumental work. Sheshonk I. added a large wall at
Karnak, covered with the record of his Judaean war. Osorkon (Uasarkon)
I. built largely at Bubastis, and Osorkon II. added the great granite
pylon there, covered with scenes of his festival; but at Thebes these
kings only inscribed previous monuments. The Ethiopian (XXVth) dynasty
built mainly in their capital under Mount Barkal, and Shabako and
Tirhaka (Tahrak) also left chapels and a pylon at Thebes; and the latter
added a great colonnade leading up to the temple of Karnak, of which one
column is still standing.

Of the Saite kings there are very few large monuments. Their work was
mainly of limestone and built in the Delta, and hence it has been
entirely swept away. The square fort of brickwork at Daphnae (q.v.) was
built by Psammetichus I. Of Apries (Haa-ab-ra, Hophra) an obelisk and
two monolith shrines are the principal remains. Of Amasis (Aahmes) II.
five great shrines are known; but the other kings of this age have only
left minor works. The Persians kept up Egyptian monuments. Darius I.
quarried largely, and left a series of great granite decrees along his
Suez canal; he also built the great temple in the oasis of Kharga.

The XXXth Dynasty renewed the period of great temples. Nekhtharheb built
the temple of Behbet, now a ruinous heap of immense blocks of granite.
Beside other temples, now destroyed, he set up the great west pylon of
Karnak, and the pylon at Kharga. Nekhtnebf built the Hathor temple and
great pylon at Philae, and the east pylon of Karnak, beside temples
elsewhere, now vanished. Religious building was continued under the
Ptolemies and Romans; and though the royal impulse may not have been
strong, yet the wealth of the land under good government supplied means
for many places to rebuild their old shrines magnificently. In the Fayum
the capital was dedicated to Queen Arsinoe, and doubtless Ptolemy
rebuilt the temple, now destroyed. At Sharona are remains of a temple of
Ptolemy I. Dendera is one of the most complete temples, giving a noble
idea of the appearance of such work anciently. The body of the temple is
of Ptolemy XIII., and was carved as late as the XVIth (Caesarion), and
the great portico was in building from Augustus to Nero. At Coptos was a
screen of the temple of Ptolemy I. (now at Oxford), and a chapel still
remains of Ptolemy XIII. Karnak was largely decorated; a granite cella
was built under Philip Arrhidaeus, covered with elaborate carving; a
great pylon was added to the temple of Khonsu by Ptolemy III.; the inner
pylon of the Ammon-temple was carved by Ptolemy VI. and IX.; and granite
doorways were added to the temples of Month and Mut by Ptolemy II. At
Luxor the entire cella was rebuilt by Alexander. At Medinet Habu the
temple of Tethmosis III. had a doorway built by Ptolemy X., and a
forecourt by Antoninus. The smaller temple was built under Ptolemy X.
and the emperors. South of Medinet Habu a small temple was built by
Hadrian and Antoninus. At Esna the great temple was rebuilt and
inscribed during a couple of centuries from Titus to Decius. At El Kab
the temple dates from Ptolemy IX. and X. The great temple of Edfu, which
has its enclosure walls and pylon complete, and is the most perfect
example remaining, was gradually built during a century and a half from
Ptolemy III. to XI. The monuments of Philae begin with the wall of
Nekhtnebf. Ptolemy II. began the great temple, and the temple of
Arhesnofer (Arsenuphis) is due to Ptolemy IV., that of Asclepius to
Ptolemy V., that of Hathor to Ptolemy VI., and the great colonnades
belong to Ptolemy XIII. and Augustus. The beautiful little riverside
temple, called the "kiosk," was built by Augustus and inscribed by
Trajan; and the latest building was the arch of Diocletian.

Farther south, in Nubia, the temples of Dabod and Dakka were built by
the Ethiopian Ergamenes, contemporary of Ptolemy IV.; and the temple of
Dendur is of Augustus. The latest building of the temple style is the
White Monastery near Suhag. The external form is that of a great temple,
with windows added along the top; while internally it was a Christian
church. The modern dwellings in it have now been cleared out, and the
interior admirably preserved and cleaned by a native Syrian architect.

Beside the great monuments, which we have now noticed, the historical
material is found on several other classes of remains. These are: (1)
The royal tombs, which in the Vth, VIth, XVIIIth, XIXth and XXth
Dynasties are fully inscribed; but as the texts are always religious and
not historical, they are less important than many other remains. (2) The
royal coffins and wrappings, which give information by the added
graffiti recording their removals; (3) Royal tablets, which are of the
highest value for history, as they often describe or imply historical
events; (4) Private tombs and tablets, which are in many cases
biographical. (5) Papyri concerning daily affairs which throw light on
history; or which give historic detail, as the great papyrus of Rameses
III., and the trials under Rameses X. (6) The added inscriptions on
buildings by later restorers, and alterations of names for
misappropriation. (7) The statues which give the royal portraits, and
sometimes historical facts. (8) The _ostraca_, or rough notes of work
accounts, and plans drawn on pieces of limestone or pottery. (9) The
scarabs bearing kings' names, which under the Hyksos and in some other
dark periods, are our main source of information. (10) The miscellaneous
small remains of toilet objects, ornaments, weapons, &c., many of which
bear royal names.

  Every object and monument with a royal name will be found catalogued
  under each reign in Petrie's _History of Egypt_, 3 vols., the last
  editions of each being the fullest.     (W. M. F. P.)

F. _Chronology._--1. _Technical._--The standard year of the Ancient
Egyptians consisted of twelve months of thirty days[17] each, with five
epagomenal days, in all 365 days. It was thus an effective compromise
between the solar year and the lunar month, and contrasts very
favourably with the intricate and clumsy years of other ancient systems.
The leap-year of the Julian and Gregorian calendars confers the immense
benefit of a fixed correspondence to the seasons which the Egyptian year
did not possess, but the uniform length of the Egyptian months is
enviable even now. The months were grouped under three seasons of four
months each, and were known respectively as the first, second, third and
fourth month [HRGs: N12:Z1], [HRGs: N12:two], [HRGs: N12:three], [HRGs:
N12:four] of [HRGs: SA-x:t-hrw] (i'h.t) "inundation" or "verdure,"
[HRGs: pr:r-t:hrw] _pr.t_ (_pro_) "seed-time," "winter," and [HRGs:
S:N35B-hrw] _smw (shom)_ "harvest," "summer," the [HRGs:
Z93-Z92-Hr:r-w-rnp-t:Z1] "five (days) over the year" being outside these
seasons and the year itself, according to the Egyptian expression, and
counted either at the beginning or at the end of the year. Ultimately
the Egyptians gave names to the months taken from festivals celebrated
in them, in order as follows:--Thoth, Paophi, Athyr, Choiak, Tobi,
Mechir, Phamenoth, Pharmuthi, Pachons, Payni, Epiphi, Mesore, the
epagomenal days being then called "the short year." In Egypt the
agricultural seasons depend more immediately on the Nile than on the
solar movements; the first day of the first month of inundation, i.e.
nominally the beginning of the rise of the Nile, was the beginning of
the year, and as the Nile commences to rise very regularly at about the
date of the annual heliacal rising of the conspicuous dog-star Sothis
(Sirius) (which itself follows extremely closely the slow retrogression
of the Julian year), the primitive astronomers found in the heliacal
rising of Sothis as observed at Memphis (on July 19 Julian) a very
correct and useful starting-point for the seasonal year. But the year of
365 days lost one day in four years of the Sothic or Julian year, so
that in 121 Egyptian years New Year's day fell a whole month too early
according to the seasons, and in 1461 years a whole year was lost. This
"Sothic period" or era of 1460 years, during which the Egyptian New
Year's day travelled all round the Sothic year, is recorded by Greek and
Roman writers at least as early as the 1st century B.C. The epagomenal
days appear on a monument of the Vth Dynasty and in the very ancient
Pyramid texts. They were considered unlucky, and perhaps this accounts
for the curious fact that, although they are named in journals and in
festival lists, &c., where precise dating was needed, no known monument
or legal document is dated in them. It is, however, quite possible that
by the side of the year of 365 days a shorter year of 360 was employed
for some purposes. Lunar months were observed in the regulation of
temples, and lunar years, &c., have been suspected. To find uniformity
in any department in Egyptian practice would be exceptional. By the
decree of Canopus, Ptolemy III. Euergetes introduced through the
assembly of priests an extra day every fourth year, but this reform had
no acceptation until it was reimposed by Augustus with the Julian
calendar. Whether any earlier attempt was made to adjust the civil to
the solar or Sothic year in order to restore the festivals to their
proper places in the seasons temporarily or otherwise, is a question of
great importance for chronology, but at present it remains unanswered.
Probably neither the Sothic nor any other era was employed by the
ancient Egyptians, who dated solely by regnal years (see below). An
inscription of Rameses II. at Tanis is dated in the 400th year of the
reign of the god Seth of Ombos, probably with reference to some
religious ordinance during the rule of the Seth-worshipping Hyksos;
Rameses II. may well have celebrated its quater-centenary, but it is
wrong to argue from this piece of evidence alone that an era of Seth was
ever observed.

From the Middle Kingdom onward to the Roman period, the dates upon
Egyptian documents are given in regnal years. On the oldest monuments
the years in a reign were not numbered consecutively but were named
after events; thus in the Ist Dynasty we find "the year of smiting the
Antiu-people," in the beginning of the IIIrd Dynasty "the year of
fighting and smiting the people of Lower Egypt." But under the IInd
Dynasty there was a census of property for taxation every two years, and
the custom, continuing (with some irregularities) for a long time,
offered a uniform mode of marking years, whether current or past. Thus
such dates are met with as "the year of the third time of numbering" of
a particular king, the next being designated as "the year after the
third time of numbering." Under the Vth Dynasty this method was so much
the rule that the words "of numbering" were commonly omitted. It would
seem that in the course of the next dynasty the census became annual
instead of biennial, so that the "times" agreed with the actual years of
reign; thenceforward their consecutive designation as "first time,"
"second time," for "first year," "second year," was as simple as it well
could be, and lasted unchanged to the fall of paganism. The question
arises from what point these regnal dates were calculated. Successive
regnal years might begin (1) on the anniversary of the king's accession,
or (2) on the calendrical beginning in each year (normally on the first
day of the nominal First month of inundation, i.e. 1st Thoth in the
later calendar). In the latter case there would be a further
consideration: was the portion of a calendar year following the
accession of the new king counted to the last year of the outgoing king,
or to the first year of the new king? In Dynasties I., IV.-V., XVIII.
there are instances of the first mode (1), in Dynasties II., VI. (?),
XII., XXVI. and onwards they follow the second (2). It may be that the
practice was not uniform in all documents even of the same age. In
Ptolemaic times not only were Macedonian dates sometimes given in Greek
documents, but there were certainly two native modes of dating current;
down to the reign of Euergetes there was a "fiscal" dating in papyri,
according to which the year began in Paophi, besides a civil dating
probably from Thoth; later, all the dates in papyri start from Thoth.

The Macedonian year is found in early Ptolemaic documents. The fixed
year of the Canopic decree under Euergetes (with 1st Thoth on Oct. 22)
was never adopted. Augustus established an "Alexandrian" era with the
fixed Julian year, retaining the Egyptian months, with a sixth
epagomenal day every fourth year. The capture of Alexandria having taken
place on the 1st of August 30 B.C., the era began nominally in 30 B.C.,
but it was not actually introduced till some years later, from which
time the 1st Thoth corresponded with the 29th of August in the Julian
year. The vague "Egyptian" year, however, continued in use in native
documents for some centuries along with the Alexandrian "Ionian" year.
The era of Diocletian dates from the 29th of August 284, the year of his
reforms; later, however, the Christians called it the era of the Martyrs
(though the persecution was not until 302), and it survived the Arab
conquest. The dating by indictions, i.e. Roman tax-censuses, taking
place every fifteenth year, probably originated in Egypt, in A.D. 312,
the year of the defeat of Maxentius. The indictions began in Payni of
the fixed year, when the harvest had been secured.

  See F. K. Ginzel, _Handbuch der mathematischen und technischen
  Chronologie_, Bd. i. (Leipzig, 1906), and the bibliography in the
  following section.

2. _Historical._[18]--As to absolute chronology, the assigning of a
regnal year to a definite date B.C. is clear enough (except in
occasional detail) from the conquest by Alexander onwards. Before that
time, in spite of successive efforts to establish a chronology, the
problem is very obscure. The materials for reconstructing the absolute
chronology are of several kinds: (1) Regnal dates as given on
contemporary monuments may indicate the _lengths of individual reigns_,
but not with accuracy, as they seldom reach to the end of a reign and do
not allow for co-regencies. Records of the time that has elapsed between
two regnal dates in the reigns of different kings are very helpful; thus
stelae from the Serapeum recording the ages of the Apis bulls with the
dates of their birth and death have fixed the chronology of the XXVIth
Dynasty. Traditional evidence for the lengths of reigns exists in the
Turin Papyrus of kings and in Manetho's history; unfortunately the
papyrus is very fragmentary and preserves few reign-lengths entire, and
Manetho's evidence seems very untrustworthy, being known only from late
excerpts. (2) The duration of a period may be calculated by
_generations_ or the probable average lengths of reigns, but such
calculations are of little value, and the succession of generations even
when the evidence seems to be full is particularly difficult to
ascertain in Egyptian, owing to adoptions and the repetition of the same
name even in one family of brothers and sisters. (3) _Synchronisms_ in
the histories of other countries furnish reliable dates--Greek, Persian,
Babylonian and Biblical dates for the XXVIth Dynasty, Assyrian for the
XXVth; less precise are the Biblical date of Rehoboam, contemporary with
the invasion of Shishak (Sheshonk) in the XXIInd Dynasty, and the date
of the Babylonian and Assyrian kings contemporary with Amenhotp IV. in
the XVIIIth Dynasty. The last, about 1400 B.C., is the earliest point to
which such coincidences reach. (4) _Astronomical data_, especially the
heliacal risings of Sothis recorded by dates of their celebration in the
vague year. These are easily calculated on the assumption first that the
observations were correctly made, secondly that the calendrical dates
are in the year of 365 days beginning on 1st Thoth, and thirdly that
this year subsequently underwent no readjustment or other alteration
before the reign of Euergetes. The assumption may be a reasonable one,
and if the results agree with probabilities as deduced from the rest of
the evidence it is wise to adopt it; if on the other hand the other
evidence seems in any serious degree contrary to those results it may be
surmised that the assumption is faulty in some particular. The harvest
date referred to below helps to show that the first part of the
assumption is justified.

  +---------+---------------+--------+----------+------+--------+------+
  |Dynasty. |  Meyer 1887   |Petrie  |  Meyer   |Sethe |Breasted|Petrie|
  |         |(minimum date).|1894 &c.|1904-1908.|1905. |  1906. |1906. |
  +---------+---------------+--------+----------+------+--------+------+
  |      I. | }             |  4777  |  3315    | 3360 |  3400  | 5510 |
  |     II. | }   3180      |  4514  |          | 3110 |        | 5247 |
  |    III. | }             |  4212  |  2895    | 2810 |  2980  | 4945 |
  |     IV. |     2830      |  3998  |  2840    | 2720 |  2900  | 4731 |
  |      V. |               |  3721  |  2680    | 2630 |  2750  | 4454 |
  |     VI. |     2530      |  3503  |  2540    | 2480 |  2625  | 4206 |
  |    VII. |               |  3322  |          | 2300 |  2475  | 4003 |
  |   VIII. |               |  3252  |          |      |        | 3933 |
  |     IX. |               |  3106  |  2360    |      |  2445  | 3787 |
  |      X. |               |  3006  |          |      |        | 3687 |
  |     XI. |               |  2821  |  2160    | 2100 |  2160  | 3502 |
  |    XII. |     2130      |  2778  |  2000    | 2000 |  2000  | 3459 |
  |   XIII. |     1930      |  2565  |  1791    |      |  1788  | 3246 |
  |    XIV. |               |  2112  |          |      |        | 2793 |
  |     XV. |     1780      |        |  1680[*] |      |        | 2533 |
  |    XVI. |               |  1928  |          |      |        | 2249 |
  |   XVII. |               |  1738  |          |      |        | 1731 |
  |  XVIII. |     1530      |  1587  |  1580    |      |  1580  | 1580 |
  |    XIX. |     1320      |  1327  |  1321    |      |  1350  | 1323 |
  +---------+---------------+--------+----------+------+--------+------+
    [*] Meyer makes XIII. overlap XV. (Hyksos), and XIV. (Xoite),
    contemporary with XVI. (Hyksos) and XVII. (Theban).

The duration of the reigns in several dynasties is fairly well known
from the incontrovertible evidence of contemporary monuments. The XXVIth
Dynasty, which lasted 139 years, is particularly clear, and synchronisms
fix its regnal dates to the years B.C. within an error of one or two
years at most. The lengths of several reigns in the XIIth, XVIIIth and
XIXth Dynasties are known, and the sum total for the XIIth Dynasty is
preserved better than any other in the Turin Papyrus, which was written
under the XIXth Dynasty. The succession and number of the kings are also
ascertained for other dynasties, together with many regnal dates, but
very serious gaps exist in the records of the Egyptian monuments, the
worst being between the XIIth and the XVIIIth Dynasties, between the
XIth and the VIth, and at Dynasties I.-III. For the chronology before
the time of the XXVIth Dynasty Herodotus's history is quite worthless.
Manetho alone of all authorities offers a complete chronology from the
1st Dynasty to the XXXth. In the case of the six kings of the XXVIth
Dynasty, Africanus, the best of his excerptors, gives correct figures
for five reigns, but attributes six instead of sixteen years to Necho;
the other excerptors have wrong numbers throughout. For the XIXth
Dynasty Manetho's figures are wrong wherever we can check them; the
names, too, are seriously faulty. In the XVIIIth Dynasty he has too many
names and few are clearly identifiable, while the numbers are
incomprehensible. In the XIIth Dynasty the number of the kings is
correct and many of the names can be justified, but the reign-lengths
are nearly, if not quite, all wrong. The summations of years for the
Dynasties XII. and XVIII. are likewise wrong. It seems, therefore, that
the known texts of Manetho, serviceable as they have been in the
reconstruction of Egyptian history, cannot be employed as a serious
guide to the early chronology, since they are faulty wherever we can
check them, even in the XXVIth Dynasty whose kings were so celebrated
among the Greeks. There remain the astronomical data. Of these, the
Sothic date furnished by a calendar in the Ebers Papyrus of the 9th year
of Amenophis I. (when interpreted on the assumption stated above), and
another at Elephantine of an uncertain year of Tethmosis III., tally
well with each other (1550-1546, 1474-1470 B.C.) and with the Babylonian
synchronism (not yet accurately determined) under Amenhotp IV.
(Akhenaton). Another Sothic date of the 7th year of Senwosri III. on a
Berlin papyrus from Kahun, similarly interpreted (1882-1878 B.C.), gives
for the XIIth Dynasty a range from 2000 to 1788 B.C. This (discovered by
L. Borchardt in 1899) seems to offer a welcome ray, piercing the
obscurity of early Egyptian chronology; guided by it the historian Ed.
Meyer, and K. Sethe have framed systems of chronology in close agreement
with each other, reaching back to the 1st Dynasty at about 3400 B.C. To
Meyer is further due a calculation that the Egyptian calendar was
introduced in 4241-4238 B.C.[19] Their results in general have been
adopted by the "Berlin school," including Erman, Steindorff (in
Baedeker's _Egypt_) and Breasted in America. Nevertheless many
Egyptologists are unwilling to accept the new chronology, the chief
obstacle being that it allows so short an interval for the six dynasties
between the XIIth and the XVIIIth. If the XIIth Dynasty ended about 1790
B.C. and the XVIIIth began about 1570 B.C., taking what seems to be the
utmost interval that it permits, 220 years have to contain a crowd of
kings of whom nearly 100 are already known by name from monuments and
papyri, while fresh names are being added annually to the long list; the
shattered fragments of the last columns in the Turin Papyrus show space
for 150 or perhaps 180 kings of this period, apparently without reaching
the XVIIth Dynasty. An estimate of 160 to 200 kings would therefore not
be excessive. The dates that have come down to us are very few; the only
ones known from the Hyksos period are of a 12th and a 33rd year. In the
Turin Papyrus two reign-lengths of less than a year, seven others of
less than five years each, one of ten years and one of thirteen seem
attributable to the XIIIth and XIVth Dynasties. Probably most of the
reigns were short, as Manetho also decidedly indicates. It is possible
that the compiler of the Turin Papyrus, who excluded contemporary reigns
in the period between the VIth and the XIIth Dynasties, here admitted
such; nor is a correspondingly large number of kings in so short a
period without analogies in history. Professor Petrie, however, thinks
it best, while accepting the evidence of the Sirius date, to suppose
further that a whole Sothic period of 1460 years had passed in the
interval, making a total of 1650 years for the six dynasties in place of
220 years. This, however, seems greatly in excess of probability, and
several Egyptologists familiar with excavation are willing to accept
Meyer's figures on archaeological grounds. To the present writer it
seems that Meyer's chronology provides a convenient working theory, but
involves such an improbability in regard to the interval between the
XIIth and the XVIIIth Dynasties that the interpretation of the Sothic
date on which it is founded must be viewed with suspicion until clear
facts are found to corroborate it. Corroboration has been sought by
Mahler, Sethe and Petrie in the dates of new moons, of warlike and other
expeditions, and of high Nile, but their evidence so far is too vague
and uncertain to affect the question seriously. It is remarkable that no
records of eclipses are known from Egyptian documents. The interesting
date of the harvest at El Bersha, quoted by Meyer in Breasted,
_Records_, i. p. 48, confirms the Sothic date for the XIIth Dynasty in
some measure, but it belongs to the same age, and therefore its evidence
would be equally vitiated with the other by any subsequent alteration in
the Egyptian calendar. Before the discovery of the Kahun Sothic date,
Professor Petrie put the end of the XIIth Dynasty at 2565 B.C.; in 1884
even Meyer had suggested 1930 B.C. as its _minimum_ date, thus allowing
400 years at the least for the period from the XIIIth Dynasty to the
XVIIth.

  +----------+-----------+-------+------------+----------+---------+
  | Dynasty. | Wiedemann | Meyer |   Petrie   | Breasted | Maspero |
  |          |   1884.   | 1884. | 1905-1906. |   1906.  |  1904.  |
  +----------+-----------+-------+------------+----------+---------+
  |     XIX. |   1490    |  1320 |(1328), 1322|   1350   |         |
  |      XX. |   1280    |  1180 |    1202    |   1200   |         |
  |     XXI. |   1100    |  1060 |    1102    |   1090   |         |
  |    XXII. |    975    |   930 |     952    |    945   |         |
  |   XXIII. |    810    |       |     755    |    745   |         |
  |    XXIV. |    720    |       |     721    |    718   |         |
  |     XXV. |    715    |   728 |     715    |    712   |         |
  |    XXVI. |    664    |   663 |     664    |    663   |         |
  |   XXVII. |    525    |   525 |     525    |    525   |    425  |
  |  XXVIII. |    415    |       |     405    |          | c. 405  |
  |    XXIX. |    408    |       |     399    |          |    399  |
  |     XXX. |    387    |       |     378    |          |    380  |
  |   Ochus  |    350    |       |     342    |          |    342  |
  +----------+-----------+-------+------------+----------+---------+

Beyond the XIIth Dynasty estimates must again be vague. The spacing of
the years on the Palermo stone has given rise to some calculations for
the early dynasties. Others are grounded on the dates of certain
operations which are likely to have taken place at particular seasons
of the year so that they can be roughly calculated on the Sothic basis,
others on Manetho's figures, average lengths of reigns, evidence of the
Turin Papyrus, &c.

Table I. page 79 shows the chronology of the first nineteen dynasties,
according to recent authorities, before and after the discovery of the
Kahun Sothic date.

The dates of the earlier dynasties in this table are always intended to
be only approximate; for instance, Meyer in 1904 allowed an error of 100
years either of excess or deficiency in the dates he assigned to the
dynasties from the Xth upwards.

The other dynasties are dated as in Table II. by different authorities.

  See Ed. Meyer, _Geschichte des Altertums_, Bd. i. (Stuttgart, 1884),
  _Geschichte des alten Agyptens_ (1887), _Agyptische Chronologie_
  (_Abhandl._ of Prussian Academy) (Berlin, 1904, with the supplement
  _Nachtrage zur agypt. Chronologie_, ib. 1907); K. Sethe, "Beitrage zur
  altesten Geschichte Agyptens" (in his _Untersuchungen_, Bd. iii.)
  (Leipzig, 1905); J. H. Breasted, _Ancient Records of Egypt_,
  "Historical Documents," vol. i. (Chicago, 1906); W. M. F. Petrie, _A
  History of Egypt_, vol. i. (London, 1884), vol. iii. (1905),
  _Researches in Sinai_ (London, 1906); G. Maspero, _Histoire ancienne
  des peuples de l'orient_ (Paris, 1904); A. Wiedemann, _Agyptische
  Geschichte_ (Gotha, 1884); articles by Mahler and others in the
  _Zeitschrift fur agyptische Sprache and Orientalistische
  Literaturzeitung_ (recent years).     (F. Ll. G.)


III. HISTORY

1. _From the Earliest Times to the Moslem Conquest._

In the absence of a strict chronology, the epochs of Pharaonic history
are conveniently reckoned in dynasties according to Manetho's scheme,
and these dynasties are grouped into longer periods:--the Old Kingdom
(Dynasties I. to VIII.), including the Earliest Dynasties (I. to III.)
and the Pyramid Period (Dynasties IV. to VI.); the Middle Kingdom
(Dynasties IX. to XVII.), including the Heracleopolite Dynasties (IX. to
X.) and the Hyksos Period (Dynasties XV. to XVII.); the New Empire
(Dynasties XVIII. to XX.); the Deltaic Dynasties (Dynasties XXI. to
XXXI.), including the Saite and Persian Periods (Dynasties XXVI. to
XXXI.). The conquest by Alexander ushers in the Hellenistic age,
comprising the periods of Ptolemaic and Roman rule.

_The Prehistoric Age._--One of the most striking features of recent
Egyptology is the way in which the earliest ages of the civilization,
before the conventional Egyptian style was formed, have been illustrated
by the results of excavation. Until 1895 there seemed little hope of
reaching the records of those remote times, although it was plain that
the civilization had developed in the Nile valley for many centuries
before the IVth Dynasty, beyond which the earliest known monuments
scarcely reached. Since that year, however, there has been a steady flow
of discoveries in prehistoric and early historic cemeteries, and, partly
in consequence of this, monuments already known, such as the annals of
the Palermo stone, have been made articulate for the beginnings of
history in Egypt.

It is probable that certain rudely chipped flints, so-called eoliths, in
the alluvial gravels (formed generally at the mouth of wadis opening on
to the Nile) at Thebes and elsewhere, are the work of primitive man; but
it has been shown that such are produced also by natural forces in the
rush of torrents. On the surface of the desert, at the borders of the
valley, palaeolithic implements of well-defined form are not uncommon,
and bear the marks of a remote antiquity. In some cases they appear to
lie where they were chipped on the sites of flint factories. Geologists
and anthropologists are not yet agreed on the question whether the
climate and condition of the country have undergone large changes since
these implements were deposited. As yet none have been found in such
association with animal remains as would help in deciding their age, nor
have any implements been discovered in rock-shelters or in caves.

Of neolithic remains, arrowheads and other implements are found in some
numbers in the deserts. In the Fayum region, about the borders of the
ancient Lake of Moeris and beyond, they are particularly abundant and
interesting in their forms. But their age is uncertain; some may be
contemporary with the advanced culture of the XIIth Dynasty in the Nile
valley. Definite history on the other hand has been gained from the
wonderful series of "prehistoric" cemeteries excavated by J. de Morgan,
Petrie, Reisner and others on the desert edgings of the cultivated
alluvium. The succession of archaeological types revealed in them has
been tabulated by Petrie in his _Diospolis Parva_; and the detailed
publication of Reisner's unusually careful researches is bringing much
new light on the questions involved, amongst other things showing the
exact point at which the "prehistoric" series merges into the Ist
Dynasty, for, as might be surmised, in many cases the prehistoric
cemeteries continued in use under the earliest dynasties. The finest
pottery, often painted but all hand-made without the wheel, belongs to
the prehistoric period; so also do the finest flint implements, which,
in the delicacy and exactitude of their form and flaking, surpass all
that is known from other countries. Metal seems to be entirely absent
from the earliest type of graves, but immediately thereafter copper
begins to appear (bronze is hardly to be found before the XIIth
Dynasty). The paintings on the vases show boats driven by oars and sails
rudely figured, and the boats bear emblematic standards or ensigns. The
cemeteries are found throughout Upper and Middle Egypt, but as yet have
not been met with in the Delta or on its borders. This might be
accounted for by the inhabitants of Lower Egypt having practised a
different mode of disposing of the dead, or by their cemeteries being
differently placed.

Tradition, mythology and later customs make it possible to recover a
scrap of the political history of that far-off time. Menes, the founder
of the Ist Dynasty, united the two kingdoms of Upper and Lower Egypt. In
the prehistoric period, therefore, these two realms were separate. The
capital of Upper Egypt was Nekheb, now represented by the ruins of El
Kab, with the royal residence across the river at Nekhen
(Hieraconpolis); that of Lower Egypt was at Buto (Puto or Dep) in the
marshes, with the royal residence in the quarter called Pe. Nekhebi,
goddess of El Kab, represented the Upper or Southern Kingdom, which was
also under the tutelage of the god Seth, the goddess Buto and the god
Horus similarly presiding over the Lower Kingdom. The royal god in the
palace of each was a hawk or Horus. The spirits of the deceased kings
were honoured respectively as the jackal-headed spirits of Nekhen and
the hawk-headed spirits of Pe. As we hear also of the "spirits of On" it
is probable that Heliopolis was at one time capital of a kingdom. In
after days the prehistoric kings were known as "Worshippers of Horus"
and in Manetho's list they are the [Greek: nekues] "Dead," and [Greek:
heroes] "Heroes," being looked upon as intermediate between the divine
dynasties and those of human kings. It is impossible to estimate the
duration of the period represented by the prehistoric cemeteries; that
the two kingdoms existed throughout unchanged is hardly probable.

According to the somatologist Elliott Smith, the most important change
in the physical character of the people of Upper Egypt, in the entire
range of Egyptian archaeology, took place at the beginning of the
dynastic period; and he accounts for this by the mingling of the Lower
with the Upper Egyptian population, consequent on the uniting of the two
countries under one rule. From remains of the age of the IVth Dynasty he
is able to define to some extent the type of the population of Lower
Egypt as having a better cranial and muscular development than that of
Upper Egypt, probably through immigration from Syria. The advent of the
dynasties, however, produced a quickening rather than a dislocation in
the development of civilization.

It is doubtful whether we possess any writing of the prehistoric age. A
few names of the kings of Lower Egypt are preserved in the first line of
the Palermo stone, but no annals are attached to them. Petrie considers
that one of the kings buried at Abydos, provisionally called Nar-mer and
whose real name may be Mer or Beza, preceded Menes; of him there are
several inscribed records, notably a magnificent carved and inscribed
slate palette found at Hieraconpolis, with figures of the king and his
vizier, war-standards and prisoners. To identify him with Bezau
(Boethos) of the IInd Dynasty runs counter to much archaeological
evidence. Sethe places him next after Menes and some would identify him
with that king. Another inscribed palette may be pre-dynastic; it
perhaps mentions a king named "Scorpion."


  The earliest dynasties.

_The Old Kingdom._--The names of a number of kings attributable to the
Ist Dynasty are known from their tombs at Abydos. Unfortunately, they
are almost exclusively Horus titles [HRG: tyw-O33], in place of the
personal names by which they were recorded in the lists of Abydos and
Manetho; some, however, of the latter are found, and prove that the
scribes of the New Kingdom were unable to read them correctly. Important
changes and improvements took place in the writing even during the Ist
Dynasty. The personal name of Menes [HRG: mn] is given by one only of
many relics of a king whose Horus-name was Aha, "the Fighter." Doubts
have been expressed about the identification with Menes, but it is
strongly corroborated by the very archaic style of the remains. The name
of Aha (Menes) was found in two tombs, one at Nagada north of Thebes and
nearly opposite the road to the Red Sea, the other at Abydos. Manetho
makes the Ist Dynasty Thinite, this being the capital of the nome in
which Abydos lay. Upper Egypt always had precedence over Lower Egypt,
and it seems clear that Menes came from the former and conquered the
latter. According to tradition he founded Memphis which lay on the
frontier of his conquest; probably he resided there as well as at
Abydos; at any rate relics of one of the later kings of the Ist Dynasty
have already been recognized in its vast necropolis. Of the eight kings
of the Ist Dynasty, three--the fifth, sixth and seventh in the Ramesside
list of Abydos--are positively identified by tomb-remains from Abydos,
and others are scarcely less certain. Two of the kings have also left
tablets at the copper and turquoise mines of Wadi Maghara in Sinai. The
royal tombs are built of brick, but one of them, that of Usaphais, had
its floor of granite from Elephantine. They must have been filled with
magnificent furniture and provisions of every kind, including annual
record-tablets of the reigns, carved in ivory and ebony. From a fragment
on the Palermo stone it is clear that material existed as late as the
Vth Dynasty for a brief note of the height of the Nile and other
particulars in each year of the reign of these kings.

The IInd Dynasty of Manetho appears to have been separated from the Ist
even on the Palermo stone; it also was Thinite, and the tombs of several
of its nine (?) kings were found at Abydos. The IIIrd Dynasty is given
as Memphite by Manetho. Two of the kings built huge mastaba-tombs at Bet
Khallaf near Abydos, but the architect and learned scribe Imhotp
designed for one of these two kings, named Zoser, a second and mightier
monument at Memphis, the great step-pyramid of Sakkara. In Ptolemaic
times Imhotp was deified, and the traditional importance of Zoser is
shown by a forged grant of the Dodecaschoenus to the cataract god Khnum,
purporting to be from his reign, but in reality dating from the
Ptolemaic age. With Snefru, at the end of this dynasty, we reach the
beginning of Egyptian history as it was known before the recent
discoveries. Monuments and written records are henceforth more numerous
and important, and the Palermo annals show a fuller scale of record. The
events in the three years that are preserved include a successful raid
upon the negroes, and the construction of ships and gates of cedar-wood
which must have been brought from the forests of the Lebanon. Snefru
also set up a tablet at Wadi Maghara in Sinai. He built two pyramids,
one of them at Medum in steps, the other, probably in the perfected
form, at Dahshur, both lying between Memphis and the Fayum.


  The pyramid period.

Pyramids did not cease to be built in Egypt till the New Kingdom; but
from the end of the IIIrd to the VIth Dynasty is pre-eminently the time
when the royal pyramid in stone was the chief monument left by each
successive king. Zoser and Snefru have been already noticed. The
personal name enclosed in a cartouche [HRG] is henceforth the commonest
title of the king. We now reach the IVth Dynasty containing the famous
names of Cheops (q.v.), Chephren (Khafre) and Mycerinus (Menkeure),
builders respectively of the Great, the Second and the Third Pyramids of
Giza. In the best art of this time there was a grandeur which was never
again attained. Perhaps the noblest example of Egyptian sculpture in the
round is a diorite statue of Chephren, one of several found by Mariette
in the so-called Temple of the Sphinx. This "temple" proves to be a
monumental gate at the lower end of the great causeway leading to the
plateau on which the pyramids were built. A king Dedefre, between Cheops
and Chephren, built a pyramid at Abu-Roash. Shepseskaf is one of the
last in the dynasty. Tablets of most of these kings have been found at
the mines of Wadi Maghara. In the neighbourhood of the pyramids there
are numerous mastabas of the court officials with fine sculpture in the
chapels, and a few decorated tombs from the end of this centralized
dynasty of absolute monarchs are known in Upper Egypt. A tablet which
describes Cheops as the builder of various shrines about the Great
Sphinx has been shown to be a priestly forgery, but the Sphinx itself
may have been carved out of the rock under the splendid rule of the IVth
Dynasty.

The Vth Dynasty is said to be of Elephantine, but this must be a
mistake. Its kings worshipped Re, the sun, rather than Horus, as their
ancestor, and the title [HRG: zA-hrw] "son of the Sun" began to be
written by them before the cartouche containing the personal name, while
another "solar" cartouche, containing a name compounded with Re,
followed the title [HRG: sw:t-bit:t] "king of Upper and Lower Egypt."
Sahure and the other kings of the dynasty built magnificent temples with
obelisks dedicated to Re, one of which, that of Neuserre at Abusir, has
been thoroughly explored. The marvellous tales of the Westcar Papyrus,
dating from the Middle Kingdom, narrate how three of the kings were born
of a priestess of Re. The pyramids of several of the kings are known.
The early ones are at Abusir, and the best preserved of the pyramid
temples, that of Sahure, excavated by the German Orient-Gesellschaft, in
its architecture and sculptured scenes has revealed an astonishingly
complete development of art and architecture as well as of warlike
enterprise by sea and land at this remote period; the latest pyramid
belonging to the Vth Dynasty, that of Unas at Sakkara, is inscribed with
long ritual and magical texts. Exquisitely sculptured tombs of this time
are very numerous at Memphis and are found throughout Upper Egypt. Of
work in the traditional temples of the country no trace remains,
probably because, being in limestone, it has all perished. The annals of
the Palermo stone were engraved and added to during this dynasty; the
chief events recorded for the time are gifts and endowments for the
temples. Evidently priestly influence was strong at the court.
Expeditions to Sinai and Puoni (Punt) are commemorated on tablets.

The VIth Dynasty if not more vigorous was more articulate; inscribed
tombs are spread throughout the country. The most active of its kings
was the third, named Pepi or Phiops, from whose pyramid at Sakkara the
capital, hitherto known as "White Walls," derived its later name of
Memphis (MN-NFR, Mempi); a tombstone from Abydos celebrates the activity
of a certain Una during the reigns of Pepi and his successor in
organizing expeditions to the Sinai peninsula and south Palestine, and
in transporting granite from Elephantine and other quarries. Herkhuf,
prince of Elephantine and an enterprising leader of caravans to the
south countries both in Nubia and the Libyan oases, flourished under
Merenre and Pepi II. called Neferkere. On one occasion he brought home a
dwarf dancer from the Sudan, described as being like one brought from
Puoni in the time of the fifth-dynasty king Assa; this drew from the
youthful Pepi II. an enthusiastic letter which was engraved in full upon
the facade of Herkhuf's tomb. The reign of the last-named king, begun
early, lasted over ninety years, a fact so long remembered that even
Manetho attributes to him ninety-four years; its length probably caused
the ruin of the dynasty. The local princelings and monarchs had been
growing in culture, wealth and power, and after Pepi II. an ominous gap
in the monuments, pointing to civil war, marks the end of the Old
Kingdom. The VIIth and VIIIth Dynasties are said to have been Memphite,
but of them no record survives beyond some names of kings in the lists.


  Heracleopolite period.

_The Middle Kingdom._--The long Memphite rule was broken by the IXth and
Xth Dynasties, of Heracleopolis Magna (Hes) in Middle Egypt. Kheti or
Achthoes was apparently a favourite name with the kings, but they are
very obscure. They may have spread their rule by conquest over Upper
Egypt and then overthrown the Memphite dynasty. The chief monuments of
the period are certain inscribed tombs at Assiut; it appears that one of
the kings, whose praenomen was Mikere, supported by a fleet and army
from Upper Egypt, and especially by the prince of Assiut, was restored
to his paternal city of Heracleopolis, from which he had probably been
driven out; his pyramid, however, was built in the old royal necropolis
at Memphis. Later the princes of Thebes asserted their independence and
founded the XIth Dynasty, which pushed its frontiers northwards until
finally it occupied the whole country. Its kings were named Menthotp,
from Mont, one of the gods of Thebes; others, perhaps sub-kings, were
named Enyotf (Antef). They were buried at Thebes, whence the coffins of
several were obtained by the early collectors of the 19th century.
Nibhotp Menthotp I. probably established his rule over all Egypt. The
funerary temple of Nebhepre Menthotp III., the last but one of these
kings, has been excavated by the Egypt Exploration Fund at Deir el
Bahri, and must have been a magnificent monument. His successor
Sankhkere Menthotp IV. is known to have sent an expedition by the Red
Sea to Puoni.

The XIIth Dynasty is the central point of the Middle Kingdom, to which
the decline of the Memphite and the rise of the Heracleopolite dynasty
mark the transition, while the growth of Thebes under the XIth Dynasty
is its true starting-point. Monuments of the XIIth Dynasty are abundant
and often of splendid design and workmanship, whereas previously there
had been little produced since the VIth Dynasty that was not half
barbarous. Although not much of the history of the XIIth Dynasty is
ascertained, the Turin Papyrus and many dated inscriptions fix the
succession and length of reign of the eight kings very accurately. The
troubled times that the kingdom had passed through taught the long-lived
monarchs the precaution of associating a competent successor on the
throne. The nomarchs and the other feudal chiefs were inclined to
strengthen themselves at the expense of their neighbours; a firm hand
was required to hold them in check and distribute the honours as they
were earned by faithful service. The tombs of the most favoured and
wealthy princes are magnificent, particularly those of certain families
in Middle Egypt at Beni Hasan, El Bersha, Assiut and Deir Rifa, and it
is probable that each had a court and organization within his nome like
that of the royal palace in miniature. Eventually, in the reigns of
Senwosri III. and Amenemhe III., the succession of strong kings appears
to have centralized all authority very completely. The names in the
dynasty are Amenemhe (Ammenemes) and Senwosri (formerly read Usertesen
or Senusert). The latter seems to be the origin of the Sesostris (q.v.)
and Sesoosis of the legends. Amenemhe I., the first king, whose
connexion with the previous dynasty is not known, reigned for thirty
years, ten of them being in partnership with his son Senwosri I. He had
to fight for his throne and then reorganize the country, removing his
capital or residence from Thebes to a central situation near Lisht about
25 m. south of Memphis. His monuments are widespread in Egypt, the
quarries and mines in the desert as far as Sinai bear witness to his
great activity, and we know of an expedition which he made against the
Nubians. The "Instructions of Amenemhe to his son Senwosri," whether
really his own or a later composition, refer to these things, to his
care for his subjects, and to the ingratitude with which he was
rewarded, an attempt on his life having been made by the trusted
servants in his own palace. The story of Sinuhi is the true or realistic
history of a soldier who, having overheard the secret intelligence of
Amenemhe's death, fled in fear to Palestine or Syria and there became
rich in the favour of the prince of the land; growing old, however, he
successfully sued for pardon from Senwosri and permission to return and
die in Egypt.

Senwosri I. was already the executive partner in the time of the
co-regency, warring with the Libyans and probably in the Sudan. After
Amenemhe's death he fully upheld the greatness of the dynasty in his
long reign of forty-five years. The obelisk of Heliopolis is amongst his
best-known monuments, and the damming of the Lake of Moeris (q.v.) must
have been in progress in his reign. He built a temple far up the Nile at
Wadi Halfa and there set up a stela commemorating his victories over the
tribes of Nubia. The fine tombs of Ameni at Beni Hasan and of Hepzefa at
Assiut belong to his reign. The pyramids of both father and son are at
Lisht.

Amenemhe II. was buried at Dahshur; he was followed by Senwosri II.,
whose pyramid is at Illahun at the mouth of the Fayum. In his reign were
executed the fine paintings in the tomb of Khnemhotp at Beni Hasan,
which include a remarkable scene of Semitic Bedouins bringing eye-paint
to Egypt from the eastern deserts. In Manetho he is identified with
Sesostris (see above), but Senwosri I., and still more Senwosri III.,
have a better claim to this distinction. The latter warred in Palestine
and in Nubia, and marked the south frontier of his kingdom by a statue
and stelae at Semna beyond the Second Cataract. Near his pyramid was
discovered the splendid jewelry of some princesses of his family (see
JEWELRY ad init.). The tomb of Thethotp at El Bersha, celebrated for the
scene of the transport of a colossus amongst its paintings, was finished
in this reign.

Amenemhe III. completed the work of Lake Moeris and began a series of
observations of the height of the inundation at Semna which was
continued by his successors. In his long reign of forty-six years he
built a pyramid at Dahshur, and at Hawara near the Lake of Moeris
another pyramid together with the Labyrinth which seems to have been an
enormous funerary temple attached to the pyramid. His name was
remembered in the Fayum during the Graeco-Roman period and his effigy
worshipped there as Pera-marres, i.e. Pharaoh Marres (Marres being his
praenomen graecized). Amenemhe IV.'s reign was short, and the dynasty
ended with a queen Sebeknefru (Scemiophris), whose name is found in the
scanty remains of the Labyrinth. The XIIth Dynasty numbered eight rulers
and lasted for 213 years. Great as it was, it created no empire outside
the Nile valley, and its most imposing monument, which according to the
testimony of the ancients rivalled the pyramids, is now represented by a
vast stratum of chips.

The history of the following period down to the rise of the New Empire
is very obscure. Manetho gives us the XIIIth (Diospolite) Dynasty, the
XIVth (Xoite from Xois in Lower Egypt), the XVth and XVIth (Hyksos) and
the XVIIth (Diospolite), but his names are lost except for the Hyksos
kings. The Abydos tablet ignores all between the XIIth and XVIIIth
Dynasties. The Turin Papyrus preserves many names on its shattered
fragments, and the monuments are for ever adding to the list, but it is
difficult to assign them accurately to their places. The Hyksos names
can in some cases be recognized by their foreign aspect, the peculiar
style of the scarabs on which they are engraved or by resemblances to
those recorded in Manetho. The kings of the XVIIth Dynasty too are
generally recognizable by the form of their name and other
circumstances. Manetho indicates marvellous crowding for the XIIIth and
XIVth Dynasties, but it seems better to suggest a total duration of 300
or 400 years for the whole period than to adopt Meyer's estimate of
about 210 years (see above, Chronology).

Amongst the kings of the XIIIth Dynasty (including perhaps the XIVth),
not a few are represented by granite statues of colossal size and fine
workmanship, especially at Thebes and Tanis, some by architectural
fragments, some by graffiti on the rocks about the First Cataract. Some
few certainly reigned over all Egypt. Sebkhotp (Sekhotp, [Greek:
Sochotes]) is a favourite name, no doubt to be connected with the god of
the Fayum. Several of the Theban kings named Antef (Enyotf) must be
placed here rather than in the XIth Dynasty. A decree of one of them
degrading a monarch who had sided with his enemies was found at Coptos
engraved on a doorway of Senwosri I.


  The Hyksos period.

In its divided state Egypt would fall an easy prey to the foreigner.
Manetho says that the Hyksos (q.v.) gained Egypt without a blow. Their
domination must have lasted a considerable time, the Rhind mathematical
papyrus having been copied in the thirty-third year of a king Apophis.
The monuments and scarabs of the Hyksos kings are found throughout Upper
and Lower Egypt; those of Khian somehow spread as far as Crete and
Bagdad. The Hyksos, in whom Josephus recognized the children of Israel,
worshipped their own Syrian deity, identifying him with the Egyptian god
Seth, and endeavoured to establish his cult throughout Egypt to the
detriment of the native gods. It is to be hoped that definite light may
one day be forthcoming on the whole of this critical episode which had
such a profound effect on the character and history of the Egyptian
people. The spirited overthrow of the Hyksos ushered in the glories in
arms and arts which marked the New Empire. The XVIIth Dynasty probably
began the struggle, at first as semi-independent kinglets at Thebes.
Seqenenre is here a leading name; the mummy of the third Seqenenre, the
earliest in the great find of royal mummies at Deir el Bahri, shows the
head frightfully hacked and split, perhaps in a battle with the Hyksos.


  XVIIIth Dynasty.

  Queen Hatshepsut.

_The New Empire._--The epithet "new" is generally attached to this
period, and "empire" instead of "kingdom" marks its wider power. The
glorious XVIIIth Dynasty seems to have been closely related to the
XVIIth. Its first task was to crush the Hyksos power in the north-east
of the Delta; this was fully accomplished by its founder Ahmosi
(dialectically Ahmasi, Amosis or Amasis I.) capturing their great
stronghold of Avaris. Amasis next attacked them in S.W. Palestine, where
he captured Sharuhen after a siege of three years. He fought also in
Syria and in Nubia, besides overcoming factious opposition in his own
land. The principal source for the history of this time is the
biographical inscription at El Kab of a namesake of the king, Ahmosi son
of Abana, a sailor and warrior whose exploits extend to the reign of
Tethmosis I. Amenophis I. (Amenhotp), succeeding Amasis, fought in Libya
and Ethiopia. Tethmosis I. (c. 1540 B.C.) was perhaps of another family,
but obtained his title to the throne through his wife Ahmosi. After some
thirty years of settled rule uninterrupted by revolt, Egypt was now
strong and rich enough to indulge to the full its new taste for war and
lust of conquest. It had become essentially a military state. The whole
of the administration was in the hands of the king with his vizier and
other court officials; no trace of the feudalism of the Middle Kingdom
survived. Tethmosis thoroughly subdued Cush, which had already been
placed under the government of a viceroy. This province of Cush extended
from Napata just below the Fourth Cataract on the south to El Kab in the
north, so that it included the first three nomes of Upper Egypt, which
agriculturally were not greatly superior to Nubia. Turning next to
Syria, Tethmosis carried his arms as far as the Euphrates. It is
possible that his predecessor had also reached this point, but no record
survives to prove it. These successful campaigns were probably not very
costly, and prisoners, plunder and tribute poured in from them to enrich
Egypt. Tethmosis I. made the first of those great additions to the
temple of the Theban Ammon at Karnak by which the Pharaohs of the Empire
rendered it by far the greatest of the existing temples in the world.
The temple of Deir el Bahri also was designed by him. Towards the end of
his reign, his elder sons being dead, Tethmosis associated Hatshepsut,
his daughter by Ahmosi, with himself upon the throne. Tethmosis I. was
the first of the long line of kings to be buried in the Valley of the
Tombs of the Kings of Thebes. At his death another son Tethmosis II.
succeeded as the husband of his half-sister, but reigned only two or
three years, during which he warred in Nubia and placed Tethmosis III.,
his son by a concubine Esi, upon the throne beside him (c. 1500 B.C.).
After her husband's death the ambitious Hatshepsut assumed the full
regal power; upon her monuments she wears the masculine garb and aspect
of a king though the feminine gender is retained for her in the
inscriptions. On some monuments of this period her name appears alone,
on others in conjunction with that of Tethmosis III., while the latter
again may appear without the queen's; but this extraordinary woman must
have had a great influence over her stepson and was the acknowledged
ruler of Egypt. Tethmosis, to judge by the evidence of his mummy and the
chronology of his reign, was already a grown man, yet no sign of the
immense powers which he displayed later has come down to us from the
joint reign. Hatshepsut cultivated the arts of peace. She restored the
worship in those temples of Upper and Lower Egypt which had not yet
recovered from the religious oppression and neglect of the Hyksos. She
completed and decorated the temple of Deir el Bahri, embellishing its
walls with scenes calculated to establish her claims, representing her
divine origin and upbringing under the protection of Ammon, and her
association on the throne by her human father. The famous sculptures of
the great expedition by water to Puoni, the land of incense on the
Somali coast, are also here, with many others. At Karnak Hatshepsut
laboured chiefly to complete the works projected in the reigns of
Tethmosis I. and II., and set up two obelisks in front of the entrance
as it then was. One of these, still standing, is the most brilliant
ornament of that wonderful temple. A date of the twenty-second year of
her reign has been found at Sinai, no doubt counted from the beginning
of the co-regency with Tethmosis I. Not much later, in his twenty-second
year, Tethmosis III. is reigning alone in full vigour. While she lived,
the personality of the queen secured the devotion of her servants and
held all ambitions in check. Not long after her death there was a
violent reaction. Prejudice against the rule of a woman, particularly
one who had made her name and figure so conspicuous, was probably the
cause of this outbreak, and perhaps sought justification in the fact
that, however complete was her right, she had in some degree usurped a
place to which her stepson (who was also her nephew) had been appointed.
Her cartouches began to be defaced or her monuments hidden up by other
buildings, and the same rage pursued some of her most faithful servants
in their tombs. But the beauty of the work seems to have restrained the
hand of the destroyer. Then came the religious fanaticism of Akhenaton,
mutilating all figures of Ammon and all inscriptions containing his
name; this made havoc of the exquisite monuments of Hatshepsut; and the
restorers of the XIXth Dynasty, refusing to recognize the legitimacy of
the queen, had no scruples in replacing her names by those of the
associate kings Tethmosis I., II. or III. These acts of vandalism took
place throughout Egypt, but in the distant mines of Sinai the cartouches
of Hatshepsut are untouched. In the royal lists of Seti I. and Rameses
II. Hatshepsut has no place, nor is her reign referred to on any later
monument.[20]


  Wars of Tethmosis III.

The immense energy of Tethmosis III. now found its outlet in war. Syria
had revolted, perhaps on Hatshepsut's death, but by his twenty-second
year the monarch was ready to lead his army against the rebels. The
revolt, headed by the city of Kadesh on the Orontes, embraced the whole
of western Syria. The movements of Tethmosis in this first campaign,
including a battle with the Syrian chariots and infantry at Megiddo and
the capture of that city, were chronicled from day to day, and an
extract from this chronicle is engraved on the walls of the sanctuary of
Karnak, together with a brief record of the subsequent expeditions. In a
series of five carefully planned campaigns he consolidated his
conquests in southern Syria and secured the ports of Phoenicia (q.v.).
Kadesh fell in the sixth campaign. In the next year Tethmosis revisited
the Phoenician ports, chastised the rebellious and received the tribute
of Syria, all the while preparing for further advance, which did not
take place until another year had gone by. Then, in the thirty-third
year of his reign, he marched through Kadesh, fought his way to
Carchemish, defeated the forces that opposed him there and crossed over
the Euphrates into the territory of the king of Mitanni. He set up a
tablet by the side of that of Tethmosis I. and turned southward,
following the river as far as Niy. Here he stayed to hunt a herd of 120
elephants, and then, marching westwards, received the tribute of
Naharina and gifts from the Hittites in Asia Minor and from the king of
Babylon. In all he fought seventeen campaigns in Syria until the spirit
of revolt was entirely crushed in a second capture of Kadesh. The wars
in Libya and Ethiopia were of less moment. In the intervals of war
Tethmosis III. proved to be a wonderfully efficient administrator, with
his eye on every corner of his dominions. The Syrian expeditions
occupied six months in most of his best years, but the remaining time
was spent in activity at home, repressing robbery and injustice,
rebuilding and adorning temples with the labour of his captives and the
plunder and tribute of conquered cities, or designing with his own hand
the gorgeous sacred vessels of the sanctuary of Ammon. In his later
years some expeditions took place into Nubia. Tethmosis died in the
fifty-fourth year of his reign. His mummy, found in the _cachette_ at
Deir el Bahri, is said to be that of a very old man. He was the greatest
Pharaoh in the New Empire, if not in all Egyptian history.


  Amenophis III.

Tethmosis III. was succeeded by his son Amenophis II., whom he had
associated on the throne at the end of his reign. One of the first acts
of the new king was to lead an army into Syria, where revolt was again
rife; he reached and perhaps crossed the Euphrates and returned home to
Thebes with seven captive kings of Tikhsi and much spoil. The kings he
sacrificed to Ammon and hanged six bodies on the walls, while the
seventh was carried south to Napata and there exposed as a terror to the
Ethiopians. Amenophis reigned twenty-six years and left his throne to
his son Tethmosis IV., who is best remembered by a granite tablet
recording his clearance of the Great Sphinx. He also warred in northern
Syria and in Cush. His son Amenophis III., c. 1400 B.C., was a mighty
builder, especially at Thebes, where his reign marks a new epoch in the
history of the great temples, Luxor being his creation, while avenues of
rams, pylons, &c., were added on a vast scale to Karnak. He married a
certain Taia, who, though apparently of humble parentage, was held in
great honour by her husband as afterwards by her son. Amenophis III.
warred in Ethiopia, but his sway was long unquestioned from Napata to
the Euphrates. Small objects with his name and that of Taia are found on
the mainland and in the islands of Greece. Through the fortunate
discovery of cuneiform tablets deposited by his successor in the
archives at Tell el-Amarna, we can see how the rulers of the great
kingdoms beyond the river, Mitanni, Assyria and even Babylonia,
corresponded with Amenophis, gave their daughters to him in marriage,
and congratulated themselves on having his friendship. The king of
Cyprus too courted him; while within the empire the descendants of the
Syrian dynasts conquered by his father, having been educated in Egypt,
ruled their paternal possessions as the abject slaves of Pharaoh. A
constant stream of tribute poured into Egypt, sufficient to defray the
cost of all the splendid works that were executed. Amenophis caused a
series of large scarabs unique in their kind to be engraved with the
name and parentage of his queen Taia, followed by varying texts
commemorating like medals the boundaries of his kingdom, his secondary
marriage with Gilukhipa, daughter of the king of Mitanni, the formation
of a sacred lake at Thebes, a great hunt of wild cattle, and the number
of lions the king slew in the first ten years of his reign. The colossi
known to the Greeks by the name of the Homeric hero Memnon, which look
over the western plain of Thebes, represent this king and were placed
before the entrance of his funerary temple, the rest of which has
disappeared. His palace lay farther south on the west bank, built of
crude brick covered with painted stucco. Towards the end of his reign of
thirty-six years, Syria was invaded by the Hittites from the north and
the people called the Khabiri from the eastern desert; some of the
kinglets conspired with the invaders to overthrow the Egyptian power,
while those who remained loyal sent alarming reports to their sovereign.


  Amenophis IV.

Amenophis IV., son of Amenophis III. and Taia, was perhaps the most
remarkable character in the long line of the Pharaohs. He was a
religious fanatic, who had probably been high priest of the sun-god at
Heliopolis, and had come to view the sun as the visible source of life,
creation, growth and activity, whose power was demonstrated in foreign
lands almost as clearly as in Egypt. Thrusting aside all the
multitudinous deities of Egypt and all the mythology even of Heliopolis,
he devoted himself to the cult of the visible sun-disk, applying to it
as its chief name the hitherto rare word Aton, meaning "sun"; the
traditional divine name Harakht (Horus of the horizon), given to the
hawk-headed sun-god of Heliopolis, was however allowed to subsist and a
temple was built at Karnak to this god. The worship of the other gods
was officially recognized until his fifth year, but then a sweeping
reform was initiated by which apparently the new cult alone was
permitted. Of the old deities Ammon represented by far the wealthiest
and most powerful interests, and against this long favoured deity the
Pharaoh hurled himself with fury. He changed his own name from Amenhotp,
"Ammon is satisfied," to Akhenaton, "pious to Aton," erased the name and
figure of Ammon from the monuments, even where it occurred as part of
his own father's name, abandoned Thebes, the magnificent city of Ammon,
and built a new capital at El Amarna in the plain of Hermopolis, on a
virgin site upon the edge of the desert. This with a large area around
he dedicated to Aton in the sixth year, while splendid temples, palaces,
houses and tombs for his god, for himself and for his courtiers were
rising around him; apparently also this "son of Aton" swore an oath
never to pass beyond the boundaries of Aton's special domain. There are
signs also that the polytheistic word "gods" was obliterated on many of
the monuments, but other divine names, though almost entirely excluded
from Akhenaton's work, were left untouched where they already existed.
In all local temples the worship of Aton was instituted. The confiscated
revenues of Ammon and the tribute from Syria and Cush provided ample
means for adorning Ekhaton (Akhetaton), "the horizon of Aton," the new
capital, and for richly rewarding those who adopted the Aton teaching
fervently. But meanwhile the political needs of the empire were
neglected; the dangers which threatened it at the end of the reign of
Amenophis III. were never properly met; the dynasts in Syria were at war
amongst themselves, intriguing with the great Hittite advance and with
the Khabiri invaders. Those who relied on Pharaoh and remained loyal as
their fathers had done sent letter after letter appealing for aid
against their foes. But though a general was despatched with some
troops, he seems to have done more harm than good in misjudging the
quarrels. At length the tone of the letters becomes one of despair, in
which flight to Egypt appears the only resource left for the adherents
of the Egyptian cause. Before the end of the reign Egyptian rule in
Syria had probably ceased altogether. Akhenaton died in or about the
seventeenth year of his reign, c. 1350 B.C. He had a family of
daughters, who appeared constantly with him in all ceremonies, but no
son. Two sons-in-law followed him with brief reigns; but the second,
Tutenkhaton, soon changed his name to Tutenkhamun, and, without
abandoning Ekhaton entirely, began to restore to Karnak its ancient
splendour, with new monuments dedicated to Ammon. Akhenaton's reform had
not reached deep amongst the masses of the population; they probably
retained all their old religious customs and superstitions, while the
priesthoods throughout the country must have been fiercely opposed to
the heretic's work, even if silenced during his lifetime by force and
bribes. One more adherent of his named Ay, a priest, ruled for a short
time, but now Aton was only one of many gods. At length a general named
Harmahib, who had served under Akhenaton, came to the throne as a
whole-hearted supporter of the old religion; soon Aton and his royal
following suffered the fate that they had imposed upon Ammon; their
monuments were destroyed and their names and figures erased, while those
of Ammon were restored. From the time of Rameses II. onwards the years
of the reigns of the heretics were counted to Harmahib, and Akhenaton
was described as "that criminal of Akhetaton." Harmahib had to bring
order as a practical man into the long-neglected administration of the
country and to suppress the extortions of the official classes by severe
measures. His laws to this end were engraved on a great stela in the
temple of Karnak, of which sufficient remains to bear witness to his
high aims, while the prosperity of the succeeding reigns shows how well
he realized the necessities of the state. He probably began also to
re-establish the prestige of Egypt by military expeditions in the
surrounding countries.


  XIXth Dynasty.

  Rameses II.

Harmahib appears to have legitimated his rule by marriage to a royal
princess, but it is probable that Rameses I., who succeeded as founder
of the XIXth Dynasty, was not closely related to him. Rameses in his
brief reign of two years planned and began the great colonnaded hall of
Karnak, proving that he was a man of great ideas, though probably too
old to carry them out; this task he left to his son Seti I., who reigned
one year with his father and on the latter's death was ready at once to
subdue the Bedouin Shasu, who had invaded Palestine and withheld all
tribute. This task was quickly accomplished and Seti pushed onward to
the Lebanon. Here cedars were felled for him by the Syrian princes, and
the Phoenicians paid homage before he returned home in triumph. The
Libyans had also to be dealt with, and afterwards Seti advanced again
through Palestine, ravaged the land of the Amorites and came into
conflict with the Hittites. The latter, however, were now firmly
established in the Orontes valley, and a treaty with Mutallu, the king
of Kheta, reigning far away in Cappadocia, probably ended the wars of
Seti. In his ninth year he turned his attention to the gold mines in the
eastern desert of Nubia and improved the road thither. Meanwhile the
great work at Karnak projected by his father was going forward, and
throughout Egypt the injuries done to the monuments by Akhenaton were
thoroughly repaired; the erased inscriptions and figures were restored,
not without many blunders. Seti's temple at Abydos and his galleried
tomb in the Valley of the Tombs of the Kings stand out as the most
splendid examples of their kind in design and in decoration. Rameses II.
succeeded at an early age and reigned sixty-seven years, during which he
finished much that was begun by Seti and filled all Egypt and Nubia with
his own monuments, some of them beautiful, but most, necessarily
entrusted to inferior workmen, of coarse execution. The excavation of
the rock temple of Abu Simbel and the completion of the great hall of
Karnak were his greatest achievements in architecture. His wars began in
his second year, their field comprising the Nubians, the Libyans, the
Syrians and the Hittites. In his fifth year, near Kadesh on the Orontes,
his army was caught unprepared and divided by a strong force of chariots
of the Hittites and their allies, and Rameses himself was placed in the
most imminent danger; but through his personal courage the enemy was
kept at bay till reinforcements came up and turned the disaster into a
victory. The incidents of this episode were a favourite subject in the
sculptures of his temples, where their representation was accompanied by
a poetical version of the affair and other explanatory inscriptions.
Kadesh, however, was not captured, and after further contests, in his
twenty-first year Rameses and the Hittite king Khattusil (Kheta-sar)
made peace, with a defensive alliance against foreign aggression and
internal revolt (see HITTITES). Thanks to Winckler's discoveries, the
cuneiform text of this treaty from Boghaz Keui can now be compared with
the hieroglyphic text at Karnak. In the thirty-fourth year, c. 1250
B.C., Khattusil with his friend or subject the king of Kode came from
his distant capital to see the wonders of Egypt in person, bringing one
of his daughters to be wife of the splendid Pharaoh. Rameses II. paid
much attention to the Delta, which had been neglected until the days of
Seti I., and resided there constantly; the temple of Tanis must have
been greatly enlarged and adorned by him; a colossus of the king placed
here was over 90 ft. in height, exceeding in scale even the greatest of
the Theban colossi which he had erected in his mortuary temple of the
Ramesseum. Towards the end of the long reign the vigilance and energy of
the old king diminished. The military spirit awakened in the struggle
with the Hyksos had again departed from the Egyptian nation; mercenaries
from the Sudan, from Libya and from the northern nations supplied the
armies, while foreigners settled in the rich lands of the Delta and
harried the coasts. It was a time too when the movements of the nations
that so frequently occurred in the ancient world were about to be
particularly active. Mineptah, c. 1225 B.C., succeeding his father
Rameses II., had to fight many battles for the preservation of his
kingdom and empire. Apparently most of the fighting was finished by the
fifth year of his reign; in his mortuary temple at Thebes he set up a
stela of that date recording a great victory over the Libyan immigrants
and invaders, which rendered the much harried land of Egypt safe. The
last lines picture this condition with the crushing of the surrounding
tribes. Libya was wasted, the Hittites pacified, Canaan, Ashkelon
(Ascalon), Gezer, Yenoam sacked and plundered: "Israel is desolated, his
seed is not, Khor (Palestine) has become a widow (without protector) for
Egypt." The Libyans are accompanied by allies whose names, Sherden,
Shekelesh, Ekwesh, Lukku, Teresh, suggest identifications with
Sardinians, Sicels, Achaeans, Lycians and Tyrseni or Etruscans. The
Sherden had been in the armies of Rameses II., and are distinguished by
their remarkable helmets and apparently body armour of metal. The Lukku
are certainly the same as the Lycians. Probably they were all sea-rovers
from the shores and islands of the Mediterranean, who were willing to
leave their ships and join the Libyans in raids on the rich lands of
Egypt. Mineptah was one of the most unconscionable usurpers of the
monuments of his predecessors, including those of his own father, who,
it must be admitted, had set him the example. The coarse cutting of his
cartouches contrasts with the splendid finish of the Middle Kingdom work
which they disfigure. It may be questioned whether it was due to a wave
of enthusiasm amongst the priests and people, leading them to rededicate
the monuments in the name of their deliverer, or a somewhat insane
desire of the king to perpetuate his own memory in a singularly
unfortunate manner. Mineptah, the thirteenth son in the huge family of
Rameses, must have been old when he ascended the throne; after his first
years of reign his energies gave way, and he was followed by a quick
succession of inglorious rulers, Seti II., the queen Tuosri, Amenmesse,
Siptah; the names of the last two were erased from their monuments.


  XXth Dynasty.

A great papyrus written after the death of Rameses III. and recording his
gifts to the temples briefly reviews the conditions of these troublous
times. "The land of Egypt was in the hands of chiefs and rulers of towns,
great and small slaying each other; afterwards a certain Syrian made
himself chief; he made the whole land tributary before him; he united his
companions and plundered their property (i.e. of the other chiefs). They
made the gods like men, and no offerings were presented in the temples.
But when the gods inclined themselves to peace ... they established their
son Setenkhot (Setnekht) to be ruler of every land." Of the Syrian
occupation we know nothing further. Setenkhot, c. 1200 B.C., had a very
short reign and was not counted as legitimate, but he established a
lasting dynasty (probably by conciliating the priesthood). He was father
of Rameses III., who revived the glories of the empire. The dangers that
menaced Egypt now were similar to those which Mineptah had to meet at his
accession. Again the Libyans and the "peoples of the sea" were acting in
concert. The latter now comprised Peleset (the Cretans, ancestors of the
Philistines), Thekel, Shekelesh, Denyen (Danaoi?) and Weshesh; they had
invaded Syria from Asia Minor, reaching the Euphrates, destroying the
Hittite cities and progressing southwards, while their ships gathered
plunder from the coasts of the Delta. This fleet joined the Libyan
invaders, but was overthrown with heavy loss by the Egyptians, in whose
ranks there actually served many Sherden and Kehaka, Sardinian and Libyan
mercenaries. Egypt itself was thus clear of enemies; but the chariots and
warriors of the Philistines and their associates were advancing through
Syria, their families and goods following in ox-carts, and their ships
accompanying them along the shore. Rameses led out his army and fleet
against them and struck them so decisive a blow that the migrating swarm
submitted to his rule and paid him tribute. In his eleventh year another
Libyan invasion had to be met, and his suzerainty in Palestine forcibly
asserted. His vigour was equal to all these emergencies and the later
years of his reign were spent in peace. Rameses III., however, was not a
great ruler. He was possessed by the spirit of decadence, imitative
rather than originating. It is evident that Rameses II. was the model to
which he endeavoured to conform, and he did not attempt to preserve
himself from the weakening influences of priestcraft. To the temples he
not only restored the property which had been given to them by former
kings, but he also added greatly to their wealth; the Theban Ammon
naturally received by far the greatest share, more than those of all the
other gods together. The land held in the name of different deities is
estimated at about 15% of the whole of Egypt; various temples of Ammon
owned two-thirds of this, Re of Heliopolis and Ptah of Memphis being the
next in wealth. His palace was at Medinet Habu on the west bank of Thebes
in the south quarter; and here he built a great temple to Ammon, adorned
with scenes from his victories and richly provided with divine offerings.
Although Egypt probably was prosperous on the whole, there was
undoubtedly great distress amongst certain portions of the population. We
read in a papyrus of a strike of starving labourers in the Theban
necropolis who would not work until corn was given to them, and
apparently the government storehouse was empty at the time, perhaps in
consequence of a bad Nile. Shortly before the death of the old king a
plot in the harem to assassinate him, and apparently to place one of his
sons on the throne, was discovered and its investigation ordered, leading
after his death to the condemnation of many high-placed men and women.
Nine kings of the name of Rameses now followed each other ingloriously in
the space of about eighty years to the end of the XXth Dynasty, the power
of the high priests of Ammon ever growing at their expense. At this time
the Theban necropolis was being more systematically robbed than ever
before. Under Rameses IX. an investigation took place which showed that
one of the royal tombs before the western cliffs had been completely
ransacked and the mummies burnt. Three years later the Valley of the
Tombs of the Kings was attacked and the sepulchres of Seti I. and Rameses
II. were robbed.


  The Deltaic Dynasties; Libyan period.

The authority of the last king of the XXth Dynasty, Rameses XII., was
shadowy. Hrihor, the high priest in his reign, gradually gathered into
his own hands all real power, and succeeded him at Thebes, c. 1100 B.C.,
while a prince at Tanis named Smendes (Esbenteti) founded a separate
dynasty in the Delta (Dynasty XXI.). From this period dates a remarkable
papyrus containing the report of an envoy named Unamun, sent to Syria by
Hrihor to obtain cedar timber from Byblus. He took with him an image of
Ammon to bestow life and health on the prince of Byblus, but apparently
no other provision for the journey or for the negotiations beyond a
letter of recommendation to Smendes and a little gold and silver.
Smendes had trading ships in the Phoenician ports, but even his
influence was not greater than that of other commercial or pirate
centres, while Hrihor was of no account except in so far as he might pay
well for the cedar wood he required. Unamun was robbed on the voyage,
the prince of Byblus rebuffed him, and when at last the latter agreed to
provide the timber it was only in exchange for substantial gifts hastily
sent for from Egypt (including rolls of papyrus) and the promise of more
to follow. The prince, however, seems to have acknowledged to some
extent the divinity of Ammon and the debt owed by Phoenicia to Egyptian
culture, and pitied the many misfortunes of Unamun. The narrative shows
the feebleness of Egypt abroad. The Tanite line of kings generally had
the over-lordship of the high priests of Thebes; the descendants of
Hrihor, however, sometimes by marriage with princesses of the other
line, could assume cartouches and royal titles, and in some cases
perhaps ruled the whole of Egypt. Ethiopia may have been ruled with the
Thebais, but the records of the time are very scanty. Syria was wholly
lost to Egypt. The mummies from the despoiled tombs of the kings were
the object of much anxious care to the kings of this dynasty; after
being removed from one tomb to another, they were finally deposited in a
shaft near the temple of Deir el Bahri, where they remained for nearly
three thousand years, until the demand for antiquities at last brought
the plunderer once more to their hiding-place; eventually they were all
secured for the Cairo museum, where they may now be seen.

Libyan soldiers had long been employed in the army, and their military
chiefs settled in the large towns and acquired wealth and power, while
the native rulers grew weaker and weaker. The Tanite dynasty may have
risen from a Libyan stock, though there is nothing to prove it; the
XXIInd Dynasty are clearly from their names of foreign extraction, and
their genealogy indicates distinctly a Libyan military origin in a
family of rulers of Heracleopolis Magna, in Middle Egypt. Sheshonk
(Shishak) I., the founder of the dynasty, c. 950 B.C., seems to have
fixed his residence at Bubastis in the Delta, and his son married the
daughter of the last king of the Tanite dynasty. Heracleopolis seems
henceforth for several centuries to have been capital of Middle Egypt,
which was considered as a more or less distinct province. Sheshonk
secured Thebes, making one of his sons high priest of Ammon, and whereas
Solomon appears to have dealt with a king of Egypt on something like an
equal footing, Sheshonk re-established Egyptian rule in Palestine and
Nubia, and his expedition in the fifth year of Rehoboam subdued Israel
as well as Judah, to judge by the list of city names which he inscribed
on the wall of the temple of Karnak. Osorkon I. inherited a prosperous
kingdom from his father, but no further progress was made. It required a
strong hand to curb the Libyan chieftains, and divisions soon began to
show themselves in the kingdom. The XXIInd Dynasty lasted through many
generations; but there were rival kings, and M. Legrain thinks that he
has proof that the XXIIIrd Dynasty was contemporaneous with the end of
the XXIInd. The kings of the XXIIIrd Dynasty had little hold upon the
subject princes, who spent the resources of the country in feuds amongst
themselves. A native kingdom had meanwhile been established in Ethiopia.
Our first knowledge of it is at this moment, when the Ethiopian king
Pankhi already held the Thebais. The energetic prince of Sais, Tefnakht,
followed by most of the princes of the Delta, subdued most of Middle
Egypt, and by uniting these forces threatened the Ethiopian border.
Heracleopolis Magna, however, with its petty king Pefteuaubasti, held
out against Tefnakht, and Pankhi coming to its aid not only drove
Tefnakht out of Middle Egypt, but also captured Memphis and received the
submission of the princes and chiefs; in all these included four "kings"
and fourteen other chiefs. According to Diodorus the Ethiopian state was
theocratic, ruled through the king by the priests of Ammon. The account
is probably exaggerated; but even in Pankhi's record the piety of the
king, especially towards Ammon, is very marked.


  Ethiopian Dynasty.

The XXIVth Dynasty consisted of a single Saite king named Bocchoris
(Bekerrinf), son of Tefnachthus, apparently the above Tefnakht. Another
Ethiopian invader, Shabako (Sabacon), is said to have burnt Bocchoris
alive. The Ethiopian rule of the XXVth Dynasty was now firmly
established, and the resources of the two countries together might have
been employed in conquest in Syria and Phoenicia; but at this very time
the Assyrian empire, risen to the highest pitch of military greatness,
began to menace Egypt. The Ethiopian could do no more than encourage or
support the Syrians in their fight for freedom against Sargon and
Sennacherib. Shabako was followed by Shebitku and Shebitku by Tirhaka
(Tahrak, Taracos). Tirhaka was energetic in opposing the Assyrian
advance, but in 670 B.C. Esarhaddon defeated his army on the border of
Egypt, captured Memphis with the royal harem and took great spoil. The
Egyptian resistance to the Assyrians was probably only half-hearted; in
the north especially there must have been a strong party against the
Ethiopian rule. Tirhaka laboured to propitiate the north country, and
probably rendered the Ethiopian rule acceptable throughout Egypt.
Notwithstanding, the Assyrian king entrusted the government and
collection of tribute to the native chiefs; twenty princes in all are
enumerated in the records, including one Assyrian to hold the key of
Egypt at Pelusium. Scarcely had Esarhaddon withdrawn before Tirhaka
returned from his refuge in the south and the Assyrian garrisons were
massacred. Esarhaddon promptly prepared a second expedition, but died on
the way to Egypt in 668 B.C.; his son Assur-bani-pal sent it forward,
routed Tirhaka and reinstated the governors. At the head of these was
Necho (Niku), king of Sais and Memphis, father of Psammetichus, the
founder of the XXVIth Dynasty. We next hear that correspondence with
Tirhaka was intercepted, and that Necho, together with Pekrur of Psapt
(at the entrance to the Wadi Tumilat) and the Assyrian governor of
Pelusium, was taken to Nineveh in chains to answer the charge of
treason. Whatever may have occurred, it was deemed politic to send Necho
back loaded with honours and surrounded by a retinue of Assyrian
officials. Upper Egypt, however, was loyal to Tirhaka, and even at
Memphis the burial of an Apis bull was dated by the priests as in his
reign. Immediately afterwards he died. His nephew Tandamane, received by
the Upper country with acclamations, besieged and captured Memphis,
Necho being probably slain in the encounter. But in 661 (?)
Assur-bani-pal drove the Ethiopian out of Lower Egypt, pursued him up
the Nile and sacked Thebes. This was the last and most tremendous
visitation of the Assyrian scourge.


  XXVIth Dynasty.

Psammetichus (Psammetk), 664-610 B.C., the son of Necho, succeeded his
father as a vassal of Assyria in his possessions of Memphis and Sais,
allied himself with Gyges, king of Lydia, and aided by Ionian and Carian
mercenaries, extended and consolidated his power.[21] By the ninth year
of his reign he was in full possession of Thebes. Assur-bani-pal's
energies throughout this crisis were entirely occupied with revolts
nearer home, in Babylon, Elam and Arabia. The Assyrian arms again
triumphed everywhere, but at the cost of complete exhaustion. Under the
firm and wise rule of Psammetichus, Egypt recovered its prosperity after
the terrible losses inflicted by internal wars and the decade of
Assyrian invasions. The revenue went up by leaps and bounds.
Psammetichus guarded the frontiers of Egypt with three strong garrisons,
placing the Ionian and Carian mercenaries especially at the Pelusiac
Daphnae in the N.E., from which quarter the most formidable enemy was
likely to appear. The Assyrians did not move against him, but a great
Scythian horde, destroying all before it in its southward advance, is
said by Herodotus to have been turned back by presents and entreaties.
Diplomacy backed up by vigorous preparations may have deterred the
Scythians from the dangerous enterprise of crossing the desert to Egypt.
Before his death Psammetichus had advanced into southern Palestine and
captured Azotus.

When Psammetichus began to reign the situation of Egypt was very
different from what it had been under the Empire. The development of
trade in the Mediterranean and contact with new peoples and new
civilizations in peace and war had given birth to new ideas among the
Egyptians and at the same time to a loss of confidence in their own
powers. The Theban supremacy was gone and the Delta was now the wealthy
and progressive part of Egypt; piety increased amongst the masses,
unenterprising and unwarlike, but proud of their illustrious antiquity.
Thebes and Ammon and the traditions of the Empire savoured too much now
of the Ethiopian; the priests of the Memphite and Deltaic dynasty
thereupon turned deliberately for their models to the times of the
ancient supremacy of Memphis, and the sculptures and texts on tomb and
temple had to conform as closely as possible to those of the Old
Kingdom. In other than religious matters, however, the Egyptians were
inventing and perhaps borrowing. To enumerate a few examples of this
which are already definitely known: we find that the forms of legal and
business documents became more precise; the mechanical arts of casting
in bronze on a core and of moulding figures and pottery were brought to
the highest pitch of excellence; and portraiture in the round on its
highest plane was better than ever before and admirably lifelike,
revealing careful study of the external anatomy of the individual.

Psammetichus died in the fifty-fourth year of his reign and was
succeeded by his son Necho, 610-594 B.C. Taking advantage of the
helpless state of the Assyrians, whose capital was assailed by the Medes
and the Babylonians, the new Pharaoh prepared an expedition to recover
the ancient possessions of the Empire in Syria. Josiah alone, faithful
to the king of Assyria, opposed him with his feeble force at Megiddo and
was easily overcome and slain. Necho went forward to the Euphrates, put
the land to tribute, and, in the case of Judah at any rate, filled the
throne with his own nominee (see JEHOIAKIM). The fall of Nineveh and the
division of the spoil gave to Nabopolasser, king of Babylon, the
inheritance of the Assyrians in the west, and he at once despatched his
son Nebuchadrezzar to fight Necho. The Babylonian and Egyptian forces
met at Carchemish (605), and the rout of the latter was so complete that
Necho relinquished Syria and might have lost Egypt as well had not the
death of Nabopolasser recalled the victor to Babylon. Herodotus relates
that in Necho's reign a Phoenician ship despatched from Egypt actually
circumnavigated Africa, and the attempt was made to complete a canal
through the Wadi Tumilat, which connected the Mediterranean and Red Seas
by way of the Lower Egyptian Nile. (See SUEZ.) The next king,
Psammetichus II., 594-589 B.C., according to one account made an
expedition to Syria or Phoenicia, and apparently sent a mercenary force
into Ethiopia as far as Abu Simbel. Pharaoh Hophra (Apries), 589-570
B.C., fomented rebellion against the Babylonian suzerainty in Judah, but
accomplished little there. Herodotus, however, describes his reign as
exceedingly prosperous. The mercenary troops at Elephantine mutinied and
attempted to desert to Ethiopia, but were brought back and punished.
Later, however, a disastrous expedition sent to aid the Libyans against
the Greek colony of Cyrene roused the suspicion and anger of the native
soldiery at favours shown to the mercenaries, who of course had taken no
part in it. Amasis (Ahmosi) II. was chosen king by the former (570-525
B.C.), and his swarm of adherents overcame the Greek troops in Apries'
pay (see AMASIS). None the less Amasis employed Greeks in numbers, and
cultivated the friendship of their tyrants. His rule was confined to
Egypt (and perhaps Cyprus), but Egypt itself was very prosperous. At the
beginning of his long reign of forty-four years he was threatened by
Nebuchadrezzar; later he joined the league against Cyrus and saw with
alarm the fall of his old enemy. A few months after his death, 525 B.C.,
the invading host of the Persians led by Cambyses reached Egypt and
dethroned his son Psammetichus III.


  The Persian period, XXVIIth Dynasty.

Cambyses at first conciliated the Egyptians and respected their
religion; but, perhaps after the failure of his expedition into
Ethiopia, he entirely changed his policy, and his memory was generally
execrated. He left Egypt so completely crushed that the subsequent
usurpation of the Persian throne was marked by no revolt in that
quarter. Darius, 521-486 B.C., proved himself a beneficent ruler, and in
a visit to Egypt displayed his consideration for the religion of the
country. In the Great Oasis he built a temple to Ammon. The annual
tribute imposed on the satrapy of Egypt and Cyrene was heavy, but it was
probably raised with ease. The canal from the Nile to the Red Sea was
completed or repaired, and commerce flourished. Documents dated in the
thirty-fourth and thirty-fifth years of Darius are not uncommon, but
apparently at the very end of his reign, some years after the disaster
of Marathon, Egypt was induced to rebel. Xerxes, 486-467 B.C., who put
down the revolt with severity, and his successor Artaxerxes, 466-425
B.C., like Cambyses, were hateful to the Egyptians. The disorders which
marked the accession of Artaxerxes gave Egypt another opportunity to
rebel. Their leaders were Inaros the Libyan of Marea and the Egyptian
Amyrtaeus. Aided by an Athenian force, Inaros slew the satrap Achaemenes
at the battle of Papremis and destroyed his army; but the garrison of
Memphis held out, and a fresh host from Persia raised the siege and in
turn besieged the Greek and Egyptian forces on the island of Papremis.
At last, after two years, having diverted the river from its channel,
they captured and burnt the Athenian ships and quickly ended the
rebellion. The reigns of Xerxes II. and Darius II. are marked by no
recorded incident in Egypt until a successful revolt about 405 B.C.
interrupted the Persian domination.

Monuments of the Persian rule in Egypt are exceedingly scanty. The
inscriptions of Pefteuauneit, priest of Neith at Sais, and from his
position the native authority who was most likely to be consulted by
Cambyses and Darius, tells of his relations with these two kings. For
the following reigns Egyptian documents hardly exist, but some papyri
written in Aramaic have been found at Elephantine and at Memphis. Those
from the former locality show that a colony of Jews with a temple
dedicated to Yahweh (Jehovah) had established themselves at that
garrison and trading post (see ASSUAN). Herodotus visited Egypt in the
reign of Artaxerxes, about 440 B.C. His description of Egypt, partly
founded on Hecataeus, who had been there about fifty years earlier, is
the chief source of information for the history of the Saite kings and
for the manners of the times, but his statements prove to be far from
correct when they can be checked by the scanty native evidence.
     (F. Ll. G.)


  Dynasties XXVIII.-XXXI.

Amyrtaeus (Amnertais) of Sais, perhaps a son of Pausiris and grandson of
the earlier Amyrtaeus, revolted from Darius II. c. 405 B.C., and Egypt
regained its independence for about sixty years. The next king Nefeuret
(Nepherites I.) was a Mendesian and founded the XXIXth Dynasty. After
Hakor and Nefeuret II. the sovereignty passed to Dynasty XXX., the last
native Egyptian line. Monuments of all these kings are known, and art
flourished particularly under the Mendesian kings Nekhtharheb
(Nectanebes or Nectanebus I.) and Nekhtnebf (Nectanebes II.). The former
came to the throne when a Persian invasion was imminent, 378 B.C. Hakor
had already formed a powerful army, largely composed of Greek
mercenaries. This army Nekhtharheb entrusted to the Athenian Chabrias.
The Persians, however, succeeded in causing his recall and in gaining
the services of his fellow-countryman Iphicrates. The invading army
consisted of 200,000 barbarians under Pharnabazus and 20,000 Greeks
under Iphicrates. After the Egyptians had experienced a reverse,
Iphicrates counselled an immediate advance on Memphis. His advice was
not followed by Pharnabazus; the Egyptian king collected his forces and
won a pitched battle near Mendes. Pharnabazus retreated and Egypt was
free.

Nekhtharheb was succeeded by Tachos or Teos, whose short reign was
occupied by a war with Persia, in which the king of Egypt secured the
services of a body of Greek mercenaries under the Spartan king Agesilaus
and a fleet under the Athenian general Chabrias. He entered Phoenicia
with every prospect of success, but having offended Agesilaus he was
dethroned in a military revolt which gave the crown to Nekhtnebf or
Nectanebes II., the last native king of Egypt. At this moment a revolt
broke out. The prince of Mendes almost succeeded in overthrowing the new
king. Agesilaus defeated the rival pretender and left Nekhtnebf
established on the throne. But the opportunity of a decisive blow
against Persia was lost. The new king, Artaxerxes III. Ochus, determined
to reduce Egypt. A first expedition was defeated by the Greek
mercenaries of Nekhtnebf, but a second, commanded by Ochus himself,
subdued Egypt with no further resistance than that of the Greek garrison
of Pelusium. Nekhtnebf, instead of endeavouring to relieve them,
retreated to Memphis and fled thence to Ethiopia, 340 (?) B.C. Thus
miserably fell the monarchy of the Pharaohs, after an unexampled
duration of 3000 years, or as some think far longer. More than 2000
years have since passed, and though Egypt has from time to time been
independent, not one native prince has sat on the throne of the
Pharaohs. "There shall be no more a prince of the land of Egypt" (Ezek.
xxx. 13) was prophesied in the days of Apries as the final state of the
land.

Ochus treated his conquest barbarously. From this brief re-establishment
of Persian dominion (counted by Manetho as Dynasty XXXI.) no document
survives except one papyrus that appears to be dated in the reign of
Darius III.

  See J. H. Breasted, _A History of Egypt from the Earliest Times to the
  Persian Conquest_ (New York and London, 1905); _A History of the
  Ancient Egyptians_ (New York and London, 1908); _Ancient Records of
  Egypt: Historical Documents from the Earliest Times to the Persian
  Conquest, collected, edited and translated_ (5 vols., Chicago,
  1906-1907); W. M. F. Petrie, _A History of Egypt_ (from the earliest
  times to the XXXth Dynasty) (3 vols., London, 1899-1905); E. A. W.
  Budge, _A History of Egypt_, vols. i-vii. (London, 1902); G. Maspero,
  _Histoire ancienne des peuples de l'orient_ (6th ed., 1904), _The Dawn
  of Civilization, The Struggle of the Nations, The Passing of the
  Empires_ (London, 1904, &c.); P. E. Newberry and J. Garstang, _A Short
  History of Ancient Egypt_ (London, 1904); G. Steindorff, _Die
  Blutezeit des Pharaonenreiches_ (Dyn. XVIII.) (Bielefeld and Leipzig,
  1900); H. Winckler, _The Tell el Amarna Letters_ (Berlin, London and
  New York, 1896).

_The Conquest by Alexander._--When, in 332 B.C., after the battle of
Issus, Alexander entered Egypt, he was welcomed as a deliverer. The
Persian governor had not forces enough to oppose him, and he nowhere
experienced even the show of resistance. He visited Memphis, founded
Alexandria, and went on pilgrimage to the oracle of Ammon (Oasis of
Siwa). The god declared him to be his son, renewing thus an old Egyptian
convention or belief; Olympias was supposed to have been in converse
with Ammon, even as the mothers of Hatshepsut and Amenophis III. are
represented in the inscriptions of the Theban temples to have received
the divine essence. At this stage of his career the treasure and tribute
of Egypt were of great importance to the Macedonian conqueror. He
conciliated the inhabitants by the respect which he showed for their
religion; he organized the government of the natives under two officers,
who must have been already known to them (of these Petisis, an Egyptian,
soon resigned his share into the charge of his colleague Doloaspis, who
bears a Persian name.) But Alexander designed his Greek foundation of
Alexandria to be the capital, and entrusted the taxation of Egypt and
the control of its army and navy to Greeks. Early in 331 B.C. he was
ready to depart, and led his forces away to Phoenicia. A granite gateway
to the temple of Khnum at Elephantine bears his name in hieroglyphic,
and demotic documents are found dated in his reign.

_The Ptolemaic Period._--On the division of Alexander's dominions in 323
B.C., Egypt fell to Ptolemy the son of Lagus, the founder of the
Ptolemaic dynasty (see PTOLEMIES). Under these rulers the rich kingdom
was heavily taxed to supply the sinews of war and to support every kind
of lavish expenditure. Officials, and the higher ones were nearly all
Greeks, were legion, but the whole system was so judiciously worked that
there was little discontent amongst the patient peasantry. During the
reign of Philadelphus the land gained from the bed of the lake of Moeris
was assigned to veteran soldiers; the great armies of the Ptolemies were
rewarded or supported by grants of farm lands, and men of Macedonian,
Greek and Hellenistic extraction were planted in colonies and garrisons
or settled themselves in the villages throughout the country. Upper
Egypt, farthest from the centre of government, was probably least
affected by the new influences, though the first Ptolemy established the
Greek colony of Ptolemais to be its capital. Intermarriages, however,
gradually had their effect; after the revolt of the natives in the reign
of Ptolemy V., we find the Greek and Egyptian elements closely
intermingled. Ptolemy I. had established the cult of the Memphite
Serapis in a Graeco-Egyptian form, affording a common ground for native
and Hellenistic worshippers. The greater number of the temples to the
native deities in Upper Egypt and in Nubia (to 50 m. south of the
Cataract, within the Dodecaschoenus) were built under the Ptolemies. No
serious effort was made to extend the Ptolemaic rule into Ethiopia, and
Ergamenes, the Hellenizing king of Ethiopia, was evidently in alliance
with Philopator; in the next reign two native kings, probably supported
by Ethiopia, reigned in succession at Thebes. That famous city lost all
except its religious importance under the Ptolemies; after the
"destruction" or dismantling by Lathyrus it formed only a series of
villages. The population of Egypt in the time of Ptolemy I. is put at
7,000,000 by Diodorus, who also says that it was greater then than it
ever was before; at the end of the dynasty, in his own day, it was not
much less though somewhat diminished. Civil wars and revolts must have
greatly injured both Upper and Lower Egypt. It is remarkable that, while
the building and decoration of temples continued in the reigns of
Ptolemy Auletes and the later Ptolemies and Cleopatra, papyri of those
times whether Greek or Egyptian are scarcely to be found.


  Christianity.

_The Roman Period._--In 30 B.C. Augustus took Egypt as the prize of
conquest. He treated it as a part of his personal domain, free from any
interference by the senate. In the main lines the Ptolemaic organization
was preserved, but Romans were gradually introduced into the highest
offices. On Egypt Rome depended for its supplies of corn; entrenched
there, a revolting general would be difficult to attack, and by simply
holding back the grain ships could threaten Rome with starvation. No
senator therefore was permitted to take office or even to set foot in
the country without the emperor's special leave, and by way of
precaution the highest position, that of prefect, was filled by a Roman
of equestrian rank only. As the representative of the emperor, this
officer assumed the place occupied by the king under the old order,
except that his power was limited by the right of appeal to Caesar. The
first prefect, Cornelius Gallus, tamed the natives of Upper Egypt to the
new yoke by force of arms, and meeting ambassadors from Ethiopia at
Philae, established a nominal protectorate of Rome over the frontier
district, which had been abandoned by the later Ptolemies. The third
prefect, Gaius Petronius, cleared the neglected canals for irrigation;
he also repelled an invasion of the Ethiopians and pursued them far up
the Nile, finally storming the capital of Napata. But no attempt was
made to hold Ethiopia. In succeeding reigns much trouble was caused by
jealousies and quarrels between the Greeks and the Jews, to whom
Augustus had granted privileges as valuable as those accorded to the
Greeks. Aiming at the spice trade, Aelius Gallus, the second prefect of
Egypt under Augustus, had made an unsuccessful expedition to conquer
Arabia Felix; the valuable Indian trade, however, was secured by
Claudius for Egypt at the expense of Arabia, and the Red Sea routes were
improved. Nero's reign especially marks the commencement of an era of
prosperity which lasted about a century. Under Vespasian the Jewish
temple at Leontopolis in the Delta, which Onias had founded in the reign
of Ptolemy Philometor, was closed; worse still, a great Jewish revolt
and massacre of the Greeks in the reign of Trajan resulted, after a
stubborn conflict of many months with the Roman army under Marcius
Livianus Turbo, in the virtual extermination of the Jews in Alexandria
and the loss of all their privileges. Hadrian, who twice visited Egypt
(A.D. 130, 134), founded Antinoe in memory of his drowned favourite.
From this reign onwards buildings in the Graeco-Roman style were erected
throughout the country. A new Sothic cycle began in A.D. 139. Under
Marcus Aurelius a revolt of the Bucolic or native troops recruited for
home service was taken up by the whole of the native population and was
suppressed only after several years of fighting. The Bucolic war caused
infinite damage to the agriculture of the country and marks the
beginning of its rapid decline under a burdensome taxation. The province
of Africa was now of equal importance with Egypt for the grain supply of
the capital. Avidius Cassius, who led the Roman forces in the war,
usurped the purple, and was acknowledged by the armies of Syria and
Egypt. On the approach of Marcus Aurelius, the adherents of Cassius slew
him, and the clemency of the emperor restored peace. After the downfall
of the house of the Antonines, Pescennius Niger, who commanded the
forces in Egypt, was proclaimed emperor on the death of Pertinax (A.D.
193). Severus overthrew his rival (A.D. 194) and, the revolt having been
a military one, did not punish the province; in 202 he gave a
constitution to Alexandria and the nome capitals. In his reign the
Christians of Egypt suffered the first of their many persecutions. When
Christianity was planted in the country we do not know, but it must very
early have gained adherents among the learned Jews of Alexandria, whose
school of thought was in some respects ready to welcome it. From them it
rapidly passed to the Greeks. Ultimately the new religion spread to the
Egyptians; their own creed was worn out, and they found in Christianity
a doctrine of the future life for which their old belief had made them
not unready; while the social teaching of Christianity came with special
fitness to a subject race. The history of the Coptic Version has yet to
be written. It presents some features of great antiquity, and, unlike
all others, has the truly popular character of being written in the
three dialects of the language. Side by side there grew up an
Alexandrian church, philosophic, disputative, ambitious, the very centre
of Christian learning, and an Egyptian church, ascetic, contemplative,
mystical. The two at length influenced one another; still we can
generally trace the philosophic teachers to a Greek origin, the mystics
to an Egyptian.

Caracalla, in revenge for an affront, massacred all the men capable of
bearing arms in Alexandria. His granting of the Roman citizenship to all
Egyptians in common with the other provincials was only to extort more
taxes. Under Decius, A.D. 250, the Christians again suffered from
persecution. When the empire broke up in the weak reign of Gallienus,
the prefect Aemilianus, who took the surname Alexander or Alexandrinus,
was made emperor by the troops at Alexandria, but was conquered by the
forces of Gallienus. In his brief reign of only a few months he had
driven back an invasion of the Blemmyes. This predatory tribe, issuing
from Nubia, was long to be the terror of Upper Egypt. Zenobia, queen of
Palmyra, after an unsuccessful invasion, on a second attempt conquered
Egypt, which she added to her empire, but lost it when Aurelian made war
upon her (A.D. 272). The province was, however, unsettled, and the
conquest of Palmyra was followed in the same year by the suppression of
a revolt in Egypt (A.D. 273). Probus, who had governed Egypt for
Aurelian and Tacitus, was subsequently chosen by the troops to succeed
Tacitus, and is the first governor of this province who obtained the
whole of the empire. He expelled the Blemmyes, who were dominating the
whole of the Thebaid. Diocletian invited the Nobatae to settle in the
Dodecaschoenus as a barrier against their incursions, and subsidized
both Blemmyes and Nobatae. The country, however, was still disturbed,
and in A.D. 296 a formidable revolt broke out, led by Achilleus, who as
emperor took the name Domitius Domitianus. Diocletian, finding his
troops unable to determine the struggle, came to Egypt, captured
Alexandria and put his rival to death (296). He then reorganized the
whole province, and the well-known "Pompey's Pillar" was set up by the
grateful and repentant Alexandrians to commemorate his gift to them of
part of the corn tribute.

The Coptic era of Diocletian or of the Martyrs dates from the accession
of Diocletian (A.D. 284). The edict of A.D. 303 against the Christians,
and those which succeeded it, were rigorously carried out in Egypt,
where Paganism was still strong and face to face with a strong and
united church. Galerius, who succeeded Diocletian in the government of
the East, implacably pursued his policy, and this great persecution did
not end until the persecutor, perishing, it is said, of the dire malady
of Herod and Philip II. of Spain, sent out an edict of toleration (A.D.
311).

By the edict of Milan (A.D. 313), Constantine, with the agreement of his
colleague Licinius, acknowledged Christianity as having at least equal
rights with other religions, and when he gained sole power he wrote to
all his subjects advising them, like him, to become Christians (A.D.
324). The Egyptian Church, hitherto free from schism, was now divided by
a fierce controversy, in which we see two Greek parties, rather than a
Greek and an Egyptian, in conflict. The council of Nicaea was called
together (A.D. 325) to determine between the Orthodox and the party of
the Alexandrian presbyter Arius. At that council the native Egyptian
bishops were chiefly remarkable for their manly protest against
enforcing celibacy on the clergy. The most conspicuous controversialist
on the Orthodox side was the young Alexandrian deacon Athanasius, who
returned home to be made archbishop of Alexandria (A.D. 326). After
being four times expelled by the Arians, and once by the emperor Julian,
he died, A.D. 373, at the moment when an Arian persecution began. So
large a proportion of the population had taken religious vows that under
Valens it became necessary to abolish the privilege of monks which
exempted them from military service. The reign of Theodosius I.
witnessed the overthrow of Arianism, and this was followed by the
suppression of Paganism, against which a final edict was promulgated
A.D. 390. In Egypt, the year before, the temple of Serapis at Alexandria
had been captured after much bloodshed by the Christian mob and turned
into a church. Generally the Coptic Christians were content to build
their churches within the ancient temples, plastering over or effacing
the sculptures which were nearest to the ground and in the way of the
worshippers. They do not seem to have been very zealous in the work of
destruction; the native religion was already dead and they had no fear
of it. The prosperity of the church was the sign of its decay, and
before long we find persecution and injustice disgracing the seat of
Athanasius. Cyril, the patriarch of Alexandria (A.D. 415), expelled the
Jews from the capital with the aid of the mob, and by the murder of the
beautiful philosopher Hypatia marked the lowest depth to which ignorant
fanaticism could descend. A schism now produced lengthened civil war and
alienated Egypt from the empire. The distinction between religion and
politics seemed to be lost, and the government grew weaker and weaker.
The system of local government by citizens had now entirely disappeared.
Offices, with new Byzantine names, were now almost hereditary in the
wealthy land-owning families. The Greek rulers of the Orthodox faith
were unable to protect the tillers of the soil, and these being of the
Monophysite persuasion and having their own church and patriarch, hated
the Orthodox patriarch (who from the time of Justinian onwards was
identical with the prefect) and all his following. Towards the middle of
the 5th century, the Blemmyes, quiet since the reign of Diocletian,
recommenced their incursions, and were even joined in them by the
Nobatae. These tribes were twice brought to account severely for their
misdoings, but not effectually checked. It was in these circumstances
that Egypt fell without a conflict when attacked by Chosroes (A.D. 616).
After ten years of Persian dominion the success of Heraclius restored
Egypt to the empire, and for a time it again received a Greek governor.
The Monophysites, who had taken advantage of the Persian occupation,
were persecuted and their patriarch expelled. The Arab conquest was
welcomed by the native Christians, but with it they ceased to be the
Egyptian nation. Their language is still used in their churches, but it
is no longer spoken, and its literature, which is wholly ecclesiastical,
has been long unproductive.

The decline of Egypt was due to the purely military government of the
Romans, and their subsequent alliance with the Greek party of
Alexandria, which never represented the country. Under weak emperors,
the rest of Egypt was exposed to the inroads of savages, and left to
fall into a condition of barbarism. Ecclesiastical disputes tended to
alienate both the native population and the Alexandrians. Thus at last
the country was merely held by armed force, and the authority of the
governor was little recognized beyond the capital, except where
garrisons were stationed. There was no military spirit in a population
unused to arms, nor any disinclination to be relieved from an arbitrary
and persecuting rule. Thus the Moslem conquest was easy.

  BIBLIOGRAPHY.--_Hellenistic Period._--See the special articles
  ALEXANDRIA, &c., and especially PTOLEMIES; J. P. Mahaffy, _The Empire
  of the Ptolemies_ (London, 1895), _A History of Egypt under_ _the
  Ptolemaic Dynasty_ (London, 1899); A. Bouche-Leclercq, _Histoire des
  Lagides_ (4 vols., Paris, 1903- ); E. A. W. Budge, _A History of
  Egypt_, vols. vii.-viii. (London, 1902); J. G. Milne, _A History of
  Egypt under Roman Rule_ (London, 1898); E. Gibbon, _Decline and Fall
  of the Roman Empire_ (edited by J. B. Bury) (London, 1900). The
  administration and condition of Egypt under the Ptolemaic and Roman
  rules are abundantly illustrated in recently discovered papyri, see
  especially the English publications of B. P. Grenfell and A. S. Hunt
  (_Memoirs of the Graeco-Roman Branch of the Egypt Exploration Fund_)
  and F. G. Kenyon (British Museum Catalogues); also Mr Kenyon's annual
  summaries in the _Archaeological Report of the Egypt Exploration
  Fund_. An ample selection of the Greek inscriptions from Egypt is to
  be found in W. Dittenberger, _Orientis Graeci inscriptiones selectae_
  (2 vols., Leipzig, 1903-1905).     (R. S. P.; F. Ll. G.)


2. _Mahommedan Period._

(1) _Moslem Conquest of Egypt._--In accordance with the scheme of
universal conquest conceived by the founder of Islam, an army of some
4000 men was towards the end of the year A.D. 639 sent against Egypt
under the command of 'Amr (see 'AMR-IBN-EL-ASS), by the second caliph,
Omar I., who had some doubt as to the expediency of the enterprise. The
commander marched from Syria through El-'Arish, easily took Farama or
Pelusium, and thence proceeded to Bilbeis, where he was delayed for a
month; having captured this place, he proceeded to a point on the Nile
called Umm Dunain, the siege of which also occasioned him some
difficulty. After taking it, he crossed the Nile to the Fayum. On the
6th of June of the following year (640) a second army of 12,000 men,
despatched by Omar, arrived at Heliopolis (On). 'Amr recrossed the river
and joined it, but presently was confronted by a Roman army, which he
defeated at the battle of Heliopolis (July 640); this victory was
followed by the siege of Babylon, which after some futile attempts at
negotiation was taken partly by storm and partly by capitulation on Good
Friday, the 6th of April 641. 'Amr next proceeded in the direction of
Alexandria, which was surrendered to him by a treaty signed on the 8th
of November 641, under which it was to be occupied by the Moslems on the
29th of September of the following year. The interval was spent by him
in founding the city Fostat (Fustat), near the modern Cairo, and called
after the camp (_Fossatum_) occupied by him while besieging Babylon; and
in reducing those coast towns that still offered resistance. The Thebaid
seems to have surrendered with scarcely any opposition.

The ease with which this valuable province was wrenched from the Roman
empire appears to have been due to the treachery of the governor of
Egypt, Cyrus, patriarch of Alexandria, and the incompetence of the
generals of the Roman forces. The former, called by the Arabs Mukaukis
(Muqauqis) from his Coptic name Pkauchios, had for ten years before the
arrival of 'Amr maintained a fierce persecution of the Jacobite sect, to
which the bulk of the Copts belonged. During the siege of Babylon he had
been recalled and exiled, but after the death of Heraclius had been
reinstated as patriarch by Heraclonas, and been welcomed back to
Alexandria with general rejoicing in September 641. Since Alexandria
could neither have been stormed nor starved out by the Arabs, his
motives for surrendering it, and with it the whole of Egypt, have been
variously interpreted, some supposing him to have been secretly a
convert to Islam. The notion that the Arab invaders were welcomed and
assisted by the Copts, driven to desperation by the persecution of
Cyrus, appears to be refuted by the fact that the invaders treated both
Copts and Romans with the same ruthlessness; but the dissensions which
prevailed in the Christian communities, leading to riots and even civil
war in Alexandria and elsewhere, probably weakened resistance to the
common enemy. An attempt was made in the year 645 with a force under
Manuel, commander of the Imperial forces, to regain Alexandria for the
Byzantine empire; the city was surprised, and held till the summer of
646, when it was again stormed by 'Amr. In 654 a fleet was equipped by
Constans with a view to an invasion, but it was repulsed, and partly
destroyed by storm. From that time no serious effort was made by the
Eastern Empire to regain possession of the country. And it would appear
that at the time of the attempt by Manuel the Arabs were actually
assisted by the Copts, who at the first had found the Moslem lighter
than the Roman yoke.


  Terms of capitulation.

A question often debated by Arabic authors is whether Egypt was taken by
storm or capitulation, but, so far as the transference of the country
was accomplished by the first taking of Alexandria, there seems no doubt
that the latter view is correct. The terms were those on which conquered
communities were ordinarily taken under Moslem protection. In return for
a tribute of money (_jizyah_) and food for the troops of occupation
(_daribat-al-ta'am_), the Christian inhabitants of Egypt were to be
excused military service, and to be left free in the observance of their
religion and the administration of their affairs.

From 639 to 968 Egypt was a province of the Eastern Caliphate, and was
ruled by governors sent from the cities which at different times ranked
as capitals. Like other provinces of the later Abbasid Caliphate its
rulers were, during this period, able to establish quasi-independent
dynasties, such being those of the Tulunids who ruled from 868 to 905,
and the Ikshidis from 935-969. In 969 the country was conquered by
Jauhar for the Fatimite caliph Mo'izz, who transferred his capital from
Mahdia (q.v.) in the Maghrib to Cairo. This dynasty lasted till 1171,
when Egypt was again embodied in the Abbasid empire by Saladin, who,
however, was himself the founder of a quasi-independent dynasty called
the Ayyubites or Ayyubids, which lasted till 1252. The Ayyubites were
followed by the Mameluke dynasties, usually classified as Bahri from
1252-1382, and Burji from 1382-1517; these sovereigns were nominally
under the suzerainty of Abbasid caliphs, who were in reality instruments
of the Mameluke sultans, and resided at Cairo. In 1517 Egypt became part
of the Ottoman empire and was governed by pashas sent from
Constantinople, whose influence about 1707 gave way to that of officials
chosen from the Mamelukes who bore the title Sheik al-balad. After the
episode of the French occupation, government by pashas was restored;
Mehemet Ali (appointed pasha in 1805) obtained from the Porte in 1841
the right to bequeath the sovereignty to his descendants, one of whom,
Ismail Pasha, received the title Khedive, which is still held by Mehemet
Ali's descendants.

(2) The following is a list of the governors of Egypt in these
successive periods:--

    (a) _During the undivided Caliphate._

  'Amr-ibn-el-Ass, A.H. 18-24 (A.D. 639-645).
  'Abdallah b. Sa'd b. Abi Sarh, 24-36 (645-656).
  Qais b. Sa'd b. 'Ubadah, 36 (657-658).
  Mahommed b. Abu Bekr, 37-38 (658).
  Ashtar Malik b. al-Harith (appointed, but never governed).
  'Amr-ibn-el-Ass, 38-43 (658-663).
  'Utbah b. Abu Sofian, 43-44 (664-665).
  'Utbah b. 'Amir, 44-45 (665).
  Maslama b. Mukhallad, 45-62 (665-682).
  Sa'id b. Yazid b. 'Alqamah, 62-64 (682-684).
  Abdarrahman b. 'Utbah b. Jahdam, 64-65 (684).
  Abdalaziz ('Abd al-'Aziz) b. Merwan, 65-86 (685-705).
  'Abdallah b. 'Abd al-Malik, 86-90 (705-708).
  Qurrah b. Sharik al-'Absi, 90-96 (709-714).
  'Abd al-Malik b. Rifa'ah al-Fahmi, 96-99 (715-717).
  Ayyub b. Shurahbil al-Asbahi, 99-101 (717-720).
  Bishr b. Safwan al-Kalbi, 101-102 (720-721).
  Hanzalah b. Safwan, 102-105 (721-724).
  Mahommed b. 'Abd al-Malik, 105 (724).
  Hurr b. Yusuf, 105-108 (724-727).
  Hafs b. al-Walid, 108 (727).
  'Abd al-Malik b. Rifa'ah, 109 (727).
  Walid b. Rifa'ah, 109-117 (727-735).
  'Abd al-Rahman b. Khalid, 117-118 (735).
  Hanzalah b. Safwan, 118-124 (735-742).
  Hafs b. al-Walid, 124-127 (742-745).
  Hassan b. 'Atahiyah al-Tu'jibi, 127 (745).
  Hafs b. al-Walid, 127 (745).
  Hautharah b. Suhail al-Bahili, 128-131 (745-749).
  Mughirah b. 'Ubaidallah al-Fazari, 131-132 (749).
  'Abd al-Malik b. Marwan al-Lakhmi, 132 (750).
  Salih b. 'Ali, 133 (750-751).
  Abu 'Aun 'Abdalmalik b. Yazid, 133-136 (751-753).
  Salih b. 'Ali, 136-137 (753-755)--second time.
  Abu 'Aun, 137-141 (755-758)--second time.
  Musa b. Ka'b b. 'Uyainah al-Tamimi, 141 (758-759).
  Mahommed b. al-Ash'ath b. 'Uqbah al-Khuza i, 141-143 (759-760).
  Humaid b. Qahtabah b. Shabib al-Ta'i, 143-144 (760-762).
  Yazid b. Hatim b. Kabisah al-Muhallabi, 144-152 (762-769).
  'Abdallah b. 'Abdarrahman b. Moawiya b. Hudaij, 152-155 (769-772).
  Mahommed b. Abdarrahman b. Moawiya b. Hudaij, 155 (772).
  Musa b. 'Ulayy b. Rabah al-Lakhmi, 155-161 (772-778).
  'Isa b. Luqman b. Mahommed al-Jumahi, 161-162 (778).
  Wadih, 162 (779).
  Mansur b. Yazid b. Mansur al-Ru'aini, 162 (779).
  Abu Salih Yahya b. Dawud b. Mamdud, 162-164 (779-780).
  Salim b. Sawadah al-Tamimi, 164 (780-781).
  Ibrahim b. Salih b. 'Ali, 165-167 (781-784).
  Musa b. Mus'ab b. al-Rabi al-Khath'ami, 167-168 (784-785).
  Usamah b. 'Amr b. 'Alqamah al-Ma'afiri, 168 (785).
  al Fadl b. Salih b. 'Ali al-'Abbasi, 168-169 (785-786).
  'Ali b. Sulaiman b. 'Ali al-'Abbasi, 169-171 (786-787).
  Musa b. 'Isa b. Musa al-'Abbasi, 171-172 (787-789).
  Maslamah b. Yahya b. Qurrah al-Bajili, 172-173 (789-790).
  Mahommed b. Zuhair al-Azdi, 173 (790).
  Dawud b. Yazid b. Hatim al-Muhallabi, 174-175 (790).
  Musa b. 'Isa al-'Abbasi, 175-176 (790-792).
  Ibrahim b. Salih, 176 (792).
  Salih b. Ibrahim, 176 (792).
  Abdallah b. al-Musayyib b. Zuhair al Dabbi, 176-177 (792-793).
  Ishaq b. Sulaiman b. 'Ali al-'Abbasi, 177-178 (793-794).
  Harthamah b. A'yan, 178 (794-795).
  'Obaidallah b. al-Mahdi, 179 (795).
  Musa b. 'Isa al-'Abbasi, 179-180 (795-796).
  'Obaidallah b. al-Mahdi, 180-181 (796-797)--second time.
  Isma'il b. Salih b. 'Ali al-'Abbasi, 181-182 (797-798).
  Isma'il b. 'Isa b. Musa al-'Abbasi, 182-183 (798).
  Laith b. al-Fadl al-Abiwardi, 183-187 (798-803).
  Ahmad b. Isma'il b. 'Ali al-'Abbasi, 187-189 (803-805).
  'Obaidallah b. Mahommed b. Ibrahim al-'Abbasi, 189-190 (805-806).
  Husain b. Jamil, 190-192 (806-808).
  Malik b. Dalham b. 'Isa al-Kalbi, 192-193 (808).
  Hasan b. al-Tahtah, 193-194 (808-809).
  Hatim b. Harthamah b. A'yan, 194-195 (809-811).
  Jabir b. al-Ash'ath b. Yahya al-Ta'i, 195-196 (811-812).
  'Abbad b. Mahommed b. Hayyan al-Balkhi, 196-198 (812-813).
  Mottalib b. 'Abdallah b. Malik al-Khuza'i, 198 (813-814).
  'Abbas b. Musa b. 'Isa al-'Abbasi, 198-199 (814).
  Mottalib b. 'Abdallah, 199-200 (814-816)--second time.
  Sari b. al-Hakam b. Yusuf, 200-201 (816).
  Sulaiman b. Ghalib b. Jibril al-Bajili, 201 (816-817).
  Sari b. al-Hakam, 201-205 (817-820).
  Abu Nasr Mahommed b. al-Sari, 205 (820-821).
  'Obaidallah b. al-Sari, 205-211 (821-826).
  'Abdallah b. Tahir, 211-213 (826-829).
  Mahommed b. Harun (al-Mo'tasim), 213-214 (829).
  'Umair b. Al-Walid al-Tamimi al-Badhaghisi, 214 (829).
  'Isa b. Yazid, 214 (829).
  'Abduyah b. Jabalah, 215-216 (830-831).
  'Isa b. Mansur b. Musa al-Rafi'i, 216-217 (831-832).
  Nasr b. Abdallah Kaidar al-Safadi, 217-219 (832-834).
  Muzaffar b. Kaidar, 219 (834).
  Musa b. Abi'l-'Abbas Thabit al-Hanafi, 219-224 (834-839).
  Malik b. Kaidar al Safadi, 224-226 (839-841).
  'Ali b. Yahya abu l-Hasan al-Armani, 226-228 (841-842).
  'Isa b. Mansur al-Rafi'i, 229-233 (843-847).
  Harthamah b. al-Nadir al-Jabali, 233-234 (848-849).
  Hatim b. Harthamah, 234 (849).
  'Ali b. Yahya, 234-235 (849-850).
  Ishaq b. Yahya al-Khatlani, 235-236 (850-851).
  'Abd al-Wahid b. Yahya b. Mansur, 236-238 (851-852).
  'Anbasa b. Ishaq b. Shamir, 238-242 (852-856).
  Yazid b. 'Abdallah b. Dinar, 242-253 (856-867).
  Muzahim b. Khaqan al-Turki, 253-254 (867-868).
  Ahmad b. Muzahim b. Khaqan, 254 (868).
  Urjuz b. Ulugh Tarkhan al-Turki, 254 (868).

  _Tulunid house._

  Ahmad b. Tulun, 254-270 (868-884).
  Khomaruya b. Ahmad, 270-282 (884-896).
  Jaish b. Khomaruya, 282 (896).
  Harun b. Khomaruya, 283-292 (896-904).
  Shaiban b. Ahmad, 292 (905).
  'Isa b. Mahommed al-Naushari, 292 (905).
  Mahommed b. 'Ali al-Khalanji, 292-293 (905-906).
  'Isa al-Naushari, 293-297 (906-910)--second time.
  Takin b. Abdallah al-Khazari, 297-302 (910-915).
  Dhuka al-Rumi, 303-307 (915-919).
  Takin b. 'Abdallah, 307-309 (919-921)--second time.
  Abu Qabus Mahmud b. Hamal, 309 (921).
  Hilal b. Badr, 309-311 (921-923).
  Ahmad b. Kaighlagh, 311 (923).
  Takin b. Abdallah, 311-321 (923-933)--third time.
  Mahommed b. Takin, 321 (933).

  _Ikshidi house._

  Mahommed b. Tughj al-Ikshid, 321 (933).
  [Ahmad b. Kaighlagh, 321-322 (933-934)].
  Mahommed b. Tughj, 323-334 (934-946)--second time.
  Unjur b. al-Ikshid, 334-349 (946-961).
  'Ali b. al-Ikshid, 349-355 (961-966).
  Kafur b. Abdallah al-Ikshidi, 355-357 (966-968).
  Abu'l-Fawaris Ahmad b. 'Ali b. al-Ikshid, 357 (968).

    _(b) Fatimite Caliphs_, 357-567 (969-1171).

  Mo'izz Abu Tamim Ma'add (or li-din allah), 357-365 (969-975).
  'Aziz Abu Mansur Nizar (al-'Aziz billah), 365-386 (975-996).
  Hakim [Abu 'Ali Mansur], 386-411 (996-1020).
  Zahir [Abu'l-Hasan 'Ali], 411-427 (1020-1035).
  Mostansir [Abu Tamim Ma'add], 427-487 (1035-1094).
  Mosta'li [Abu'l-Qasim Ahmad], 487-495 (1094-1101).
  Amir [Abu 'Ali Mansur], 495-524 (1101-1130).
  Hafiz [Abu'l-Maimun 'Abd al-Majid], 524-544 (1130-1149).
  Zafir [Abu'l-Mansur Isma'il], 544-549 (1149-1154).
  Fa'iz [Abu'l-Qasim 'Isa], 549-555 (1154-1160).
  'Adid [Abu Mahommed 'Abdallah], 555-567 (1160-1171).

    _(c) Ayyubite Sultans_, 564-648 (1169-1250).

  Malik al-Nasir Salah al-din Yusuf b. Ayyub (SALADIN), 564-589
    (1169-1193).
  Malik al-'Aziz 'Imad al-din Othman, 589-595 (1193-1198).
  Malik al-Mansur Mahommed, 595-596 (1198-1199).
  Malik al-'Adil Saif al-din Abu Bakr, 596-615 (1199-1218).
  Malik AL-KAMIL Mahommed, 615-635 (1218-1238).
  Malik al-'Adil II. Saif al-din Abu Bakr, 635-637 (1238-1240).
  Malik al-Salih Najm al-din Ayyub, 637-647 (1240-1249).
  Malik al-Mo'azzam Turanshah, 647-648 (1249-1250).
  Malik al-Ashraf Musa, 648-650 (1250-1252).

    _(d) Bahri Mamelukes_, 648-792 (1250-1390).

  Shajar al-durr, 648 (1250).
  Malik al-Mo'izz 'Izz al-din Aibek, 648-655 (1250-1257).
  Malik al-Mansur Nureddin 'Ali, 655-657 (1257-1259).
  Malik al-Mozaffar Saif al-din KOTUZ, 657-658 (1259-1260).
  Malik al-Zahir [Rukn al-din (Rukneddin) BIBARS Bundukdari],
  658-676 (1260-1277).
  Malik al-Sa'id Nasir al-din Barakah Khan, 676-678 (1277-1279).
  Malik al-'Adil Badr al-din Salamish, 678 (1279).
  Malik al-Mansur Saif al-din QALA'UN, 678-689 (1279-1290).
  Malik al-Ashraf [Salah al-din KHALIL], 689-693 (1290-1293).
  Malik al-Nasir [Nasir al-din Mahommed], 693-694 (1293-1294).
  Malik al-'Adil [Zain al-din KITBOGA], 694-696 (1294-1296).
  Mansur [Husam al-din LAJIN], 696-698 (1296-1298).
  NASIR MAHOMMED (again), 698-708 (1298-1308).
  Mozaffar [Rukn al-din Bibars Jashengir], 708-709 (1308-1310).
  Nasir Mahommed (third time), 709-741 (1310-1341).
  Mansur [Saif al-din ABU BAKR], 741-742 (1341).
  Ashraf [Ala'u 'l-din KUCHUK], 742 (1341-1342).
  Nasir [Shihab al-din Ahmad], 742-743 (1342).
  Salih 'Imad al-din Isma'il], 743-746 (1342-1345).
  Kamil [Saif al-din SHA'BAN], 746-747 (1345-1346).
  Mozaffar [Saif al-din HAJJI], 747-748 (1346-1347).
  Nasir [Nasir al-din Hasan], 748-752 (1347-1351).
  Salih [Salah al-din Salih], 752-755 (1351-1354).
  Nasir [Hasan] (again), 755-762 (1354-1361).
  Mansur [Salah al-din Mahommed], 762-764 (1361-1363).
  Ashraf [Nasir al-din Sha'ban], 764-778 (1363-1377).
  Mansur ['Ala'u 'l-din 'Ali], 778-783 (1377-1381).
  Salih [Salah al-din Hajji, 783-784 (1381-1382).
  Barkuk or Barquq (see below), 784-791 (1382-1389).
  Hajji again, with title of Mozaffar, 791-792 (1389-1390).

    _(e) Burji Mamelukes_, 784-922 (1382-1517).

  Zahir [Saif al-din Barquq], 784-801 (1382-1398) [interrupted by Hajji,
     791-792].
  Nasir [Nasir al-din FARAJ], 801-808 (1398-1405).
  Mansur ['Izz al-din Abdalaziz ('Abd al-'Aziz)], 808-809 (1405-1406).
  Nasir Faraj (again), 809-815 (1406-1412).
  'Adil Mosta'in (Abbasid caliph), 815 (1412).
  Mu'ayyad [Sheikh], 815-824 (1412-1421).
  Mozaffar [Ahmad], 824 (1421).
  Zahir [Saif al-din Tatar], 824 (1421).
  Salih [Nasir al-din Mahommed], 824-825 (1421-1422).
  Ashraf [Saif al-din Barsbai], 825-842 (1422-1438).
  'Aziz [Jamal al-din Yusuf], 842 (1438).
  Zahir [Saif al-din Jakmak], 842-857 (1438-1453).
  Mansur [Fakhr al-din Othman], 857 (1453).
  Ashraf [Saif al-din Inal], 857-865 (1453-1461).
  Mu'ayyad [Shihab al-din Ahmad], 865 (1461).
  Zahir [Saif al-din Khoshkadam], 865-872 (1461-1467).
  Zahir [Saif al-din Yelbai or Bilbai], 872 (1467).
  Zahir [Timurbogha], 872-873 (1467-1468).
  Ashraf [Saif al-din (KAIT BEY)], 873-901 (1468-1495).
  Nasir [Mahommed], 901-904 (1495-1498).
  Zahir [Kansuh], 904-905 (1498-1499).
  Ashraf [Janbalat or Jan Belat], 905-906 (1499-1501).
  'Adil Tumanbey, 906 (1501).
  Ashraf [Kansuh Ghuri], 906-922 (1501-1516).
  Ashraf [Tumanbey], 922 (1516-1517).

    _(f) Turkish Governors after the Ottoman Conquest._

  Khair Bey, 923 (1517).
  Mustafa Pasha, 926 (1520).
  Ahmad, 929 (1523).
  Qasim, 930 (1524).
  Ibrahim, 931 (1525).
  Suleiman, 933 (1527).
  Dawud, 945 (1538).
  'Ali, 956 (1549).
  Mahommed, 961 (1554).
  Iskandar, 963 (1556).
  'Ali al-Khadim, 968 (1561).
  Mustafa, 969 (1561).
  'Ali al-Sufi, 971 (1563).
  Mahmud, 973 (1566).
  Sinan, 975 (1567).
  Hosain, 980 (1573).
  Masih, 982 (1575).
  Hasan al-Khadim, 988 (1580).
  Ibrahim, 991 (1583).
  Sinan, 992 (1584).
  Uwais, 994 (1585).
  Hafiz Ahmad, 999 (1591).
  Kurt, 1003 (1595).
  Sayyid Mahommed, 1004 (1596).
  Khidr, 1006 (1598).
  'Ali al-Silahdar, 1009 (1601).
  Ibrahim, 1012 (1604).
  Mahommed al-Kurji, 1013 (1605).
  Hasan, 1014 (1605).
  Mahommed al-Sufi, 1016 (1607).
  Ahmad al-Daftardar, 1022 (1613).
  Mustafa Lafakli, 1026 (1617).
  Ja'far, 1027 (1618).
  Mustafa, 1028 (1619).
  Hosain, 1028 (1619).
  Mahommed, 1031 (1622).
  Ibrahim, 1031 (1622).
  Mustafa, 1032 (1623).
  'Ali, 1032 (1623).
  Mustafa, 1032 (1624).
  Bairam, 1036 (1626).
  Mahommed, 1037 (1627).
  Musa, 1040 (1631).
  Khalil al-Bustanji, 1041 (1631).
  Ahmad al-Kurji, 1042 (1633).
  Hosain, 1045 (1636).
  Mahommed b. Ahmad, 1047 (1638).
  Mustafa al-Bustanji, 1049 (1639).
  Maqsud, 1050 (1641).
  Suyan Bey, 1054 (1644).
  Ayyub, 1055 (1645).
  Mahommed b. Haidar, 1057 (1647).
  Ahmad, 1058 (1648).
  'Abd al-Rahman, 1061 (1651).
  Mahommed al-Silahdar, 1062 (1652).
  Ghazi, 1066 (1655).
  Omar, 1067 (1652).
  Ahmad, 1077 (1666).
  Ibrahim, 1078 (1667).
  Hosain, 1085 (1674).
  Hasan al-Janbalat, 1087 (1676).
  Othman, 1091 (1680).
  Hasan al-Silahdar, 1099 (1688).
  Ahmad, 1101 (1690).
  'Ali Qilij, 1102 (1691).
  Isma'il, 1107 (1696).
  Hosain, 1109 (1697).
  Qara Mahommed or Ahmad, 1111 (1699).
  Mahommed Rami, 1116 (1704).
  'Ali Muslim, 1118 (1706).
  Hosain Ketkhuda, 1119 (1707).
  Ibrahim Qabudan, 1121 (1709).
  Khalil, 1122 (1710).
  Wali, 1123 (1711).
  'Abidin, 1127 (1715).
  'Ali Izmirli, 1129 (1717).
  Rajab, 1130 (1718).
  Mahommed al-Bashimi, 1132 (1720).
  'Ali, 1138 (1728).
  Bakir, 1141 (1729).
  'Abdallah Kuburlu, 1142 (1729).
  Mahommed Silahdar, 1144 (1732).
  Othman Halabi, 1146 (1733).
  Bakir, 1148 (1735).
  Mustafa, 1149 (1736).
  Sulaiman b. al-'Azim, 1152 (1739).
  'Ali Hakim Oghlu, 1153 (1740).
  Yahya, 1154 (1741).
  Mahommed Yedkeshi,  1156 (1743).
  Mahommed Raghib, 1158 (1745).
  Ahmad Kuruzir, 1161 (1748).
  Sharif 'Abdallah, 1163 (1750).
  Mahommed Amin, 1166 (1753).
  Mustafa, 1166 (1753).
  'Ali Hakim Oghlu, 1169 (1756).
  Mahommed Sa'id, 1171 (1758).
  Mustafa, 1173 (1759).
  Ahmad Kamil, 1174 (1761).
  Bakir, 1175 (1761).
  Hasan, 1176 (1761).
  Hamzah, 1179 (1765).
  Mahommed Raqim, 1181 (1767).
  Mahommed Urflu, 1182 (1768).
  Ahmad, 1183 (1770).
  Qara Khalil, 1184 (1770).
  Mustafa Nabulsi, 1188 (1774).
  Ibrahim 'Arabgirli, 1189 (1775).
  Mahommed 'Izzet, 1190 (1776).
  Isma'il, 1193 (1779).
  Mahommed Malik, 1195 (1781).
  Sharif 'Ali Qassab, 1196 (1782).
  Mahommed Silahdar, 1198 (1783).
  Mahommed Yeyen, 1200 (1785).
  'Abidin Sharif, 1201 (1787).
  Isma'il Tunisi, 1203 (1788).
  Salih Qaisarli, 1209 (1794).
  Abu Bakr Tarabulsi,  1211 (1796).

    _French Occupation._

  Khosrev, 1216 (1802).
  Tahir, 1218 (1803).
  Ali Jaza'irli' or Tarabulsi, 1218 (1803).
  Khorshid, 1219 (1804).

    _(g) Hereditary Pashas (later Khedives), from 1220 (from 1805)._

  Mehemet 'Ali, 1220-1264 (1805-1848).
  Ibrahim, 1264 (1848).
  'Abbas I., 1264-1270 (1848-1854).
  Sa'id, 1270-1280 (1854-1863).
  Isma'il 1280-1300 (1863-1882).
  Tewfik, 1300-1309 (1882-1892).
  Abbas II., 1309 (1892).

(3) _Period under Governors sent from the Metropolis of the eastern
Caliphate._--The first governor of the newly acquired province was the
conqueror 'Amr, whose jurisdiction was presently restricted to Lower
Egypt; Upper Egypt, which was divided into three provinces, being
assigned to Abdallah b. Sa'd, on whom the third caliph conferred the
government of Lower Egypt also, 'Amr being recalled, owing to his
unwillingness to extort from his subjects as much money as would satisfy
the caliph. In the troubles which overtook the Islamic empire with the
accession of Othman, Egypt was greatly involved, and it had to be
reconquered from the adherents of Ali for Moawiya (Mo'awiyah) by 'Amr,
who in A.H. 38 was rewarded for his services by being reinstated as
governor, with the right to appropriate the surplus revenue instead of
sending it as tribute to the metropolis. In the confusion which followed
on the death of the Omayyad caliph Yazid the Egyptian Moslems declared
themselves for Abdallah b. Zobair, but their leader was defeated in a
battle near Ain Shams (December 684) by Merwan b. Hakam (Merwan I.), who
had assumed the Caliphate, and the conqueror's son Abd al-'Aziz was
appointed governor. They also declared themselves against the usurper
Merwan II. in 745, whose lieutenant al-Hautharah had to enter Fostat at
the head of an army. In 750 Merwan II. himself came to Egypt as a
fugitive from the Abbasids, but found that the bulk of the Moslem
population had already joined with his enemies, and was defeated and
slain in the neighbourhood of Giza in July of the same year. The Abbasid
general, Salih b. Ali, who had won the victory, was then appointed
governor.


  Coptic revolt.

During the period that elapsed between the Moslem conquest and the end
of the Omayyad dynasty the nature of the Arab occupation had changed
from what had originally been intended, the establishment of garrisons,
to systematic colonization. Conversions of Copts to Islam were at first
rare, and the old system of taxation was maintained for the greater part
of the first Islamic century. This was at the rate of a dinar per
_feddan_, of which the proceeds were used in the first place for the pay
of the troops and their families, with about half the amount in kind for
the rations of the army. The process by which the first of these
contributions was turned into coin is still obscure; it is clear that
the corn when threshed was taken over by certain public officials who
deducted the amount due to the state. In general the system is well
illustrated by the papyri forming the Schott-Reinhardt collection at
Heidelberg (edited by C.H. Becker, 1906), which contain a number of
letters on the subject from Qurrah b. Sharik, governor from A.H. 90 to
96. The old division of the country into districts (_nomoi_) is
maintained, and to the inhabitants of these districts demands are
directly addressed by the governor of Egypt, while the head of the
community, ordinarily a Copt, but in some cases a Moslem, is responsible
for compliance with the demand. An official called "receiver" (_qabbal_)
is chosen by the inhabitants of each district to take charge of the
produce till it is delivered into the public magazines, and receives 5%
for his trouble. Some further details are to be found in documents
preserved by the archaeologist Maqrizi, from which it appears that the
sum for which each district was responsible was distributed over the
unit in such a way that artisans and tradesmen paid at a rate similar to
that which was enforced on those employed in agriculture. It is not
known at what time the practice of having the amount due settled by the
community was altered into that according to which it was settled by the
governor, or at what time the practice of deducting from the total
certain expenses necessary for the maintenance of the community was
abandoned. The researches of Wellhausen and Becker have made it clear
that the difference which is marked in later Islam between a poll-tax
(_jizyah_) and a land-tax (_kharaj_) did not at first exist: the papyri
of the 1st century know only of the jizyah, which, however, is not a
poll-tax but a land-tax (in the main). The development of the poll-tax
imposed on members of tolerated cults seems to be due to various causes,
chief of them the acquisition of land by Moslems, who were not at first
allowed to possess any, the conversion of Coptic landowners to Islam,
and the enforcement (towards the end of the 1st century of Islam) of the
poll-tax on monks. The treasury could not afford to lose the land-tax,
which it would naturally forfeit by the first two of the above
occurrences, and we read of various expedients being tried to prevent
this loss. Such were making the Christian community to which the
proselyte had belonged pay as much as it had paid when his lands
belonged to it, making proselytes pay as before their conversion, or
compelling them to abandon their lands on conversion. Eventually the
theory spread that all land paid land-tax, whereas members of tolerated
sects paid a personal tax also; but during the evolution of this
doctrine the relations between conquerors and conquered became more and
more strained, and from the time when the control of the finance was
separated from the administration of the country (A.D. 715) complaints
of extortion became serious; under the predecessor of Qurrah, 'Abdallah
b. 'Abd al-Malik, the country suffered from famine, and under this ruler
it was unable to recover. Under the finance minister Obaidallah b.
Habhab (720-734) the first government survey by Moslems was made,
followed by a census; but before this time the higher administrative
posts had been largely taken out of the hands of Copts and filled with
Arabs. The resentment of the Copts finally expressed itself in a revolt,
which broke out in the year 725, and was suppressed with difficulty. Two
years after, in order that the Arab element in Egypt might be
strengthened, a colony of North Arabians (Qaisites) was sent for and
planted near Bilbeis, reaching the number of 3000 persons; this
immigration also restored the balance between the two branches of the
Arab race, as the first immigrants had belonged almost exclusively to
the South Arabian stock. Meanwhile the employment of the Arabic language
had been steadily gaining ground, and in 706 it was made the official
language of the bureaux, though the occasional use of Greek for this
purpose is attested by documents as late as the year 780. Other revolts
of the Copts are recorded for the year 739 and 750, the last year of
Omayyad domination. The outbreaks in all cases are attributed to
increased taxation.

The Abbasid period was marked at its commencement by the erection of a
new capital to the north of Fostat, bearing the name _'Askar_ or "camp."
Apparently at this time the practice of farming the taxes began, which
naturally led to even greater extortion than before; and a fresh rising
of the Copts is recorded for the fourth year of Abbasid rule. Governors,
as will be seen from the list, were frequently changed. The three
officials of importance whose nomination is mentioned by the historians
in addition to that of the governor were the commander of the bodyguard,
the minister of finance and the judge. Towards the beginning of the 3rd
Islamic century the practice of giving Egypt in fief to a governor was
resumed by the caliph Mamun, who bestowed this privilege on 'Abdallah b.
Tahir, who in 827 was sent to recover Alexandria, which for some ten
years had been held by exiles from Spain. 'Abdallah b. Tahir decided to
reside at Bagdad, sending a deputy to Egypt to govern for him; and this
example was afterwards followed. In 828, when Mamun's brother Motasim
was feudal lord, a violent insurrection broke out in the Hauf,
occasioned, as usual, by excessive taxation; it was partly quelled in
the next year by Motasim, who marched against the rebels with an army of
4000 Turks. The rebellion broke out repeatedly in the following years,
and in 831 the Copts joined with the Arabs against the government; the
state of affairs became so serious that the caliph Mamun himself visited
Egypt, arriving at Fostat in February 832; his general Afshin fought a
decisive battle with the rebels at Basharud in the Hauf region, at which
the Copts were compelled to surrender; the males were massacred and the
women and children sold as slaves.


  Turkish governors appointed.

This event finally crushed the Coptic nation, which never again made
head against the Moslems. In the following year the caliph Motasim, who
surrounded himself with a foreign bodyguard, withdrew the stipends of
the Arab soldiers in Egypt; this measure caused some of the Arab tribes
who had been long settled in Egypt to revolt, but their resistance was
crushed, and the domination of the Arab element in the country from this
time gave way to that of foreign mercenaries, who, belonging to one
nation or another, held it for most of its subsequent history. Egypt was
given in fief to a Turkish general Ashnas (Ashinas), who never visited
the country, and the rule of individuals of Turkish origin prevailed
till the rise of the Fatimites, who for a time interrupted it. The
presence of Turks in Egypt is attested by documents as early as 808.
While the governor was appointed by the feudal lord, the finance
minister continued to be appointed by the caliph. On the death of Ashnas
in 844 Egypt was given in fief to another Turkish general Itakh, but in
850 this person fell out of favour, and the fief was transferred to
Montasir, son of the caliph Motawakkil. In 856 it was transferred from
him to the vizier Fath b. Khaqan, who for the first time appointed a
Turkish governor. The chief places in the state were also filled with
Turks. The period between the rise of the Abbasids and the
quasi-independent dynasties of Egypt was marked by much religious
persecution, occasioned by the fanaticism of some of the caliphs, the
victims being generally Moslem sectarians. (For Egypt under Motawakkil
see CALIPHATE, S c. par. 10.)

The policy of these caliphs also led to severe measures being taken
against any members of the Alid family or adherents of their cause who
were to be found in Egypt.


  Tulunid Dynasty.

In the year 868 Egypt was given in fief to a Turkish general Bayikbeg,
who sent thither as his representative his stepson Ahmad b. Tulun, the
first founder of a quasi-independent dynasty. This personage was himself
the son of a Turk who, originally sent as a slave to Bagdad, had risen
to high rank in the service of the caliphs. Ahmad b. Tulun spent some of
his early life in Tarsus, and on his return distinguished himself by
rescuing his caravan, which conveyed treasure belonging to the caliph,
from brigands who attacked it; he afterwards accompanied the caliph
Mosta'in into exile, and displayed some honourable qualities in his
treatment of the fallen sovereign. He found a rival in Egypt in the
person of Ibn al-Modabbir, the finance minister, who occupied an
independent position, and who started the practice of surrounding
himself with an army of his own slaves or freedmen; of these Ibn Tulun
succeeded in depriving the finance minister, and they formed the nucleus
of an army by which he eventually secured his own independence.
Insurrections by adherents of the Alids gave him the opportunity to
display his military skill; and when in 870 his stepfather died, by a
stroke of luck the fief was given to his father-in-law, who retained
Ahmad in the lieutenancy, and indeed extended his authority to
Alexandria, which had till that time been outside it. The enterprise of
a usurper in Syria in the year 872 caused the caliph to require the
presence of Ahmad in that country at the head of an army to quell it;
and although this army was not actually employed for the purpose, it was
not disbanded by Ahmad, who on his return founded a fresh city called
Kata'i', "the fiefs," S.E. of modern Cairo, to house it. On the death of
Ahmad's father-in-law in the same year, when Egypt was given in fief to
the caliph's brother Mowaffaq (famous for his defeat of the Zanj), Ahmad
secured himself in his post by extensive bribery at headquarters; and in
the following year the administration of the Syrian frontier was
conferred on him as well. By 875 he found himself strong enough to
refuse to send tribute to Bagdad, preferring to spend the revenues of
Egypt on the maintenance of his army and the erection of great
buildings, such as his famous mosque; and though Mowaffaq advanced
against him with an army, the project of reducing Ahmad to submission
had to be abandoned for want of means. In 877 and 878 Ahmad advanced
into Syria and obtained the submission of the chief cities, and at
Tarsus entered into friendly relations with the representatives of the
Byzantine emperor. During his absence his son 'Abbas revolted in Egypt;
on the news of his father's return he fled to Barca, whence he
endeavoured to conquer the Aghlabite dominions in the Maghrib; he was,
however, defeated by the Aghlabite ruler, and returned to Barca, where
he was again defeated by his father's forces and taken prisoner.

In 882 relations between Ahmad and Mowaffaq again became strained, and
the former conceived the bold plan of getting the caliph Mo'tamid into
his power, which, however, was frustrated by Mowaffaq's vigilance; but
an open rupture was the result, as Mowaffaq formally deprived Ahmad of
his lieutenancy, while Ahmad equally formally declared that Mowaffaq had
forfeited the succession. A revolt that broke out at Tarsus caused Ahmad
to traverse Syria once more in 883, but illness compelled him to return,
and on the 10th of May 884 he died at his residence in Kata'i'. He was
the first to establish the claim of Egypt to govern Syria, and from his
time Egypt grew more and more independent of the Eastern caliphate. He
appears to have invented the fiction which afterwards was repeatedly
employed, by which the money spent on mosque-building was supposed to
have been furnished by discoveries of buried treasure.

He was succeeded by his son Khomaruya, then twenty years of age, who
immediately after his accession had to deal with an attempt on the part
of the caliph to recover Syria; this attempt failed chiefly through
dissensions between the caliph's officers, but partly through the
ability of Khomaruya's general, who succeeded in winning a battle after
his master had run away from the field. By 886 Mowaffaq found it
expedient to grant Khomaruya the possession of Egypt, Syria, and the
frontier towns for a period of thirty years, and ere long, owing to the
disputes of the provincial governors, Khomaruya found it possible to
extend his domain to the Euphrates and even the Tigris. On the death of
Mowaffaq in 891 the Egyptian governor was able to renew peaceful
relations with the caliphs, and receive fresh confirmation in his
possessions for thirty years. The security which he thereby gained gave
him the opportunity to indulge his taste for costly buildings, parks and
other luxuries, of which the chroniclers give accounts bordering on the
fabulous. After the marriage of his daughter to the caliph, which was
celebrated at enormous expense, an arrangement was made giving the
Tulunid sovereign the viceroyalty of a region extending from Barca on
the west to Hit on the east; but tribute, ordinarily to the amount of
300,000 dinars, was to be sent to the metropolis. His realm enjoyed
peace till his death in 896, when he fell a victim to some palace
intrigue at Damascus.

His son and successor Abu'l-'Asakir Jaish was fourteen years old at his
accession, and being without adequate guidance soon revealed his
incompetence, which led to his being murdered after a reign of six
months by his troops, who gave his place to his brother Harun, who was
of about the same age. In the eight years of his government the Tulunid
empire contracted, owing to the revolts of the deputies which Harun was
unable to quell, though in 898 he endeavoured to secure a new lease of
the sovereignty in Egypt and Syria by a fresh arrangement with the
caliph, involving an increase of tribute. The following years witnessed
serious troubles in Syria caused by the Carmathians, which called for
the intervention of the caliph, who at last succeeded in defeating these
fanatics; the officer Mahommed b. Solaiman, to whom the victory was due,
was then commissioned by the caliph to reconquer Egypt from the
Tulunids, and after securing the allegiance of the Syrian prefects he
invaded Egypt by sea and land at once. Before the arrival of these
troops Harun had met his death at the hands of an assassin, or else in
an affray, and his uncle Shaiban, who was placed on the throne, found
himself without the means to collect an army fit to grapple with the
invaders. Fostat was taken by Mahommed b. Solaiman after very slight
resistance, at the beginning of 905, and after the infliction of severe
punishment on the inhabitants Egypt was once more put under a deputy,
'Isa al-Naushari, appointed directly by the caliph.

The old regime was not restored without an attempt made by an adherent
of the Tulunids to reconquer Egypt ostensibly for their benefit, and for
a time the caliph's viceroy had to quit the capital. The vigorous
measures of the authorities at Bagdad speedily quelled this rebellion,
and the Tulunid palace at Kata'i' was then destroyed in order that there
might be nothing to remind the Egyptians of the dynasty. In the middle
of the year 914 Egypt was invaded for the first time by a Fatimite force
sent by the caliph al-Mahdi 'Obaidallah, now established at Kairawan.
The Mahdi's son succeeded in taking Alexandria, and advancing as far as
the Fayum; but once more the Abbasid caliph sent a powerful army to
assist his viceroy, and the invaders were driven out of the country and
pursued as far as Barca; the Fatimite caliph, however, continued to
maintain active propaganda in Egypt. In 919 Alexandria was again seized
by the Mahdi's son, afterwards the caliph al-Qa'im, and while his forces
advanced northward as far as Ushmunain (Eshmunain) he was reinforced by
a fleet which arrived at Alexandria. This fleet was destroyed by a far
smaller one sent by the Bagdad caliph to Rosetta; but Egypt was not
freed from the invaders till the year 921, when reinforcements had been
repeatedly sent from Bagdad to deal with them. The extortions
necessitated by these wars for the maintenance of armies and the
incompetence of the viceroys brought Egypt at this time into a miserable
condition; and the numerous political crises at Bagdad prevented for a
time any serious measures being taken to improve it. After a struggle
between various pretenders to the viceroyalty, in which some pitched
battles were fought, Mahommed b. Tughj, son of a Tulunid prefect of
Damascus, was sent by the caliph to restore order; he had to force his
entrance into the country by an engagement with one of the pretenders,
Ibn Kaighlagh, in which he was victorious, and entered Fostat in August
935.


  Ikshidite Dynasty.

Mahommed b. Tughj was the founder of the Ikshidi dynasty, so called from
the title Ikshid, conferred on him at his request by the caliph shortly
after his appointment to the governorship of Egypt; it is said to have
had the sense of "king" in Ferghana, whence this person's ancestors had
come to enter the service of the caliph Motasim. He had himself served
under the governor of Egypt, Takin, whose son he displaced, in various
capacities, and had afterwards held various governorships in Syria. One
of the historians represents his appointment to Egypt as effected by
bribery and even forgery. He united in his person the offices of
governor and minister of finance, which had been separate since the time
of the Tulunids. He endeavoured to replenish the treasury not only by
extreme economy, but by inflicting fines on a vast scale on persons who
had held offices under his predecessor and others who had rendered
themselves suspect. The disaffected in Egypt kept up communications with
the Fatimites, against whom the Ikshid collected a vast army, which,
however, had first to be employed in resisting an invasion of Egypt
threatened by Ibn Raiq, an adventurer who had seized Syria; after an
indecisive engagement at Lajun the Ikshid decided to make peace with Ibn
Raiq, undertaking to pay him tribute. The favour afterwards shown to Ibn
Raiq at Bagdad nearly threw the Ikshid into the arms of the Fatimite
caliph, with whom he carried on a friendly correspondence, one letter of
which is preserved. He is even said to have given orders to substitute
the name of the Fatimite caliph for that of the Abbasid in public
prayer, but to have been warned of the unwisdom of this course. In 941,
after the death of Ibn Raiq, the Ikshid took the opportunity of invading
Syria, which the caliph permitted him to hold with the addition of the
sacred cities of Mecca and Medina, which the Tulunids had aspired to
possess. He is said at this time to have started (in imitation of Ahmad
Ibn Tulun) a variety of vexatious enactments similar to those afterwards
associated with the name of Hakim, e.g. compelling his soldiers to dye
their hair, and adding to their pay for the purpose.

In the year 944 he was summoned to Mesopotamia to assist the caliph, who
had been driven from Bagdad by Tuzun and was in the power of the
Hamdanids; and he proposed, though unsuccessfully, to take the caliph
with him to Egypt. At this time he obtained hereditary rights for his
family in the government of that country and Syria. The Hamdanid Saif
addaula shortly after this assumed the governorship of Aleppo, and
became involved in a struggle with the Ikshid, whose general, Kafur, he
defeated in an engagement between Homs and Hamah (Hamath). In a later
battle he was himself defeated by the Ikshid, when an arrangement was
made permitting Saif addaula to retain most of Syria, while a prefect
appointed by the Ikshid was to remain in Damascus. The Buyid ruler, who
was now supreme at Bagdad, permitted the Ikshid to remain in possession
of his viceroyalty, but shortly after receiving this confirmation he
died at Damascus in 946.

The second of this dynasty was the Ikshid's son Unjur, who had been
proclaimed in his father's time, and began his government under the
tutelage of the negro Kafur. Syria was immediately overrun by Saif
addaula, but he was defeated by Kafur in two engagements, and was
compelled to recognize the overlordship of the Egyptian viceroy. At the
death of Unjur in 961 his brother Abu'l-Hasan 'Ali was made viceroy with
the caliph's consent by Kafur, who continued to govern for his chief as
before. The land was during this period threatened at once by the
Fatimites from the west; the Nubians from the south, and the Carmathians
from the east; when the second Ikshidi died in 965, Kafur at first made
a pretence of appointing his young son Ahmad as his successor, but
deemed it safer to assume the viceroyalty himself, setting an example
which in Mameluke times was often followed. He occupied the post little
more than three years, and on his death in 968 the aforementioned Ahmad,
called Abu'l-Fawaris, was appointed successor, under the tutelage of a
vizier named Ibn Furat, who had long served under the Ikshidis. The
accession of this prince was followed by an incursion of the Carmathians
into Syria, before whom the Ikshidi governor fled into Egypt, where he
had for a time to undertake the management of affairs, and arrested Ibn
Furat, who had proved himself incompetent.

The administration of Ibn Furat was fatal to the Ikshidis and momentous
for Egypt, since a Jewish convert, Jacob, son of Killis, who had been in
the Ikshid's service, and was ill-treated by Ibn Furat, fled to the
Fatimite sovereign, and persuaded him that the time for invading Egypt
with a prospect of success had arrived, since there was no one in Fostat
capable of organizing a plan of defence, and the dissensions between the
Buyids at Bagdad rendered it improbable that any succour would arrive
from that quarter. The Fatimite caliph Mo'izz li-din allah was also in
correspondence with other residents in Egypt, where the Alid party from
the beginning of Abbasid times had always had many supporters; and the
danger from the Carmathians rendered the presence of a strong government
necessary. The Fatimite general Jauhar (variously represented as of
Greek, Slav and Sicilian origin), who enjoyed the complete confidence of
the Fatimite sovereign, was placed at the head of an army of 100,000
men--if Oriental numbers are to be trusted--and started from Rakkada at
the beginning of March 969 with the view of seizing Egypt.

Before his arrival the administration of affairs had again been
committed to Ibn Furat, who, on hearing of the threatened invasion, at
first proposed to treat with Jauhar for the peaceful surrender of the
country; but though at first there was a prospect of this being carried
out, the majority of the troops at Fostat preferred to make some
resistance, and an advance was made to meet Jauhar in the neighbourhood
of Giza. He had little difficulty in defeating the Egyptian army, and on
the 6th of July 969 entered Fostat at the head of his forces. The name
of Mo'izz was immediately introduced into public prayer, and coins were
struck in his name. The Ikshidi governor of Damascus, a cousin of
Abu'l-Fawaris Ahmad, endeavoured to save Syria, but was defeated at
Ramleh by a general sent by Jauhar and taken prisoner. Thus the Ikshidi
Dynasty came to an end, and Egypt was transferred from the Eastern to
the Western caliphate, of which it furnished the metropolis.

(4) _The Fatimite period_ begins with the taking of Fostat by Jauhar,
who immediately began the building of a new city, al-Kahira or Cairo, to
furnish quarters for the army which he had brought. A palace for the
caliph and a mosque for the army were immediately constructed, the
latter still famous as al-Azhar, and for many centuries the centre of
Moslem learning. Almost immediately after the conquest of Egypt, Jauhar
found himself engaged in a struggle with the Carmathians (q.v.), whom
the Ikshidi prefect of Damascus had pacified by a promise of tribute;
this promise was of course not held binding by the Fatimite general
(Ja'far b. Falah) by whom Damascus was taken, and the Carmathian leader
al-Hasan b. Ahmad al-A'sam received aid from Bagdad for the purpose of
recovering Syria to the Abbasids. The general Ja'far, hoping to deal
with this enemy independently of Jauhar, met the Carmathians without
waiting for reinforcements from Egypt, and fell in battle, his army
being defeated. Damascus was taken by the Carmathians, and the name of
the Abbasid caliph substituted for that of Mo'izz in public worship.
Hasan al-A'sam advanced from Damascus through Palestine to Egypt,
encountering little resistance on the way; and in the autumn of 971
Jauhar found himself besieged in his new city. By a timely sortie,
preceded by the administration of bribes to various officers in the
Carmathian host, Jauhar succeeded in inflicting a severe defeat on the
besiegers, who were compelled to evacuate Egypt and part of Syria.

Meanwhile Mo'izz had been summoned to enter the palace that had been
prepared for him, and after leaving a viceroy to take charge of his
western possessions he arrived in Alexandria on the 31st of May 973, and
proceeded to instruct his new subjects in the particular form of
religion (Shi'ism) which his family represented. As this was in origin
identical with that professed by the Carmathians, he hoped to gain the
submission of their leader by argument; but this plan was unsuccessful,
and there was a fresh invasion from that quarter in the year after his
arrival, and the caliph found himself besieged in his capital. The
Carmathians were gradually forced to retreat from Egypt and then from
Syria by some successful engagements, and by the judicious use of
bribes, whereby dissension was sown among their leaders. Mo'izz also
found time to take some active measures against the Byzantines, with
whom his generals fought in Syria with varying fortune. Before his death
he was acknowledged as caliph in Mecca and Medina, as well as Syria,
Egypt and North Africa as far as Tangier.

In the reign of the second Egyptian Fatimite 'Aziz billah, Jauhar, who
appears to have been cashiered by Mo'izz, was again employed at the
instance of Jacob b. Killis, who had been raised to the rank of vizier,
to deal with the situation in Syria, where a Turkish general Aftakin had
gained possession of Damascus, and was raiding the whole country; on the
arrival of Jauhar in Syria the Turks called the Carmathians to their
aid, and after a campaign of many vicissitudes Jauhar had to return to
Egypt to implore the caliph himself to take the field. In August 977
'Aziz met the united forces of Aftakin and his Carmathian ally outside
Ramleh in Palestine and inflicted a crushing defeat on them, which was
followed by the capture of Aftakin; this able officer was taken to
Egypt, and honourably treated by the caliph, thereby incurring the
jealousy of Jacob b. Killis, who caused him, it is said, to be poisoned.
This vizier had the astuteness to see the necessity of codifying the
doctrines of the Fatimites, and himself undertook this task; in the
newly-established mosque of el-Azhar he got his master to make provision
for a perpetual series of teachers and students of his manual. It would
appear, however, that a large amount of toleration was conceded by the
first two Egyptian Fatimites to the other sects of Islam, and to other
communities. Indeed at one time in 'Aziz's reign the vizierate of Egypt
was held by a Christian, Jesus, son of Nestorius, who appointed as his
deputy in Syria a Jew, Manasseh b. Abraham. These persons were charged
by the Moslems with unduly favouring their co-religionists, and the
belief that the Christians of Egypt were in league with the Byzantine
emperor, and even burned a fleet which was being built for the Byzantine
war, led to some persecution. Aziz attempted without success to enter
into friendly relations with the Buyid ruler of Bagdad, 'Adod addaula,
who was disposed to favour the 'Alids, but caused the claim of the
Fatimites to descend from 'Ali to be publicly refuted. He then tried to
gain possession of Aleppo, as the key to 'Irak, but this was prevented
by the intervention of the Byzantines. His North African possessions
were maintained and extended by 'Ali, son of Bulukkin, whom Mo'izz had
left as his deputy; but the recognition of the Fatimite caliph in this
region was little more than nominal.

His successor _Abu 'Ali al-Mansur_, who reigned under the title
_al-Hakim bi'amr allah_, came to the throne at the age of eleven, being
the son of 'Aziz by a Christian mother. He was at first under the
tutelage of the Slav Burjuwan, whose policy it was to favour the Turkish
element in the army as against the Maghribine, on which the strength of
the Fatimites had till then rested; his conduct of affairs was vigorous
and successful, and he concluded a peace with the Greek emperor. After a
few years' regency he was assassinated at the instance of the young
sovereign, who at an early age developed a dislike for control and
jealousy of his rights as caliph. He is branded by historians as the
Caligula of the East, who took a delight in imposing on his subjects a
variety of senseless and capricious regulations, and persecuting
different sections of them by cruel and arbitrary measures. It is
observable that some of those with which Hakim is credited are also
ascribed to Ibn Tulun and the Ikshid (Mahommed b. Tughj). He is perhaps
best remembered by his destruction of the church of the Holy Sepulchre
at Jerusalem (1010), a measure which helped to provoke the Crusades, but
was only part of a general scheme for converting all Christians and Jews
in his dominions to his own opinions by force. A more reputable
expedient with the same end in view was the construction of a great
library in Cairo, with ample provision for students; this was modelled
on a similar institution at Bagdad. It formed part of the great palace
of the Fatimites, and was intended to be the centre of their propaganda.
At times, however, he ordered the destruction of all Christian churches
in Egypt, and the banishment of all who did not adopt Islam. It is
strange that in the midst of these persecutions he continued to employ
Christians in high official positions. His system of persecution was not
abandoned till in the last year of his reign (1020) he thought fit to
claim divinity, a doctrine which is perpetuated by the Druses (q.v.),
called after one Darazi, who preached the divinity of Hakim at the time;
the violent opposition which this aroused among the Moslems probably led
him to adopt milder measures towards his other subjects, and those who
had been forcibly converted were permitted to return to their former
religion and rebuild their places of worship. Whether his disappearance
at the beginning of the year 1021 was due to the resentment of his
outraged subjects, or, as the historians say, to his sister's fear that
he would bequeath the caliphate to a distant relative to the exclusion
of his own son, will never be known. In spite of his caprices he appears
to have shown competence in the management of external affairs;
enterprises of pretenders both in Egypt and Syria were crushed with
promptitude; and his name was at times mentioned in public worship in
Aleppo and Mosul.

His son _Abu'l-Hasan 'Ali_, who succeeded him with the title _al-Zahir
li'i'zaz din allah_, was sixteen years of age at the time, and for four
years his aunt Sitt al-Mulk acted as regent; she appears to have been an
astute but utterly unscrupulous woman. After her death the caliph was in
the power of various ministers, under whose management of affairs Syria
was for a time lost to the Egyptian caliphate, and Egypt itself raided
by the Syrian usurpers, of whom one, Salih b. Mirdas, succeeded in
establishing a dynasty at Aleppo, which maintained itself after Syria
and Palestine had been recovered for the Fatimites by Anushtakin
al-Dizbari at the battle of Ukhuwanah in 1029. His career is said to
have been marked by some horrible caprices similar to those of his
father. After a reign of nearly sixteen years he died of the plague.

His successor, _Abu Tamim Ma'add_, who reigned with the title
_al-Mostansir_, was also an infant at the time of his accession, being
little more than seven years of age. The power was largely in the hands
of his mother, a negress, who promoted the interests of her kinsmen at
court, where indeed even in Hakim's time they had been used as a
counterpoise to the Maghribine and Turkish elements in the army. In the
first years of this reign affairs were administered by the vizier
al-Jarjara'i, by whose mismanagement Aleppo was lost to the Fatimites.
At his death in 1044 the chief influence passed into the hands of Abu
Sa'd, a Jew, and the former master of the queen-mother, and at the end
of four years he was assassinated at the instance of another Jew
(Sadakah, perhaps Zedekiah, b. Joseph al-Falahi), whom he had appointed
vizier. In this reign Mo'izz b. Badis, the 4th ruler of the dependent
Zeirid dynasty which had ruled in the Maghrib since the migration of the
Fatimite Mo'izz to Egypt, definitely abjured his allegiance (1049) and
returned to Sunnite principles and subjection to the Bagdad caliphate.
The Zeirids maintained Mahdia (see ALGIERS), while other cities of the
Maghrib were colonized by Arab tribes sent thither by the Cairene
vizier. This loss was more than compensated by the enrolment of Yemen
among the countries which recognized the Fatimite caliphate through the
enterprise of one 'Ali b. Mahommed al-Sulaihi, while owing to the
disputes between the Turkish generals who claimed supremacy at Bagdad,
Mostansir's name was mentioned in public prayer at that metropolis on
the 12th of January 1058, when a Turkish adventurer Basasiri was for a
time in power. The Egyptian court, chiefly owing to the jealousy of the
vizier, sent no efficient aid to Basasiri, and after a year Bagdad was
retaken by the Seljuk Toghrul Beg, and the Abbasid caliph restored to
his rights. In the following years the troubles in Egypt caused by the
struggles between the Turkish and negro elements in Mostansir's army
nearly brought the country into the dominion of the Abbasids. After
several battles of various issue the Turkish commander Nasir addaula b.
Hamdan got possession of Cairo, and at the end of 1068 plundered the
caliph's palace; the valuable library which had been begun by Hakim was
pillaged, and an accidental fire caused great destruction. The caliph
and his family were reduced to destitution, and Nasir addaula began
negotiations for restoring the name of the Abbasid caliph in public
prayer; he was, however, assassinated before he could carry this out,
and his assassin, also a Turk, appointed vizier. Mostansir then summoned
to his aid Badr al-Jamali, an Armenian who had displayed competence in
various posts which he had held in Syria, and this person early in 1074
arrived in Cairo accompanied by a bodyguard of Armenians; he contrived
to massacre the chiefs of the party at the time in possession of power,
and with the title Amir al-Juyush ("prince of the armies") was given by
Mostansir complete control of affairs. The period of internal
disturbances, which had been accompanied by famine and pestilence, had
caused usurpers to spring up in all parts of Egypt, and Badr was
compelled practically to reconquer the country. During this time,
however, Syria was overrun by an invader in league with the Seljuk Malik
Shah, and Damascus was permanently lost to the Fatimites; other cities
were recovered by Badr himself or his officers. He rebuilt the walls of
Cairo, of more durable material than that which had been employed by
Jauhar--a measure rendered necessary partly by the growth of the
metropolis, but also by the repeated sieges which it had undergone since
the commencement of Fatimite rule. The time of Mostansir is otherwise
memorable for the rise of the Assassins (q.v.), who at the first
supported the claims of his eldest son Nizar to the succession against
the youngest Ahmed, who was favoured by the family of Badr. When Badr
died in 1094 his influence was inherited by his son al-Afdal Shahinshah,
and this, at the death of Mostansir in the same year, was thrown in
favour of _Ahmed_, who succeeded to the caliphate with the title
_al-Mosta'li billah_.


  The Crusades.

Mosta'li's succession was not carried through without an attempt on the
part of Nizar to obtain his rights, the title which he chose being
_al-Mostafa lidin allah_; for a time he maintained himself in
Alexandria, but the energetic measures of his brother soon brought the
civil war to an end. The beginning of this reign coincided with the
beginning of the Crusades, and al-Afdal made the fatal mistake of
helping the Franks by rescuing Jerusalem from the Ortokids, thereby
facilitating its conquest by the Franks in 1099. He endeavoured to
retrieve his error by himself advancing into Palestine, but he was
defeated in the neighbourhood of Ascalon, and compelled to retire to
Egypt. Many of the Palestinian possessions of the Fatimites then
successively fell into the hands of the Franks. After a reign of seven
years Mosta'li died and the caliphate was given by al-Afdal to an infant
son, aged five years at the time, who was placed on the throne with the
title _al-Amir biahkam allah_, and for twenty years was under the
tutelage of al-Afdal. He made repeated attempts to recover the Syrian
and Palestinian cities from the Franks, but with poor success. In 1118
Egypt was invaded by Baldwin I., who burned the gates and the mosques of
Farama, and advanced to Tinnis, whence illness compelled him to retreat.
In August 1121 al-Afdal was assassinated in a street of Cairo, it is
said, with the connivance of the caliph, who immediately began the
plunder of his house, where fabulous treasures were said to be amassed.
The vizier's offices were given to one of the caliph's creatures,
Mahommed b. Fatik al-Bata'ihi, who took the title _al-Ma'mun_. His
external policy was not more fortunate than that of his predecessor, as
he lost Tyre to the Franks, and a fleet equipped by him was defeated by
the Venetians. On the 4th of October 1125 he with his followers was
seized and imprisoned by order of the Caliph Amir, who was now resolved
to govern by himself, with the assistance of only subordinate officials,
of whom two were drawn from the Samaritan and Christian communities. The
vizier was afterwards crucified with his five brothers. The caliph's
personal government appears to have been incompetent, and to have been
marked by extortions and other arbitrary measures. He was assassinated
in October 1129 by some members of the sect who believed in the claims
of Nizar, son of Mostansir.

The succeeding caliph, _Abu'l-Maimun 'Abd al-Majid_, who took the title
_al-Hafiz lidin allah_, was not the son but the cousin of the deceased
caliph, and of ripe age, being about fifty-eight years old at the time;
for more than a year he was kept in prison by the new vizier, a son of
al-Afdal, whom the army had placed in the post; but towards the end of
1131 this vizier fell by the hand of assassins, and the caliph was set
free. The reign of Hafiz was disturbed by the factions of the soldiery,
between which several battles took place, ending in the subjection of
the caliph for a time to various usurpers, one of these being his own
son Hasan, who had been provoked to rebel by the caliph nominating a
younger brother as his successor. For some months the caliph was under
this son's control; but the latter, who aimed at conciliating the
people, speedily lost his popularity with the troops, and his father was
able to get possession of his person and cause him to be poisoned
(beginning of 1135).

His son _Abu'l-Mansur Isma'il_, who was seventeen years old at the time
of Hafiz's death, succeeded him with the title _al-Zafir lia'da allah_.
From this reign to the end of the Fatimite period we have the journals
of two eminent men, Usamah b. Muniqdh and Umarah of Yemen, which throw
light on the leading characters. The civil dissensions of Egypt were
notorious at the time. The new reign began by an armed struggle between
two commanders for the post of vizier, which in January 1150 was decided
in favour of the Amir Ibn Sallar. This vizier was presently assassinated
by the direction of his stepson 'Abbas, who was raised to the vizierate
in his place. This event was shortly followed by the loss to the
Fatimites of Ascalon, the last place in Syria which they held; its loss
was attributed to dissensions between the parties of which the garrison
consisted. Four years later (April 1154) the caliph was murdered by his
vizier 'Abbas, according to Usamah, because the caliph had suggested to
his favourite, the vizier's son, to murder his father; and this was
followed by a massacre of the brothers of Zafir, followed by the raising
of his infant son _Abu'l-Qasim 'Isa_ to the throne.

The new caliph, who was not five years old, received the title _al-Fa'iz
binasr allah_, and was at first in the power of 'Abbas. The women of the
palace, however, summoned to their aid Tala'i' b. Ruzzik, prefect of
Ushmunain, at whose arrival in Cairo the troops deserted 'Abbas, who was
compelled to flee into Syria, taking his son and Usamah with him. 'Abbas
was killed by the Franks near Ascalon, his son sent in a cage to Cairo
where he was executed, while Usamah escaped to Damascus.


  Frankish invasion.

  Saladin.

The infant Fa'iz, who had been permanently incapacitated by the scenes
of violence which accompanied his accession, died in 1160. Tala'i' chose
to succeed him a grandson of Zafir, who was nine years of age, and
received the title _al-'Adid lidin allah_. Tala'i', who had complete
control of affairs, introduced the practice of farming the taxes for
periods of six months instead of a year, which led to great misery, as
the taxes were demanded twice. His death was brought on by the rigour
with which he treated the princesses, one of whom, with or without the
connivance of the caliph, organized a plot for his assassination, and he
died in September 1160. His son Ruzzik inherited his post and maintained
himself in it for more than a year, when another prefect of Upper Egypt,
Shawar b. Mujir, brought a force to Cairo, before which Ruzzik fled, to
be shortly afterwards captured and beheaded. Shawar's entry into Cairo
was at the beginning of 1163; after nine months he was compelled to flee
before another adventurer, an officer in the army named Dirgham.
Shawar's flight was directed to Damascus, where he was favourably
received by the prince Nureddin, who sent with him to Cairo a force of
Kurds under Asad al-din Shirguh. At the same time Egypt was invaded by
the Franks, who raided and did much damage on the coast. Dirgham was
defeated and killed, but a dispute then arose between Shawar and his
Syrian allies for the possession of Egypt. Shawar, being unable to cope
with the Syrians, demanded help of the Frankish king of Jerusalem
Amalric (Amauri) I., who hastened to his aid with a large force, which
united with Shawar's and besieged Shirguh in Bilbeis for three months;
at the end of this time, owing to the successes of Nureddin in Syria,
the Franks granted Shirguh a free passage with his troops back to Syria,
on condition of Egypt being evacuated (October 1164). Rather more than
two years later Shirguh persuaded Nureddin to put him at the head of
another expedition to Egypt, which left Syria in January 1167, and,
entering Egypt by the land route, crossed the Nile at Itfih (Atfih), and
encamped at Giza; a Frankish army hastened to Shawar's aid. At the
battle of Babain (April 11th, 1167) the allies were defeated by the
forces commanded by Shirguh and his nephew Saladin, who was presently
made prefect of Alexandria, which surrendered to Shirguh without a
struggle. Saladin was soon besieged by the allies in Alexandria; but
after seventy-five days the siege was raised, Shirguh having made a
threatening movement on Cairo, where a Frankish garrison had been
admitted by Shawar. Terms were then made by which both Syrians and
Franks were to quit Egypt, though the garrison of Cairo remained; the
hostile attitude of the Moslem population to this garrison led to
another invasion at the beginning of 1168 by King Amalric, who after
taking Bilbeis advanced to Cairo. The caliph, who up to this time
appears to have left the administration to the viziers, now sent for
Shirguh, whose speedy arrival in Egypt caused the Franks to withdraw.
Reaching Cairo on the 6th of January 1169, he was soon able to get
possession of Shawar's person, and after the prefect's execution, which
happened some ten days later, he was appointed vizier by the caliph.
After two months Shirguh died of indigestion (23rd of March 1169), and
the caliph appointed Saladin as successor to Shirguh; the new vizier
professed to hold office as a deputy of Nureddin, whose name was
mentioned in public worship after that of the caliph. By appropriating
the fiefs of the Egyptian officers and giving them to his Kurdish
followers he stirred up much ill-feeling, which resulted in a
conspiracy, of which the object was to recall the Franks with the view
of overthrowing the new regime; but this conspiracy was revealed by a
traitor and crushed. Nureddin loyally aided his deputy in dealing with
Frankish invasions of Egypt, but the anomaly by which he, being a
Sunnite, was made in Egypt to recognize a Fatimite caliph could not long
continue, and he ordered Saladin to weaken the Fatimite by every
available means, and then substitute the name of the Abbasid for his in
public worship. Saladin and his ministers were at first afraid lest this
step might give rise to disturbances among the people; but a stranger
undertook to risk it on the 17th of September 1171, and the following
Friday it was repeated by official order; the caliph himself died during
the interval, and it is uncertain whether he ever heard of his
deposition. The last of the Fatimite caliphs was not quite twenty-one
years old at the time of his death.

(5) _Ayyubite Period._--Saladin by the advice of his chief Nureddin
cashiered the Fatimite judges and took steps to encourage the study of
orthodox theology and jurisprudence in Egypt by the foundation of
colleges and chairs. On the death of the ex-caliph he was confirmed in
the prefecture of Egypt as deputy of Nureddin; and on the decease of the
latter in 1174 (12th of April) he took the title sultan, so that with
this year the Ayyubite period of Egyptian history properly begins.
During the whole of it Damascus rather more than Cairo counted as the
metropolis of the empire. The Egyptian army, which was motley in
character, was disbanded by the new sultan, whose troops were Kurds.
Though he did not build a new metropolis he fortified Cairo with the
addition of a citadel, and had plans made for a new wall to enclose both
it and the double city; this latter plan was never completed, but the
former was executed after his death, and from this time till the French
occupation of Egypt the citadel of Cairo was the political centre of the
country. It was in 1183 that Saladin's rule over Egypt and North Syria
was consolidated. Much of Saladin's time was spent in Syria, and his
famous wars with the Franks belong to the history of the Crusades and to
his personal biography. Egypt was largely governed by his favourite
Karakush, who lives in popular legend as the "unjust judge," though he
does not appear to have deserved that title.

Saladin at his death divided his dominions between his sons, of whom
'Othman succeeded to Egypt with the title _Malik al-Aziz 'Imal al-ain_.
The division was not satisfactory to the heirs, and after three years
(beginning of 1196) the Egyptian sultan conspired with his uncle Malik
al-'Adil to deprive Saladin's son al-Afdal of Damascus, which had fallen
to his lot. The war between the brothers was continued with intervals of
peace, during which al-'Adil repeatedly changed sides: eventually he
with al-'Aziz besieged and took Damascus, and sent al-Afdal to Sarkhad,
while al-'Adil remained in possession of Damascus. On the death of
al-'Aziz on the 29th of November 1198 in consequence of a hunting
accident, his infant son Mahommed was raised to the throne with the
title _Malik al-Mansur Nasir al-din_, and his uncle al-Afdal sent for
from Sarkhad to take the post of regent or Atabeg. So soon as al-Afdal
had got possession of his nephew's person, he started on an expedition
for the recovery of Damascus: al-'Adil not only frustrated this, but
drove him back to Egypt, where on the 25th of January 1200 a battle was
fought between the armies of the two at Bilbeis, resulting in the defeat
of al-Afdal, who was sent back to Sarkhad, while al-'Adil assumed the
regency, for which after a few months he substituted the sovereignty,
causing his nephew to be deposed. He reigned under the title _Malik
al-'Adil Saif al-din_. His name was Abu Bakr.

Though the early years of his reign were marked by numerous disasters,
famine, pestilence and earthquake, of which the second seems to have
been exceedingly serious, he reunited under his sway the whole of the
empire which had belonged to his brother, and his generals conquered for
him parts of Mesopotamia and Armenia, and in 1215 he got possession of
Yemen. He followed the plan of dividing his empire between his sons, the
eldest Mahommed, called _Malik al-Kamil_, being his viceroy in Egypt,
while al-Mu'azzam 'Isa governed Syria, al-Ashraf Musa his eastern and
al-Malik al-Auhad Ayyub his northern possessions. His attitude towards
the Franks was at the first peaceful, but later in his reign he was
compelled to adopt more strenuous measures. His death occurred at Alikin
(1218), a village near Damascus, while the Franks were besieging
Damietta--the first operation of the Fifth Crusade--which was defended
by al-Kamil, to whom his father kept sending reinforcements. The efforts
of al-Kamil after his accession to the independent sovereignty were
seriously hindered by the endeavour of an amir named Ahmed b. Mashtub to
depose him and appoint in his place a brother called al-Fa'iz Sabiq
al-din Ibrahim: this attempt was frustrated by the timely interposition
of al-Mu'azzam 'Isa, who came to Egypt to aid his brother in February
1219, and compelled al-Fa'iz to depart for Mosul. After a siege of
sixteen and a half months Damietta was taken by the Franks on Tuesday
the 6th of November 1219; al-Kamil thereupon proclaimed the Jihad, and
was joined at his fortified camp, afterwards the site of Mansura, by
troops from various parts of Egypt, Syria and Mesopotamia, including the
forces of his brothers 'Isa and Musa. With these allies, and availing
himself of the advantages offered by the inundation of the Nile,
al-Kamil was able to cut off both the advance and the retreat of the
invaders, and on the 31st of August 1221 a peace was concluded, by which
the Franks evacuated Egypt.

For some years the dominions of al-'Adil remained divided between his
sons: when the affairs of Egypt were settled, al-Kamil determined to
reunite them as before, and to that end brought on the Sixth Crusade.
Various cities in Palestine and Syria were yielded to Frederick II. as
the price of his help against the son of Mu'azzam 'Isa, who reigned at
Damascus with the title of Malik al-Nasir. About 1231-32 Kamil led a
confederacy of Ayyubite princes against the Seljuk Kaikobad into Asia
Minor, but his allies mistrusted him and victory rested with Kaikobad
(see SELJUKS). Before Kamil's death he was mentioned in public prayer at
Mecca as lord of Mecca (Hejaz), Yemen, Zabid, Upper and Lower Egypt,
Syria and Mesopotamia.

At his death (May 8th, 1238) at Damascus, his son Abu Bakr was appointed
to succeed with the title _Malik al-'Adil Saif al-din_; but his elder
brother Malik al-Salih Najm al-din Ayyub, having got possession of
Damascus, immediately started for Egypt, with the view of adding that
country to his dominions: meanwhile his uncle Isma'il, prince of Hamath,
with the prince of Homs, seized Damascus, upon hearing which the troops
of Najm al-din deserted him at Nablus, when he fell into the hands of
Malik al-Nasir, prince of Kerak, who carried him off to that city and
kept him a prisoner there for a time; after which he was released and
allowed to return to Nablus. On the 31st of May 1240 the new sultan was
arrested at Bilbeis by his own amirs, who sent for Najm al-din to
succeed him; and on the 19th of June of the same year Najm al-din
entered Cairo as sultan, and imprisoned his brother in the citadel,
where he died in 1248. Meanwhile in 1244 Jerusalem had been finally
wrested from the Franks. The administration of Najm al-din is highly
praised by Ibn Khallikan, who lived under it. He made large purchases of
slaves (Mamelukes) for his army, and when the inhabitants of Cairo
complained of their lawlessness, he built barracks for them on the
island of Roda (Rauda), whence they were called Bahri or Nile Mamelukes,
which became the name of the first dynasty that originated from them.
Much of his time was spent in campaigns in Syria, where the other
Ayyubites allied themselves against him with the Crusaders, whereas he
accepted the services of the Khwarizmians: eventually he succeeded in
recovering most of the Syrian cities. His name is commemorated by the
town of Salihia, which he built in the year 1246 as a resting-place for
his armies on their marches through the desert from Egypt to Palestine.
In 1249 he was recalled from the siege of Homs by the news of the
invasion of Egypt by Louis IX. (the Seventh Crusade), and in spite of
illness he hastened to Ushmum Tanna, in the neighbourhood of Damietta,
which he provisioned for a siege. Damietta was taken on the 6th of June
1249, owing to the desertion of his post by the commander Fakhr ud-din,
and the Banu Kinanah, to whom the defence of the place had been
entrusted: fifty-four of their chieftains were afterwards executed by
the sultan for this proceeding. On the 22nd of November the sultan died
of disease at Mansura, but his death was carefully concealed by the
amirs Lajin and Aktai, acting in concert with the Queen Shajar al-durr,
till the arrival from Syria of the heir to the throne, _Turanshah_, who
was proclaimed some four months later. At the battle of Fariskur, 6th of
April 1250, the invaders were utterly routed and the French king fell
into the hands of the Egyptian sultan. The Egyptian authorities now
resolved to raze Damietta, which, however, was rebuilt shortly after.
The sultan, who himself had had no share in the victory, advanced after
it from Mansura to Fariskur, where his conduct became menacing to the
amirs who had raised him to the throne, and to Shajar al-durr; she in
revenge organized an attack upon him which was successful, fire, water,
and steel contributing to his end.

(6) _Period of Bahri Mamelukes._--The dynasties that succeeded the
Ayyubites till the conquest of Egypt by the Ottomans bore the title
Dynasties of the Turks, but are more often called Mameluke dynasties,
because the sultans were drawn from the enfranchised slaves who
constituted the court, and officered the army. The family of the fourth
of these sovereigns, Ka'a'un (Qala'un), reigned for 110 years, but
otherwise no sultan was able to found a durable dynasty: after the death
of a sultan he was usually succeeded by an infant son, who after a short
time was dethroned by a new usurper.

After the death of the Sultan Turanshah, his step-mother at first was
raised to the vacant throne, when she committed the administration of
affairs to the captain of the retainers, Aibek; but the rule of a queen
caused scandal to the Moslem world, and Shajar al-durr gave way to this
sentiment by marrying Aibek and allowing the title sultan to be
conferred on him instead of herself. For policy's sake, however, Aibek
nominally associated with himself on the throne a scion of the Ayyubite
house, Malik al-Ashraf Musa, who died in prison (1252 or 1254). Aibek
meanwhile immediately became involved in war with the Ayyubite Malik
al-Nasir, who was in possession of Syria, with whom the caliph induced
him after some indecisive actions to make peace: he then successfully
quelled a mutiny of Mamelukes, whom he compelled to take refuge with the
last Abbasid caliph Mostasim in Bagdad and elsewhere. On the 10th of
April 1257 Aibek was murdered by his wife Shajar al-durr, who was
indignant at his asking for the hand of another queen: but Aibek's
followers immediately avenged his death, placing on the throne his
infant son _Malik al-Mansur_, who, however, was almost immediately
displaced by his guardian _Kotuz_, on the plea that the Mongol danger
necessitated the presence of a grown man at the head of affairs. In 1260
the Syrian kingdom of al-Nasir was destroyed by Hulaku (Hulagu), the
great Mongol chief, founder of the Ilkhan Dynasty (see MONGOLS), who,
having finally overthrown the caliph of Bagdad (see CALIPHATE, sect. c.
S 37), also despatched a threatening letter to Kotuz; but later in the
same year Syria was invaded by Kotuz, who defeated Hulagu's lieutenant
at the battle of 'Ain Jalut (3rd of September 1260), in consequence of
which event the Syrian cities all rose against the Mongols, and the
Egyptian sultan became master of the country with the exception of such
places as were still held by the Crusaders.


  Rule of Bibars.

  Abbasid caliphate revived.

Before Kotuz had reigned a year he was murdered at Salihia by his
lieutenant Bibars (October 23rd, 1260), who was piqued, it is said, at
the governorship of Aleppo being withheld from him. The sovereignty was
seized by this person with the title of _Malik al-Qahir_, presently
altered to _al-Zahir_. He had originally been a slave of Malik al-Salih,
had distinguished himself at the battle after which Louis IX. was
captured, and had helped to murder Turanshah. Sultan Bibars, who proved
to be one of the most competent of the Bahri Mamelukes, made Egypt the
centre of the Moslem world by re-establishing in theory the Abbasid
caliphate, which had lapsed through the taking of Bagdad by Hulagu,
followed by the execution of the caliph. Bibars recognized the claim of
a certain Abu'l-Qasim Ahmed to be the son of Zahir, the 35th Abbasid
caliph, and installed him as Commander of the Faithful at Cairo with the
title _al-Mostansir billah_. Mostansir then proceeded to confer on
Bibars the title sultan, and to address to him a homily, explaining his
duties. This document is preserved in the MS. life of Bibars, and
translated by G. Weil. The sultan appears to have contemplated restoring
the new caliph to the throne of Bagdad: the force, however, which he
sent with him for the purpose of reconquering Irak was quite
insufficient for the purpose, and Mostansir was defeated and slain. This
did not prevent Bibars from maintaining his policy of appointing an
Abbasid for the purpose of conferring legitimacy on himself; but he
encouraged no further attempts at re-establishing the Abbasids at
Bagdad, and his principle, adopted by successive sultans, was that the
caliph should not leave Cairo except when accompanying the sultan on an
expedition.

The reign of Bibars was spent largely in successful wars against the
Crusaders, from whom he took many cities, notably Safad, Caesarea and
Antioch; the Armenians, whose territory he repeatedly invaded, burning
their capital Sis; and the Seljukids of Asia Minor. He further reduced
the Isma'ilians or Assassins, whose existence as a community lasted on
in Syria after it had nearly come to an end in Persia. He made Nubia
tributary, therein extending Moslem arms farther south than they had
been extended by any previous sultan. His authority was before his death
recognized all over Syria (with the exception of the few cities still in
the power of the Franks), over Arabia, with the exception of Yemen, on
the Euphrates from Birah to Kerkesia (Circesium) on the Chaboras
(Khabur), whilst the amirs of north-western Africa were tributary to
him. His successes were won not only by military and political ability,
but also by the most absolute unscrupulousness, neither flagrant perjury
nor the basest treachery being disdained. He was the first sultan who
acknowledged the equal authority of the four schools of law, and
appointed judges belonging to each in Egypt and Syria; he was thus able
to get his measures approved by one school when condemned by another.


  Kala'un.

On the 1st of July 1277 Bibars died, and the events that followed set an
example repeatedly followed during the period of the Mamelukes. The
sultan's son _Malik al-Sa'id_ ascended the throne; but within little
more than two years he was compelled to abdicate in favour of his
father-in-law _Kala'un_, a Mameluke who had risen high in the former
sovereign's service. The accession of Kala'un was also marked by an
attempt on the part of the governor of Damascus to form Syria into an
independent kingdom, an attempt frequently imitated on similar
occasions. The Syrian forces were defeated at the battle of Jazurah
(April 26th, 1280) and Kala'un resumed possession of the country; but
the disaffected Syrians entered into relations with the Mongols, who
proceeded to invade Syria, but were finally defeated by Kala'un on the
30th of October 1281 under the walls of Homs (Emesa).

The conversion to Islam of Nikudar Ahmad, the third of the Ilkhan rulers
of Persia, and the consequent troubles in the western Mongol empire, let
to a suspension of hostilities between Egypt and the Ilkhans (see
PERSIA: _History_, S B), though the latter did not cease to agitate in
Europe for a renewal of the Crusades, with little result. Kala'un,
without pursuing any career of active conquest, did much to consolidate
his dominions, and especially to extend Egyptian commerce, for which
purpose he started passports enabling merchants to travel with safety
through Egypt and Syria as far as India. After the danger from the
Mongols had ceased, however, Kala'un directed his energies towards
capturing the last places that remained in the hands of the Franks, and
proceeded to take Markab, Latakia, and Tripoli (April 26th, 1289). In
1290 he planned an attack on Acre, but died (November 10th) in the
middle of all his preparations. Under Kala'un we first hear of the
Burjite Mamelukes, who owe their name to the citadel (Burj) of Cairo,
where 3700 of the whole number of 12,000 Mamelukes maintained by this
sovereign were quartered. He also set an example, frequently followed,
of the practice of dismissing all non-Moslems from government posts:
this was often done by his successors with the view of conciliating the
Moslems, but it was speedily found that the services of the Jewish and
Christian clerks were again required. He further founded a hospital for
clinical research on a scale formerly unknown.


  Malik al-Nasir.

  Mongol Wars.

  Decline of the Bahri power.

Kala'un was followed by his son _Khalil_ (_Malik al-Ashraf Salah
al-din_), who carried out his father's policy of driving the Franks out
of Syria and Palestine, and proceeded with the siege of Acre, which he
took (May 18th, 1291) after a siege of forty-three days. The capture and
destruction of this important place were followed by the capture of
Tyre, Sidon, Haifa, Athlit and Beirut, and thus Syria was cleared of the
Crusaders. He also planned an expedition against the prince of Lesser
Armenia, which was averted by the surrender of Behesna, Marash and Tell
Hamdun. The disputes between his favourite, the vizier Ibn al-Sa'lus,
and his viceroy Baidara, led to his being murdered by the latter
(December 12th, 1293), who was proclaimed sultan, but almost immediately
fell a victim to the vengeance of the deceased sultan's party, who
placed a younger son of Kala'un, _Mahommed Malik al-Nasir_, on the
throne. This prince had the singular fortune of reigning three times,
being twice dethroned: he was first installed on the 14th of December
1293, when he was nine years old, and the affairs of the kingdom were
undertaken by a cabinet, consisting of a vizier ('Alam al-din Sinjar), a
viceroy (Kitboga), a war minister (Husam al-din Lajin al-Rumi), a
prefect of the palace (Rokneddin Bibars Jashengir) and a secretary of
state (Rokneddin Bibars Mansuri). This cabinet naturally split into
rival camps, in consequence of which Kitboga, himself a Mongol, with the
aid of other Mongols who had come into Egypt after the battle of Homs,
succeeded in ousting his rivals, and presently, with the aid of the
surviving assassins of the former sultan, compelling Malik al-Nasir to
abdicate in his favour (December 1st, 1294). The usurper was, however,
able to maintain himself for two years only, famine and pestilence which
prevailed in Egypt and Syria during his reign rendering him unpopular,
while his arbitrary treatment of the amirs also gave offence. He was
dethroned in 1296, and one of the murderers of Khalil, Husam al-din
_Lajin_, son-in-law of the sultan Bibars and formerly governor of
Damascus, installed in his palace (November 26th, 1296). It had become
the practice of the Egyptian sultans to bestow all offices of importance
on their own freedmen (Mamelukes) to the exclusion of the older amirs,
whom they could not trust so well, but who in turn became still more
disaffected. Husam al-din fell a victim to the jealousy of the older
amirs whom he had incensed by bestowing arbitrary power on his own
Mameluke Mengutimur, and was murdered on the 16th of January 1299. His
short reign was marked by some fairly successful incursions into
Armenia, and the recovery of the fortresses Marash and Tell Hamdun,
which had been retaken by the Armenians. He also instituted a fresh
survey and division of land in Egypt and Syria, which occasioned much
discontent. After his murder the deposed sultan Malik al-Nasir, who had
been living in retirement at Kerak, was recalled by the army and
reinstated as sultan in Cairo (February 7th, 1299), though still only
fourteen years of age, so that public affairs were administered not by
him, but by Salar the viceroy, and Bibars Jashengir, prefect of the
palace. The 7th Ilkhan, Ghazan Mahmud, took advantage of the disorder in
the Mameluke empire to invade Syria in the latter half of 1299, when his
forces inflicted a severe defeat on those of the new sultan, and seized
several cities, including the capital Damascus, of which, however, they
were unable to storm the citadel; in 1300, when a fresh army was
collected in Egypt, the Mongols evacuated Damascus and made no attempt
to secure their other conquests. The fear of further Mongolian invasion
led to the imposition of fresh taxes in both Egypt and Syria, including
one of 33% on rents, which occasioned many complaints. The invasion did
not take place till 1303, when at the battle of Marj al-Saffar (April
20th) the Mongols were defeated. This was the last time that the Ilkhans
gave the Egyptian sultans serious trouble; and in the letter written in
the sultan's name to the Ilkhan announcing the victory, the former
suggested that the caliphate of Bagdad should be restored to the titular
Abbasid caliph who had accompanied the Egyptian expedition, a suggestion
which does not appear to have led to any actual steps being taken. The
fact that the Mongols were in ostensible alliance with Christian princes
led to a renewal by the sultan of the ordinances against Jews and
Christians which had often been abrogated, as often renewed and again
fallen into abeyance; and their renewal led to missions from various
Christian princes requesting milder terms for their co-religionists. The
amirs Salar and Bibars having usurped the whole of the sultan's
authority, he, after some futile attempts to free himself of them, under
the pretext of pilgrimage to Mecca, retired in March 1309 to Kerak,
whence he sent his abdication to Cairo; in consequence of which, on the
5th of April 1309, _Bibars Jashengir_ was proclaimed sultan, with the
title _Malik al-Mozaffar_. This prince was originally a freedman of
Kala'un, and was the first Circassian who ascended the throne of Egypt.
Before the year was out the new sultan had been rendered unpopular by
the occurrence of a famine, and Malik al-Nasir was easily able to induce
the Syrian amirs to return to his allegiance, in consequence of which
Bibars in his turn abdicated, and Malik al-Nasir re-entered Cairo as
sovereign on the 5th of March 1310. He soon found the means to execute
both Bibars and Salar, while other amirs who had been eminent under the
former regime fled to the Mongols. The relations between their Ilkhan
and the Egyptian sultan continued strained, and the 8th Ilkhan Oeljeitu
(1304-1316) addressed letters to Philip the Fair and the English king
Edward I. (answered by Edward II. in 1307), desiring aid against Malik
al-Nasir; and for many years the courts of the sultan and the Ilkhan
continued to be the refuge of malcontents from the other kingdom.
Finally in 1322 terms of peace and alliance were agreed on between the
sultan and Abu Sa'id the 9th Ilkhan. The sultan also entered into
relations with the Mongols of the Golden Horde and in 1319 married a
daughter of the reigning prince Uzbeg Khan (see MONGOLS: _Golden
Horde_). Much of Malik al-Nasir's third administration was spent in
raids into Nubia, where he endeavoured to set up a creature of his own
as sovereign, in attempts at bringing the Bedouins of south-eastern
Egypt into subordination, and in persecuting the Nosairis, whose heresy
became formidable about this time. Like other Egyptian sultans he made
considerable use of the Assassins, 124 of whom were sent by him into
Persia to execute Kara Sonkor, at one time governor of Damascus, and one
of the murderers of Malik al-Ashraf; but they were all outwitted by the
exile, who was finally poisoned by the Ilkhan in recompense for a
similar service rendered by the Egyptian sultan. For a time Malik
al-Nasir was recognized as suzerain in north Africa, the Arabian Irak,
and Asia Minor, but he was unable to make any permanent conquests in any
of these countries. He brought Medina, which had previously been
governed by independent sherifs, to acknowledge his authority. His
diplomatic relations were more extensive than those of any previous
sultan, and included Bulgarian, Indian, and Abyssinian potentates, as
well as the pope, the king of Aragon and the king of France. He appears
to have done his utmost to protect his Christian subjects, incurring
thereby the reproaches of the more fanatical Moslems, especially in the
year 1320 when owing to incendiarism in Cairo there was danger of a
general massacre of the Christian population. His internal
administration was marked by gross extravagance, which led to his
viziers being forced to practise violent extortion for which they
afterwards suffered. He paid considerable attention to sheep-breeding
and agriculture, and by a canal which he had dug from Fuah to Alexandria
not only assisted commerce but brought 100,000 feddans under
cultivation. His taste for building and street improvement led to the
beautifying of Cairo, and his example was followed by the governors of
other great cities in the empire, notably Aleppo and Damascus. He paid
exceptionally high prices for Mamelukes, many of whom were sold by their
Mongol parents to his agents, and accustomed them to greater luxury than
was usual under his predecessors. In 1315 he instituted a survey of
Egypt, and of the twenty-four parts into which it was divided ten were
assigned to the sultan and fourteen to the amirs and the army. He took
occasion to abolish a variety of vexatious imposts, and the new budget
fell less heavily on the Christians than the old. Among the literary
ornaments of his reign was the historian and geographer Isma'il Abulfeda
(q.v.), to whom Malik al-Nasir restored the government of Hamath, which
had belonged to his ancestors, and even gave the title sultan. He died
on the 7th of June 1341. The son, _Abu Bakr_, to whom he had left the
throne, was able to maintain himself only a few months on it, being
compelled to abdicate on the 4th of August 1341 in favour of his infant
brother _Kuchuk_; the revolution was brought about by Kausun, a powerful
Mameluke of the preceding monarch. This person's authority was, however,
soon overthrown by a party formed by the Syrian prefects, and on the
11th of January _Malik al-Nasir Ahmad_, an elder son of the former
sultan of the same title, was installed in his place, though he did not
actually arrive in Cairo till the 6th of November, being unwilling to
leave Kerak, where he had been living in retirement. After a brief
sojourn in Cairo he speedily returned thither, thereby forfeiting his
throne, which was conferred by the amirs on his brother _Isma'il
al-Malik al-Salih_ (June 27th, 1342). This sultan was mainly occupied
during his short reign with besieging and taking Kerak, whither Ahmad
had taken refuge, and himself died on the 3rd of August 1345, when
another son of Malik al-Nasir, named _Sha'ban_, was placed on the
throne. The constant changes of sultan led to great disorder in the
provinces, and many of the subject principalities endeavoured to shake
off the Egyptian yoke. Sha'ban proved no more competent than his
predecessors, being given to open debauchery and profligacy, an example
followed by his amirs; and fresh discontent led to his being deposed by
the Syrian amirs, when his brother _Hajji_ was proclaimed sultan in his
place (September 18th, 1346). Hajji was deposed and killed on the 10th
of December 1347, and another infant son of Malik al-Nasir, _Hasan_, who
took his father's title, was proclaimed, the real power being shared by
three amirs, Sheikhun, Menjek and Yelbogha Arus. During this reign
(1348-1349) Egypt was visited by the "Black Death," which is said to
have carried off 900,000 of the inhabitants of Cairo and to have raged
as far south as Assuan. Towards the beginning of 1351 the sultan got rid
of his guardians and attempted to rule by himself; but though successful
in war, his arbitrary measures led to his being dethroned on the 21st of
August 1351 by the amirs, who proclaimed his brother Salih with the
title of _Malik al-Salih_. He too was only fourteen years of age. The
power was contested for by various groups of amirs, whose struggles
ended with the deposition of the sultan Salih on the 20th of October
1354, and the reinstatement of his brother _Hasan_, who was again
dethroned on the 16th of March 1361 by an amir Yelbogha, whom he had
offended, and who, having got possession of the sultan's person,
murdered him. The next day a son of the dethroned sultan Hajji was
proclaimed sultan with the title _Malik al-Mansur_. On the 29th of May
1363 this sultan was also dethroned on the ground of incompetence, and
his place was given to another grandson of Malik al-Nasir, _Sha'ban_,
son of Hosain, then ten years old. The amir Yelbogha at first held all
real power and is said to have acquired a degree of authority which no
other subject ever held. During this reign, on the 8th of October 1365,
a landing was effected at Alexandria by a Frankish fleet under Peter I.
of Cyprus, which presently took possession of the city; the Franks were
speedily compelled to embark again after plundering the city, for which
compensation was afterwards demanded by Yelbogha from the Christian
population of Egypt and Syria. Alexandria was further made the seat of a
viceroy, having previously only had a prefect. On the 11th of December
1366 Yelbogha was himself attacked by the sultan, captured and slain.
His successor in the office of first minister was a mere tool in the
hands of his Mamelukes, who compelled him to institute and depose
governors, &c., at their pleasure. In 1374 the Egyptians raided Cilicia
and captured Leo VI., prince of Lesser Armenia, which now became an
Egyptian province with a Moslem governor. On the 15th of March 1377 the
sultan was murdered by the Mamelukes, owing to his refusing a largess of
money which they demanded. The infant son of the late sultan _'Ali_, a
lad of eight years, was proclaimed with the title _Malik al-Mansur_; the
power was in the hands of the ministers Kartai and Ibek, the latter of
whom overthrew the former with the aid of his own Mamelukes, Berekeh and
Barkuk. An insurrection in Syria which spread to Egypt presently caused
the fall of Ibek, and led to the occupation of the highest posts by the
Circassian freedmen Berekeh and Barkuk, of whom the latter ere long
succeeded in ousting the former and usurping the sultan's place; on the
19th of May 1381, when the sultan 'Ali died, his place was given to an
infant brother Hajji, but on the 26th of November 1382, _Barkuk_ set
this child aside and had himself proclaimed sultan (with the title
_Malik al-Zahir_), thereby ending the Bahri dynasty and commencing that
of the Circassians. For a short period, however, Hajji was restored,
when on the 1st of June 1389 Cairo was taken by Yelbogha, governor of
Damascus, and Barkuk expelled; Hajji reigned at first under the
guardianship of Yelbogha, who was then overthrown by Mintash; Barkuk,
who had been relegated to Kerak, succeeded in again forming a party, and
in a battle fought at Shakhab, January 1390, succeeded in gaining
possession of the person of the sultan Hajji, and on the 21st of January
he was again proclaimed sultan in Cairo.


  Timur in Syria.

  Wars with European Powers.

(7) _Period of Burji Mamelukes._--Barkuk presently entered into
relations with the Ottoman sultan Bayezid I., and by slaying an envoy of
Timur incurred the displeasure of the world-conqueror; and in 1394 led
an army into Syria with the view of restoring the Jelairid Ilkhan Ahmad
to Bagdad (as Barkuk's vassal), and meeting the Mongol invasion. Barkuk,
however, died (June 20th, 1399) before Timur had time to invade Syria.
According to the custom that had so often proved disastrous, a young son
of Barkuk, _Faraj_, then aged thirteen, was appointed sultan under the
guardianship of two amirs. Incursions were immediately made by the
Ottoman sultan into the territory of Egyptian vassals at Derendeh and
Albistan (Ablestin), and Malatia was besieged by his forces. Timur, who
was at this time beginning his campaign against Bayezid, turned his
attention first to Syria, and on the 30th of October 1400 defeated the
Syrian amirs near Aleppo, and soon got possession of the city and the
citadel. He proceeded to take Hamah, Homs (Emesa) and other towns, and
on the 20th of December started for Damascus. An endeavour was made by
the Egyptian sultan to relieve Damascus, but the news of an insurrection
in Cairo caused him to retire and leave the place to its fate. In the
first three months of 1401 the whole of Northern Syria suffered from
Timur's marauders. In the following year (September 29th, 1402) Timur
who had in the interval inflicted a crushing defeat on the Ottoman
sultan, sent to demand homage from Faraj, and his demand was readily
granted, together with the delivery of the princes who had sought refuge
from Timur in Egyptian territory. The death of Timur in February 1405
restored Egyptian authority in Syria, which, however, became a
rendezvous for all who were discontented with the rule of Faraj and his
amirs, and two months after Timur's death was in open rebellion against
Faraj. Although Faraj succeeded in defeating the rebels, he was
compelled by insubordination on the part of his Circassian Mamelukes to
abdicate (September 20th, 1405), when his brother _Abd al-al-'aziz_ was
proclaimed with the title _Malik al-Mansur_; after two months this
prince was deposed, and Faraj, who had been in hiding, recalled. Most of
his reign was, however, occupied with revolts on the part of the Syrian
amirs, to quell whom he repeatedly visited Syria; the leaders of the
rebels were the amirs Newruz and Sheik Mahmudi, afterwards sultan. Owing
to disturbances and misgovernment the population of Egypt and Syria is
said to have shrunk to a third in his time, and he offended public
sentiment not only by debauchery, but by having his image stamped on his
coins. On the 23rd of May 1412, after being defeated and shut up in
Damascus, he was compelled by Sheik Mahmudi to abdicate, and an Abbasid
caliph, Mosta'in, was proclaimed sultan, only to be forced to abdicate
on the 6th of November of the same year in _Sheik's_ favour, who took
the title _Malik al-Mu'ayyad_, his colleague Newruz having been
previously sent to Syria, where he was to be autocrat by the terms of
their agreement. In the struggle which naturally followed between the
two, Newruz was shut up in Damascus, defeated and slain. Sheik himself
invaded Asia Minor and forced the Turkoman states to acknowledge his
suzerainty. After the sultan's return they soon rebelled, but were again
brought into subjection by Sheik's son Ibrahim; his victories excited
the envy of his father, who is said to have poisoned him. Sheik himself
died a few months after the decease of his son (January 13th, 1421), and
another infant son, _Ahmad_, was proclaimed with the title _Malik
al-Mozaffar_, the proclamation being followed by the usual dissensions
between the amirs, ending with the assumption of supreme power by the
amir _Tatar_, who, after defeating his rivals, on the 29th of August
1421 had himself proclaimed sultan with the title _Malik al-Zahir_.
This usurper, however, died on the 30th of November of the same year,
leaving the throne to an infant son _Mohammed_, who was given the title
_Malik al-Salih_; the regular intrigues between the amirs followed,
leading to his being dethroned on the following 1st of April 1422, when
the amir appointed to be his tutor, _Barsbai_, was proclaimed sultan
with the title _Malik al-Ashraf_. This sultan avenged the attacks on
Alexandria repeatedly made by Cyprian ships, for he sent a fleet which
burned Limasol, and another which took Famagusta (August 4th, 1425), but
failed in the endeavour to annex the island permanently. An expedition
sent in the following year (1426) succeeded in taking captive the king
of Cyprus, who was brought to Cairo and presently released for a ransom
of 200,000 dinars, on condition of acknowledging the suzerainty of the
Egyptian sultan and paying him an annual tribute. Barsbai appears to
have excelled his predecessors in the invention of devices for exacting
money from merchants and pilgrims, and in juggling with the exchange.
This led to a naval demonstration on the part of the Venetians, who
secured better terms for their trade, and to the seizure of Egyptian
vessels by the king of Aragon and the prince of Catalonia. In a census
made during Barsbai's reign, it was found that the total number of towns
and villages in Egypt had sunk to 2170, whereas in the 4th century A.H.
it had stood at 10,000. Much of Barsbai's attention was occupied with
raids into Asia Minor, where the Dhu 'l-Kadiri Turkomans frequently
rebelled, and with wars against Kara Yelek, prince of Amid, and Shah
Rokh, son of Timur. Barsbai died on the 7th of June 1438. In accordance
with the custom of his predecessors he left the throne to a son still in
his minority, _Abu'l-Mahasin Yusuf_, who took the title _Malik
al-'Aziz_, but as usual after a few months he was displaced by the
regent _Jakmak_, who on the 9th of September 1438 was proclaimed sultan
with the title _Malik al-Zahir_. In the years 1442-1444 this sultan sent
three fleets against Rhodes, where the third effected a landing, but was
unable to make any permanent conquest. In consequence of a lengthy
illness Jakmak abdicated on the 1st of February 1453, when his son
_'Othman_ was proclaimed sultan with the title _Malik al-Mansur_. Though
not a minor, he had no greater success than the sons of the usurpers who
preceded him, being dethroned after six weeks (March 15th, 1453) in
favour of the amir _Inal al-'Ala'i_, who took the title _Malik
al-Ashraf_. His reign was marked by friendly relations with the Ottoman
sultan Mahommed II., whose capture of Constantinople (1453) was the
cause of great rejoicings in Egypt, but also by violent excesses on the
part of the Mamelukes, who dictated the sultan's policy. On his death on
the 26th of February 1461 his son _Ahmad_ was proclaimed sultan with the
title _Malik al-Mu'ayyad_; he had the usual fate of sultans' sons,
earned in his case by an attempt to bring the Mamelukes under
discipline; he was compelled to abdicate on the 28th of June 1461, when
the amir _Khoshkadam_, who had served as a general, was proclaimed
sultan. Unlike the other Mameluke sovereigns, who were Turks or
Circassians, this man had originally been a Greek slave.


  Early relations with Turkey.

In his reign (1463) there began the struggle between the Egyptian and
the Ottoman sultanates which finally led to the incorporation of Egypt
in the Ottoman empire. The dispute began with a struggle over the
succession in the principality of Karaman, where the two sultans
favoured rival candidates, and the Ottoman sultan Mahommed II. supported
the claim of his candidate with force of arms, obtaining as the price of
his assistance several towns in which the suzerainty of the Egyptian
sultan had been acknowledged. Open war did not, however, break out
between the two states in Khoshkadam's time. This sultan is said to have
taken money to permit innocent persons to be ill-treated or executed. He
died on the 9th of October 1467, when the Atabeg _Yelbai_ was selected
by the Mamelukes to succeed him, and was proclaimed sultan with the
title of _Malik al-Zahir_. This person, proving incompetent, was deposed
by a revolution of the Mamelukes on the 4th of December 1467, when the
Atabeg _Timurbogha_ was proclaimed with the title _Malik al-Zahir_. In
a month's time, however, there was another palace revolution, and the
new Atabeg _Kait Bey_ or _Kaietbai_ (January 31st, 1468) was proclaimed
sultan, the dethroned Timurbogha being, however, permitted to go free
whither he pleased. Much of Kait Bey's reign was spent in struggles with
Uzun Hasan, prince of Diarbekr, and Shah Siwar, chief of the
Dhu'l-Kadiri Turkomans. He also offended the Ottoman sultan Bayezid
II. by entertaining his brother Jem, who was afterwards poisoned in
Europe. Owing to this, and also to the fact that an Indian embassy to
the Ottoman sultan was intercepted by the agents of Kait Bey, Bayezid
II. declared war against Egypt, and seized Adana, Tarsus and other
places within Egyptian territory; extraordinary efforts were made by
Kait Bey, whose generals inflicted a severe defeat on the Ottoman
invaders. In 1491, however, after the Egyptians had repeatedly defeated
the Ottoman troops, Kait Bey made proposals of peace which were
accepted, the keys of the towns which the Ottomans had seized being
restored to the Egyptian sultan. Kait Bey endeavoured to assist his
co-religionists in Spain who were threatened by King Ferdinand, by
threatening the pope with reprisals on Syrian Christians, but without
effect. As the consequence of a palace intrigue, which Kait Bey was too
old to quell, on the 7th of August 1496, a day before his death, his son
_Mahommed_ was proclaimed sultan with the title _Malik al-Nasir_; this
was in order to put the supreme power into the hands of the Atabeg
Kansuh, since the new sultan was only fourteen years old. An attempt of
the Atabeg to oust the new sultan, however, failed. After a reign of
little more than two years, filled mainly with struggles between rival
amirs, _Malik al-Nasir_ was murdered (October 31st, 1498), and his uncle
and vizier _Kansuh_ proclaimed sultan with the title _Malik al-Zahir_.
His reign only lasted about twenty months; on the 30th of June 1500 he
was dethroned by Tumanbey, who caused _Jan Belat_, the Atabeg, to be
proclaimed sultan. A few months later _Tumanbey_, at the suggestion of
Kasrawah, governor of Damascus, whom he had been sent to reduce to
subjection, ousted Jan Belat, and was himself proclaimed sultan with the
title _Malik al-'Adil_ (January 25th, 1501). His reign lasted only one
hundred days, when he was displaced by _Kansuh al-Ghuri_ (April 20th,
1501). His reign was remarkable for a naval conflict between the
Egyptians and the Portuguese, whose fleet interfered with the pilgrim
route from India to Mecca, and also with the trade between India and
Egypt; Kansuh caused a fleet to be built which fought naval battles with
the Portuguese with varying results.


  The Turkish conquest.

In 1515 there began the war with the Ottoman sultan Selim I. which led
to the close of the Mameluke period, and the incorporation of Egypt and
its dependencies in the Ottoman empire (see TURKEY: _History_). Kansuh
was charged by Selim with giving the envoys of the Safawid Isma'il
passage through Syria on their way to Venice to form a confederacy
against the Turks, and with harbouring various refugees. The actual
declaration of war was not made by Selim till May 1515, when the Ottoman
sultan had made all his preparations; and at the battle of Merj Dabik,
on the 24th of August 1515, Kansuh was defeated by the Ottoman forces
and fell fighting. Syria passed quickly into the possession of the
Turks, whose advent was in many places welcome as meaning deliverance
from the Mamelukes. In Cairo, when the news of the defeat and death of
the Egyptian sultan arrived, the governor who had been left by Kansuh,
_Tumanbey_, was proclaimed sultan (October 17th, 1516). On the 20th of
January 1517 Cairo was taken by the Ottomans, and Selim shortly after
declared sultan of Egypt. Tumanbey continued the struggle for some
months, but was finally defeated, and after being captured and kept in
prison seventeen days was executed on the 15th of April 1517.

(8) _The Turkish Period._--The sultan Selim left with his viceroy Khair
Bey a guard of 5000 janissaries, but otherwise made few changes in the
administration of the country. The register by which a great portion of
the land was a fief of the Mamelukes was left unchanged, and it is said
that a proposal made by the sultan's vizier to appropriate these estates
was punished with death. The Mameluke amirs were to be retained in
office as heads of twelve sanjaks into which Egypt was divided; and
under the next sultan, Suleiman I., two chambers were created, called
respectively the Greater and the Lesser Divan, in which both the army
and the ecclesiastical authorities were represented, to aid the pasha by
their deliberations. Six regiments altogether were constituted by the
conqueror Selim for the protection of Egypt; to these Suleiman added a
seventh, of Circassians. As will be seen from the tables, it was the
practice of the Porte to change the governor of Egypt at very short
intervals--after a year or even some months. The third governor, Ahmad
Pasha, hearing that orders for this execution had come from
Constantinople, endeavoured to make himself an independent ruler and had
coins struck in his own name. His schemes were frustrated by two of the
amirs whom he had imprisoned and who, escaping from their confinement,
attacked him in his bath and killed him. In 1527 the first survey of
Egypt under the Ottomans was made, in consequence of the official copy
of the former registers having perished by fire; yet this new survey did
not come into use until 1605. Egyptian lands were divided in it into
four classes--the sultan's domain, fiefs, land for the maintenance of
the army, and lands settled on religious foundations.


  Troubles with the army.

It would seem that the constant changes in the government caused the
army to get out of control at an early period of the Ottoman occupation,
and at the beginning of the 11th Islamic century mutinies became common;
in 1013 (1604) the governor Ibrahim Pasha was murdered by the soldiers,
and his head set on the Bab Zuwela. The reason for these mutinies was
the attempt made by successive pashas to put a stop to the extortion
called _Tulbah_, a forced payment exacted by the troops from the
inhabitants of the country by the fiction of debts requiring to be
discharged, which led to grievous ill-usage. In 1609 something like
civil war broke out between the army and the pasha, who had on his side
some loyal regiments and the Bedouins. The soldiers went so far as to
choose a sultan, and to divide provisionally the regions of Cairo
between them. They were defeated by the governor Mahommed Pasha, who on
the 5th of February 1610 entered Cairo in triumph, executed the
ringleaders, and banished many others to Yemen. The contemporary
historian speaks of this event as a second conquest of Egypt for the
Ottomans. A great financial reform was now effected by Mahommed Pasha,
who readjusted the burdens imposed on the different communities of Egypt
in accordance with their means. With the troubles that beset the
metropolis of the Ottoman empire, the governors appointed thence came to
be treated by the Egyptians with continually decreasing respect. In July
1623 there came an order from the Porte dismissing Mustafa Pasha and
appointing 'Ali Pasha governor in his place. The officers met and
demanded from the newly-appointed governor's deputy the customary
gratuity; when this was refused they sent letters to the Porte declaring
that they wished to have Mustafa Pasha and not 'Ali Pasha as governor.
Meanwhile 'Ali Pasha had arrived at Alexandria, and was met by a
deputation from Cairo telling him that he was not wanted. He returned a
mild answer; and, when a rejoinder came in the same style as the first
message, he had the leader of the deputation arrested and imprisoned.
Hereupon the garrison of Alexandria attacked the castle and rescued the
prisoner; whereupon 'Ali Pasha was compelled to embark. Shortly after a
rescript arrived from Constantinople confirming Mustafa Pasha in the
governorship. Similarly in 1631 the army took upon themselves to depose
the governor Musa Pasha, in indignation at his execution of Kitas Bey,
an officer who was to have commanded an Egyptian force required for
service in Persia. The pasha was ordered either to hand over the
executioners to vengeance or to resign his place; as he refused to do
the former he was compelled to do the latter, and presently a rescript
came from Constantinople, approving the conduct of the army and
appointing one Khalil Pasha as Musa's successor. Not only was the
governor unsupported by the sultan against the troops, but each new
governor regularly inflicted a fine upon his outgoing predecessor, under
the name of money due to the treasury; and the outgoing governor would
not be allowed to leave Egypt till he had paid it. Besides the
extortions to which this practice gave occasion the country suffered
greatly in these centuries from famine and pestilence. The latter in the
spring of 1619 is said to have carried off 635,000 persons, and in 1643
completely desolated 230 villages.


  Rise of the Beys.

By the 18th century the importance of the pasha was quite superseded by
that of the beys, and two offices, those of Sheik al-Balad and Amir
al-Hajj, which were held by these persons, represented the real headship
of the community. The process by which this state of affairs came about
is somewhat obscure, owing to the want of good chronicles for the
Turkish period of Egyptian history. In 1707 the Sheik al-Balad, Qasim
Iywaz, is found at the head of one of two Mameluke factions, the
Qasimites and the Fiqarites, between whom the seeds of enmity were sown
by the pasha of the time, with the result that a fight took place
between the factions outside Cairo, lasting eighty days. At the end of
that time Qasim Iywaz was killed and the office which he had held was
given to his son Isma'il. Isma'il held this office for sixteen years,
while the pashas were constantly being changed, and succeeded in
reconciling the two factions of Mamelukes. In 1724 this person was
assassinated through the machinations of the pasha, and Shirkas Bey, of
the opposing faction, elevated to the office of Sheik al-Balad in his
place. He was soon driven from his post by one of his own faction called
Dhu'l-Fiqar, and fled to Upper Egypt. After a short time he returned at
the head of an army, and some engagements ensued, in the last of which
Shirkas Bey met his end by drowning; Dhu'l-Fiqar was himself
assassinated in 1730 shortly after this event. His place was filled by
Othman Bey, who had served as his general in this war. In 1743 Othman
Bey, who had governed with wisdom and moderation, was forced to fly from
Egypt by the intrigues of two adventurers, Ibrahim and Ridwan Bey, who,
when their scheme had succeeded, began a massacre of beys and others
thought to be opposed to them; they then proceeded to govern Egypt
jointly, holding the two offices mentioned above in alternate years. An
attempt made by one of the pashas to rid himself of these two persons by
a _coup d'etat_ signally failed owing to the loyalty of their armed
supporters, who released Ibrahim and Ridwan from prison and compelled
the pasha to fly to Constantinople. An attempt made by a subsequent
pasha in accordance with secret orders from Constantinople was so far
successful that some of the beys were killed. Ibrahim and Ridwan
escaped, and compelled the pasha to resign his governorship and return
to Constantinople. Ibrahim shortly afterwards fell by the hand of an
assassin who had aspired to occupy one of the vacant beyships himself,
which was conferred instead on 'Ali, who as 'Ali Bey was destined to
play an important part in the history of Egypt. The murder of Ibrahim
Bey took place in 1755, and his colleague Ridwan perished in the
disputes that followed upon it.


  'Ali Bey.

'Ali Bey, who had first distinguished himself by defending a caravan in
Arabia against bandits, set himself the task of avenging the death of
his former master Ibrahim, and spent eight years in purchasing Mamelukes
and winning other adherents. He thereby excited the suspicions of the
Sheik al-Balad Khalil Bey, who organized an attack upon him in the
streets of Cairo, in consequence of which he fled to Upper Egypt. Here
he met one Salh Bey, who had injuries to avenge on Khalil Bey, and the
two organized a force with which they returned to Cairo and defeated
Khalil, who was forced to fly to Tanta, where for a time he concealed
himself; eventually, however, he was discovered, sent to Alexandria and
finally strangled. The date of 'Ali Bey's victory was 1164 A.H. (A.D.
1750), and after it he was made Sheik al-Balad. In that capacity he
executed the murderer of his former master Ibrahim; but the resentment
which this act aroused among the beys caused him to leave his post and
fly to Syria, where he won the friendship of the governor of Acre, Zahir
b. Omar, who obtained for him the goodwill of the Porte and
reinstatement in his post as Sheik al-Balad. In 1766, after the death of
his supporter the grand vizier Raghib Pasha, he was again compelled to
fly from Egypt to Yemen, but in the following year he was told that his
party at Cairo was strong enough to permit of his return. Resuming his
office he raised eighteen of his friends to the rank of bey, among them
Ibrahim and Murad, who were afterwards at the head of affairs, as well
as Mahommed Abu'l-Dhahab, who was closely connected with the rest of
'Ali Bey's career. He appears to have done his utmost to bring Egyptian
affairs into order, and by very severe measures repressed the brigandage
of the Bedouins of Lower Egypt. He appears to have aspired to found an
independent monarchy, and to that end endeavoured to disband all forces
except those which were exclusively under his own control. In 1769 a
demand came to 'Ali Bey for a force of 12,000 men to be employed by the
Porte in the Russian war. It was suggested, however, at Constantinople
that 'Ali would employ this force when he collected it for securing his
own independence, and a messenger was sent by the Porte to the pasha
with orders for his execution. 'Ali, being apprised by his agents at the
metropolis of the despatch of this messenger, ordered him to be waylaid
and killed; the despatches were seized and read by 'Ali before an
assembly of the beys, who were assured that the order for execution
applied to all alike, and he urged them to fight for their lives. His
proposals were received with enthusiasm by the beys whom he had created.
Egypt was declared independent and the pasha given forty-eight hours to
quit the country. Zahir Pasha of Acre, to whom was sent official
information of the step taken by 'Ali Bey, promised his aid and kept his
word by compelling an army sent by the pasha of Damascus against Egypt
to retreat.

The Porte was not able at the time to take active measures for the
suppression of 'Ali Bey, and the latter endeavoured to consolidate his
dominions by sending expeditions against marauding tribes, both in north
and south Egypt, reforming the finance, and improving the administration
of justice. His son-in-law, Abu'l-Dhahab, was sent to subject the
Hawwarah, who had occupied the land between Assuan and Assiut, and a
force of 20,000 was sent to conquer Yemen. An officer named Isma'il Bey
was sent with 8000 to acquire the eastern shore of the Red Sea, and one
named Hasan Bey to occupy Jidda. In six months the greater part of the
Arabian peninsula was subject to 'Ali Bey, and he appointed as sherif of
Mecca a cousin of his own, who bestowed on 'Ali by an official
proclamation the titles Sultan of Egypt and Khakan of the Two Seas. He
then, in virtue of this authorization, struck coins in his own name
(1185 A.H.) and ordered his name to be mentioned in public worship.

His next move turned out fatally. Abu'l-Dhahab was sent with a force of
30,000 men in the same year (A.D. 1771) to conquer Syria; and agents
were sent to negotiate alliances with Venice and Russia. Abu'l-Dhahab's
progress through Palestine and Syria was triumphant. Reinforced by 'Ali
Bey's ally Zahir, he easily took the chief cities, ending with Damascus;
but at this point he appears to have entered into secret negotiations
with the Porte, by which he undertook to restore Egypt to Ottoman
suzerainty. He then proceeded to evacuate Syria, and marched with all
the forces he could collect to Upper Egypt, occupying Assiut in April
1772. Having collected some additional troops from the Bedouins, he
marched on Cairo. Isma'il Bey was sent by 'Ali Bey with a force of 3000
to check his advance; but at Basatin Isma'il with his troops joined
Abu'l-Dhahab. 'Ali Bey intended at first to defend himself so long as
possible in the citadel at Cairo; but receiving information to the
effect that his friend Zahir of Acre was still willing to give him
refuge, he left Cairo for Syria (8th of April 1772), one day before the
entrance of Abu'l-Dhahab.

At Acre 'Ali's fortune seemed to be restored. A Russian vessel anchored
outside the port, and, in accordance with the agreement which he had
made with the Russian empire, he was supplied with stores and
ammunition, and a force of 3000 Albanians. He sent one of his officers,
'Ali Bey al-Tantawi, to recover the Syrian towns evacuated by
Abu'l-Dhahab, and now in the possession of the Porte. He himself took
Jaffa and Gaza, the former of which he gave to his friend Zahir of
Acre. On the 1st of February 1773 he received information from Cairo
that Abu'l-Dhahab had made himself Sheik al-Balad, and in that capacity
was practising unheard-of extortions, which were making Egypt with one
voice call for the return of 'Ali Bey. He accordingly started for Egypt
at the head of an army of 8000 men, and on the 19th of April met the
army of Abu'l-Dhahab at Salihia. 'Ali's forces were successful at the
first engagement; but when the battle was renewed two days later he was
deserted by some of his officers, and prevented by illness and wounds
from himself taking the conduct of affairs. The result was a complete
defeat for his army, after which he declined to leave his tent; he was
captured after a brave resistance, and taken to Cairo, where he died
seven days later.

After 'Ali Bey's death Egypt became once more a dependency of the Porte,
governed by Abu'l-Dhahab as Sheik al-Balad with the title pasha. He
shortly afterwards received permission from the Porte to invade Syria,
with the view of punishing 'Ali Bey's supporter Zahir, and left as his
deputies in Cairo Isma'il Bey and Ibrahim Bey, who, by deserting 'Ali at
the battle of Salihia, had brought about his downfall. After taking many
cities in Palestine Abu'l-Dhahab died, the cause being unknown; and
Murad Bey (another of the deserters at Salihia) brought his forces back
to Egypt (26th of May 1775).

Isma'il Bey now became Sheik al-Balad, but was soon involved in a
dispute with Ibrahim and Murad, who after a time succeeded in driving
Isma'il out of Egypt and establishing a joint rule (as Sheik al-Balad
and Amir al-Hajj respectively) similar to that which had been tried
previously. The two were soon involved in quarrels, which at one time
threatened to break out into open war; but this catastrophe was averted,
and the joint rule was maintained till 1786, when an expedition was sent
by the Porte to restore Ottoman supremacy in Egypt. Murad Bey attempted
to resist, but was easily defeated; and he with Ibrahim decided to fly
to Upper Egypt and await the trend of events. On the 1st of August 1782
the Turkish commander entered Cairo, and, after some violent measures
had been taken for the restoration of order, Isma'il Bey was again made
Sheik al-Balad and a new pasha installed as governor. In January 1791 a
terrible plague began to rage in Cairo and elsewhere in Egypt, to which
Isma'il Bey and most of his family fell victims. Owing to the need for
competent rulers Ibrahim and Murad Bey were sent for from Upper Egypt
and resumed their dual government. These two persons were still in
office when Bonaparte entered Egypt.

  _Moslem Authorities._--Arabic literature being cosmopolitan, and
  Arabic authors accustomed to travel from place to place to collect
  traditions and obtain oral instruction from contemporary authorities,
  or else to enjoy the patronage of Maecenates, the literary history of
  Egypt cannot be dissociated from that of the other Moslem countries in
  which Arabic was the chief literary vehicle. Hence the list of authors
  connected with Egypt, which occupies pages 161-275 of Suyuti's work,
  _Husn al-muhadarah fi akhbari Misr wal-Qahirah_ (Cairo, 1321 A.H.),
  contains the names of persons like Mutanabbi, who stayed there for a
  short time in the service of some patron; Abu Tammam, who lived there
  before he acquired fame as a poet; 'Umara of Yemen, who came there at
  a mature age to spend some years in the service of Fatimite viziers;
  each of whom figures in lists of authors belonging to some other
  country also. So long as the centre of the Islamic world was not in
  Egypt, the best talent was attracted elsewhere; but after the fall of
  Bagdad, Cairo became the chief seat of Islamic learning, and this
  rank, chiefly owing to the university of Azhar, it has ever since
  continued to maintain. The following composed special histories of
  Egypt: Ibn 'Abd al-Hakam, d. 257 A.H.; 'Abd al-Rahim b. Yunus, d. 347;
  Mahommed b. Yusuf al-Kindi, d. somewhat later; Ibn Zulaq, d. 387; 'Izz
  al-Mulk Mahommed al-Musabbihi, d. 420; Mahommed b. Salamah al-Qoda'i,
  d. 454; Jamal al-din 'Ali al-Qifti, d. 568; Jamal al-din al-Halabi, d.
  623; 'Abd al-Latif al-Baghdadi, d. 629; Mahommed b. 'Abd al-Aziz
  al-Idrisi (history of Upper Egypt), d. 649; his son Ja'far (history of
  Cairo), d. 676; Ibn Sa'id, d. 685; Ibrahim b. Wasif Shah; Ibn
  al-Mutawwaj, d. 703; Mahommed b. Dani'al, d. 710; Ja'far b. Tha'lab
  Kamal al-din al-Adfu'i (history of Upper Egypt), d. 730; 'Abd al-Qarun
  al-Halabi, d. 735; Ibn Habib, d. 779; Ibn Duqmaq, d. 790; Ibn Tughan,
  Shihab al-din al-Auhadi, d. 790; Ibn al-Mulaqqin, d. 806; Maqrizi,
  Taqiyy al-din Ahmad, d. 840; Ibn Hajar al-'Asqalani, d. 852;
  al-Sakhawi, d. 902; Abu'l-Mahasin b. Taghribirdi, d. 874; Jalal al-din
  al-Suyuti, d. 911; Ibn Zunbul al-Rammal; Ibn Iyas, d. after 928;
  Mahommed b. Abi Surur, d. after 1017; Zain al-din al Karami, d. 1033;
  'Abd al-Rahman Jabarti, d. after 1236. Of many of the Mameluke
  sultans there are special chronicles preserved in various European and
  Oriental libraries. The works of many of the authors enumerated are
  topographical and biographical as well as purely historical. To these
  there should be added the Survey of Egypt, called _al-tuhfah
  al-saniyyah_ of Ibn Ji'an, belonging to the time of Kait Bey; the
  treatise on the Egyptian constitution called _Zubdat Kashf
  al-Mamalik_, by Khalil al-Zahiri, of the same period; and the
  encyclopaedic work on the same subject called _Subh al-Insha_, by
  al-Qalqashandi, d. 821.

  Arabic poetry is in the main encomiastic and personal, and from the
  beginning of the Omayyad period sovereigns and governors paid poets to
  celebrate their achievements; of those of importance who are connected
  with Egypt we may mention Nusaib, encomiast of 'Abd al-Aziz b. Merwan,
  d. 180; the greater Nashi (Abu l-Abbas 'Abdallah), d. 293; Ibn
  Tabataba, d. 345; Abu'l-Raqa'maq, encomiast of al-Mo'izz, d. 399;
  Sari' al-Dila ('Ali b. 'Abd al-Wahid), encomiast of the Fatimite
  al-Zahir, d. 412; Sanajat al-dauh (Mahommed b. al-Qasim), encomiast of
  Hakim; 'Ali b. 'Abbad al-Iskandari, encomiast of the vizier al-Afdal,
  executed by Hafiz; Ibn Qalaqis al-Iskandari, encomiast of the
  Ayyubites, d. 607; Muhaddhab b. Mameti, encomiast of the Ayyubites, d.
  616; Ibn Sana' al-Mulk, encomiast of the Ayyubites, d. 658; Ibn
  al-Munajjim, d. 626; Ibn Matruh, encomiast of the Ayyubites, d. 654;
  Baha' al-din Zuhair, encomiast of al-Salih, d. 656; Ibn 'Ammar, d.
  675; al-Mi'mar, d. 749; Ibn Nubatah, d. 768; Ibn Abi Hajalah, d. 776;
  Burhan al-din al-Qirati, d. 801; Ibn Mukanis, d. 864; Ibn Hijjah
  al-Hamawi, d. 837. Poets distinguished for special lines are al-Hakim
  b. Dani' al, d. 608, author of the Shadow-play; and al-Busiri
  (Mahommed b. Sa'id), d. 694, author of the ode in praise of the
  prophet called Burdah. The poets of Egypt are reckoned with those of
  Syria in the _Yatimah_ of Tha' alibi; a special work upon them was
  written by Ibn Fadl allah (d. 740); and a list of poets of the 11th
  century is given by Khafaji in his _Raihanat al-alibba_.

  The needs of the Egyptian court produced a number of elegant
  letter-writers, of whom the most famous were 'Abd al-Rahim b. 'Ali
  al-Baisani, ordinarily known as al-Qadi' al-Fadil, d. 596, secretary
  of state to Saladin and other Ayyubite sultans; 'Imad al-din
  al-Ispahani, d. 597, also secretary of state and official chronicler;
  and Ibn 'Abd al-Zahir, d. 692, secretary of state to Bibars I. and
  succeeding sultans; he was followed by his son Fath al-din, to whom
  the title "Secret writer" was first given.

  In the subject of law Egypt boasts that the Imam Shafi'i, founder of
  one of the schools, resided at Fostat from 195 till his death in 204;
  his system, though displaced for a time by that invented by the
  Fatimites, and since the Turkish conquest by the Hanifite system, has
  always been popular in Egypt: in Ayyubite times it was dominant,
  whereas in Mameluke times all four systems were officially recognized.
  The eminent jurists who flourished in Moslem Egypt form a very lengthy
  list. Among the Egyptian traditionalists the most eminent is
  Daraqutni, d. 385.

  Among Egyptian mystics the most famous as authors are the poet Ibn
  al-Farid, d. 632, and Abd al-Wahhab Sha rani, d. 973. Abu'l-Hasan
  al-Shadhili (d. 656) is celebrated as the founder of the Shadhili
  order; but there were many others of note. The dictionary of
  physicians, compiled in the 7th century, enumerates nearly sixty men
  of science who resided in Egypt; the best-known among them are Sa'id
  b. Bitriq, Moses Maimonides and Ibn Baitar. Of Egyptian miscellaneous
  writers two of the most celebrated are Ibn Daqiq al'-id, d. 702, and
  Jalal al-din Suyuti.

  _European Authorities._--For the Moslem conquest, A. J. Butler, _The
  Arab Conquest of Egypt_ (Oxford, 1902); for the period before the
  Fatimites, Wustenfeld, "Die Statthalter von Agypten," in _Abhandlungen
  der koniglichen Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften zu Gottingen_, vols.
  xx. and xxi.; for the Fatimite period, Wustenfeld, "Geschichte der
  Fatimiden-Chalifen," ibid. vols. xxvi. and xxvii.; for the Ayyubite
  period, Ibn Khallikan's _Biographical Dictionary_, translated by M'G.
  de Slane (London, 1842-1871); for the Mameluke period, Weil,
  _Geschichte der Chalifen_, vols. iv. and v. (also called _Geschichte
  des Abbasidenchalifats in Agypten_), (Stuttgart, 1860-1862); Sir W.
  Muir, _The Mameluke or Slave Dynasty of Egypt_ (London, 1896); for the
  Turkish period, G. Zaidan, _History of Modern Egypt_ (Arabic), vol.
  ii. (Cairo, 1889). See also Maqrizi, _Description topographique et
  historique de l'Egypte_, translated by Bouriant (Paris, 1895, &c.); C.
  H. Becker, _Beitrage zur Geschichte Agyptens_ (Strassburg, 1902).
       (D. S. M.*)


  Battle of the Nile.

(9) _From the French Occupation to the Rise of Mehemet Ali._--The
ostensible object of the French expedition to Egypt was to reinstate the
authority of the Sublime Porte, and suppress the Mamelukes; and in the
proclamation printed with the Arabic types brought from the Propaganda
press, and issued shortly after the taking of Alexandria, Bonaparte
declared that he reverenced the prophet Mahomet and the Koran far more
than the Mamelukes reverenced either, and argued that all men were equal
except so far as they were distinguished by their intellectual and moral
excellences, of neither of which the Mamelukes had any great share. In
future all posts in Egypt were to be open to all classes of the
inhabitants; the conduct of affairs was to be committed to the men of
talent, virtue, and learning; and in proof of the statement that the
French were sincere Moslems the overthrow of the papal authority in Rome
was alleged. That there might be no doubt of the friendly feeling of the
French to the Porte, villages and towns which capitulated to the
invaders were required to hoist the flags of both the Porte and the
French republic, and in the thanksgiving prescribed to the Egyptians for
their deliverance from the Mamelukes, prayer was to be offered for both
the sultan and the French army. It does not appear that the proclamation
convinced many of the Egyptians of the truth of these professions. After
the battle of Ambabah, at which the forces of both Murad Bey and Ibrahim
Bey were dispersed, the populace readily plundered the houses of the
beys, and a deputation was sent from al-Azhar to Bonaparte to ascertain
his intentions; these proved to be a repetition of the terms of his
proclamation, and, though the combination of loyalty to the French with
loyalty to the sultan was unintelligible, a good understanding was at
first established between the invaders and the Egyptians. A municipal
council was established in Cairo, consisting of persons taken from the
ranks of the sheiks, the Mamelukes and the French; and presently
delegates from Alexandria and other important towns were added. This
council did little more than register the decrees of the French
commander, who continued to exercise dictatorial power. The destruction
of the French fleet at the battle of the Nile, and the failure of the
French forces sent to Upper Egypt (where they reached the first
cataract) to obtain possession of the person of Murad Bey, shook the
faith of the Egyptians in their invincibility; and in consequence of a
series of unwelcome innovations the relations between conquerors and
conquered grew daily more strained, till at last, on the occasion of the
introduction of a house tax, an insurrection broke out in Cairo on the
22nd of October 1798, of which the headquarters were in the Moslem
university of Azhar. On this occasion the French general Dupuy,
lieutenant-governor of Cairo, was killed. The prompt measures of
Bonaparte, aided by the arrival from Alexandria of General J. B. Kleber,
quickly suppressed this rising; but the stabling of the French cavalry
in the mosque of Azhar gave great and permanent offence. In consequence
of this affair, the deliberative council was suppressed, but on the 25th
of December a fresh proclamation was issued, reconstituting the two
divans which had been created by the Turks; the special divan was to
consist of 14 persons chosen by lot out of 60 government nominees, and
was to meet daily. The general divan was to consist of functionaries,
and to meet on emergencies.

In consequence of despatches which reached Bonaparte on the 3rd of
January 1799, announcing the intention of the Porte to invade the
country with the object of recovering it by force, Bonaparte resolved on
his Syrian expedition, and appointed governors for Cairo, Alexandria,
and Upper Egypt, to govern during his absence. From that ill-fated
expedition he returned at the beginning of June. Advantage had been
taken of this opportunity by Murad Bey and Ibrahim Bey to collect their
forces and attempt a joint attack on Cairo, but this Bonaparte arrived
in time to defeat, and in the last week of July he inflicted a crushing
defeat on the Turkish army that had landed at Aboukir, aided by the
British fleet commanded by Sir Sidney Smith. Shortly after his victory
Bonaparte left Egypt, having appointed Kleber to govern in his absence,
which he informed the sheiks of Cairo was not to last more than three
months. Kleber himself regarded the condition of the French invaders as
extremely perilous, and wrote to inform the French republic of the
facts. A double expedition shortly after Bonaparte's departure was sent
by the Porte for the recovery of Egypt, one force being despatched by
sea to Damietta, while another under Yusuf Pasha took the land route
from Damascus by al-Arish. Over the first some success was won, in
consequence of which the Turks agreed to a convention (signed January
24, 1800), by virtue of which the French were to quit Egypt. The Turkish
troops advanced to Bilbeis, where they were received by the sheiks from
Cairo, and the Mamelukes also returned to that city from their
hiding-places. Before the preparations for the departure of the French
were completed, orders came to Sir Sidney Smith from the British
government, forbidding the carrying out of the convention unless the
French army were treated as prisoners of war; and when these were
communicated to Kleber he cancelled the orders previously given to the
troops, and proceeded to put the country in a state of defence. His
departure with most of the army to attack the Turks at Mataria led to
riots in Cairo, in the course of which many Christians were slaughtered;
but the national party were unable to get possession of the citadel, and
Kleber, having defeated the Turks, was soon able to return to the
capital. On the 14th of April he bombarded Bulak, and proceeded to
bombard Cairo itself, which was taken the following night. Order was
soon restored, and a fine of twelve million francs imposed on the
rioters. Murad Bey sought an interview with Kleber and succeeded in
obtaining from him the government of Upper Egypt. He died shortly
afterwards and was succeeded by Osman Bey al-Bardisi.

On the 14th of June Kleber was assassinated by a fanatic named Suleiman
of Aleppo, said to have been incited to the deed by a Janissary refugee
at Jerusalem, who had brought letters to the sheiks of the Azhar, who,
however, refused to give him any encouragement. Three of these,
nevertheless, were executed by the French as accessories before the
fact, and the assassin himself was impaled, after torture, in spite of a
promise of pardon having been made to him on condition of his naming his
associates. The command of the army then devolved on General J. F.
(Baron de) Menou (1750-1810), a man who had professed Islam, and who
endeavoured to conciliate the Moslem population by various measures,
such as excluding all Christians (with the exception of one Frenchman)
from the divan, replacing the Copts who were in government service by
Moslems, and subjecting French residents to taxes. Whatever popularity
might have been gained by these measures was counteracted by his
declaration of a French protectorate over Egypt, which was to count as a
French colony.


  French evacuation.

In the first weeks of March 1801 the English, under Sir R. Abercromby,
effected a landing at Aboukir, and proceeded to invest Alexandria, where
on the 21st they were attacked by Menou; the French were repulsed, but
the English commander was mortally wounded in the action. On the 25th
fresh reinforcements arrived under Husain, the Kapudan Pasha, or high
admiral; and a combined English and Turkish force was sent to take
Rosetta. On the 30th of May, General A. D. Belliard, who had been left
in charge at Cairo, was assailed on two sides by the British forces
under General John Hely Hutchinson (afterwards 2nd earl of Donoughmore),
and the Turkish under Yusuf Pasha; after negotiations Belliard agreed to
evacuate Cairo and to sail with his 13,734 troops to France. On the 30th
of August, Menou at Alexandria was compelled to accept similar
conditions, and his force of 10,000 left for Europe in September. This
was the termination of the French occupation of Egypt, of which the
chief permanent monument was the _Description de l'Egypte_, compiled by
the French savants who accompanied the expedition. Further than this,
"it brought to the attention of a few men in Egypt a keen sense of the
great advantage of an orderly government, and a warm appreciation of the
advance that science and learning had made in Europe" (Hajji Browne,
_Bonaparte in Egypt and the Egyptians of to-day_, 1907, p. 268).


  British, Turks and Mamelukes.

Soon after the evacuation of Egypt by the French, the country became the
scene of more severe troubles, in consequence of the attempts of the
Turks to destroy the power of the Mamelukes. In defiance of promises to
the British government, orders were transmitted from Constantinople to
Husain Pasha, the Turkish high admiral, to ensnare and put to death the
principal beys. Invited to an entertainment, they were, according to the
Egyptian contemporary historian al-Jabarti, attacked on board the
flag-ship; Sir Robert Wilson and M. F. Mengin, however, state that they
were fired on, in open boats, in the Bay of Aboukir. They offered an
heroic resistance, but were overpowered, and some killed, some made
prisoners; among the last was Osman Bey al-Bardisi, who was severely
wounded. General Hutchinson, informed of this treachery, immediately
assumed threatening measures against the Turks, and in consequence the
killed, wounded and prisoners were given up to him. At the same time
Yusuf Pasha arrested all the beys in Cairo, but was shortly compelled by
the British to release them. Such was the beginning of the disastrous
struggle between the Mamelukes and the Turks.

Mahommed Khosrev was the first Turkish governor of Egypt after the
expulsion of the French. The form of government, however, was not the
same as that before the French invasion, for the Mamelukes were not
reinstated. The pasha, and through him the sultan, endeavoured on
several occasions either to ensnare them or to beguile them into
submission; but these efforts failing, Mahommed Khosrev took the field,
and a Turkish detachment 7000 strong was despatched against them to
Damanhur, whither they had descended from Upper Egypt, and was defeated
by a small force under al-Alfi; or, as Mengin says, by 800 men commanded
by al-Bardisi, when al-Alfi had left the field. Their ammunition and
guns fell into the hands of the Mamelukes.

In March 1803 the British evacuated Alexandria, and Mahommed Bey al-Alfi
accompanied them to England to consult respecting the means to be
adopted for restoring the former power of the Mamelukes, who meanwhile
took Minia and interrupted communication between Upper and Lower Egypt.
About six weeks after, the Arnaut (or Albanian) soldiers in the service
of Khosrev tumultuously demanded their pay, and surrounded the house of
the defterdar (or finance minister), who in vain appealed to the pasha
to satisfy their claims. The latter opened fire from the artillery of
his palace on the insurgent soldiery in the house of the defterdar,
across the Ezbekia. The citizens of Cairo, accustomed to such
occurrences, immediately closed their shops, and every man who possessed
any weapon armed himself. The tumult continued all the day, and the next
morning a body of troops sent out by the pasha failed to quell it.
Tahir, the commander of the Albanians, then repaired to the citadel,
gained admittance through an embrasure, and, having obtained possession
of it, began to cannonade the pasha over the roofs of the intervening
houses, and then descended with guns to the Ezbekia and laid close siege
to the palace. On the following day Mahommed Khosrev made good his
escape, with his women and servants and his regular troops, and fled to
Damietta by the river. This revolt marks the beginning in Egypt of the
breach between the Albanians and Turks, which ultimately led to the
expulsion of the latter, and of the rise to power of the Albanian
Mehemet Ali (q.v.), who was destined to rule the country for nearly
forty years and be the cause of serious European complications.


  First appearance of Mehemet Ali.

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


  The Mamelukes and Ali Pasha.

A few days later, Ali Pasha Jazairli landed at Alexandria with an
imperial firman constituting him pasha of Egypt, and threatened the
beys, who now were virtual masters of Upper Egypt, as well as of the
capital and nearly the whole of Lower Egypt. Mehemet Ali and al-Bardisi
therefore descended to Rosetta, which had fallen into the hands of a
brother of Ali Pasha, and having captured the town and its commander,
al-Bardisi purposed to proceed against Alexandria; but the troops
demanded arrears of pay which it was not in his power to give, and the
pasha had cut the dyke between the lakes of Aboukir and Mareotis, thus
rendering the approach to Alexandria more difficult. Al-Bardisi and
Mehemet Ali therefore returned to Cairo. The troubles of Egypt were now
increased by an insufficient inundation, and great scarcity prevailed,
aggravated by the taxation to which the beys were compelled to resort in
order to pay the troops; while murder and rapine prevailed in the
capital, the riotous soldiery being under little or no control.
Meanwhile, Ali Pasha, who had been behaving with violence towards the
Franks in Alexandria, received a _hatt-i-sherif_ from the sultan, which
he sent by his secretary to Cairo. It announced that the beys should
live peaceably in Egypt, with an annual pension each of fifteen purses
(a "purse" = 500 piastres) and other privileges, but that the government
should be in the hands of the pasha. To this the beys assented, but with
considerable misgivings; for they had intercepted letters from Ali to
the Albanians, endeavouring to alienate them from their side to his own.
Deceptive answers were returned to these, and Ali was induced by them to
advance towards Cairo at the head of 3000 men. The forces of the beys,
with the Albanians, encamped near him at Shalakan, and he fell back on a
place called Zufeyta. They next seized his boats conveying soldiers,
servants, and his ammunition and baggage; and, following him, they
demanded wherefore he brought with him so numerous a body of men, in
opposition to usage and to their previous warning. Finding they would
not allow his troops to advance, forbidden himself to retreat with them
to Alexandria, and being surrounded by the enemy, he would have hazarded
a battle, but his men refused to fight. He therefore went to the camp of
the beys, and his army was compelled to retire to Syria. In the hands of
the beys Ali Pasha again attempted treachery. A horseman was seen to
leave his tent one night at full gallop; he was the bearer of a letter
to Osman Bey Hasan, the governor of Kine. This offered a fair pretext to
the Mamelukes to rid themselves of a man proved to be a perfidious
tyrant. He was sent under a guard of forty-five men towards the Syrian
frontier; and about a week after, news was received that in a skirmish
with some of his own soldiers he had fallen mortally wounded.

The death of Ali Pasha produced only temporary tranquillity; in a few
days (February 12, 1804) the return of Mahommed Bey al-Alfi (called the
Great) from England was the signal for fresh disturbances, which, by
splitting the Mamelukes into two parties, accelerated their final
overthrow. An ancient jealousy existed between al-Alfi and the other
most powerful bey, al-Bardisi. The latter was now supreme among the
Mamelukes, and this fact considerably heightened their old enmity. While
the guns of the citadel, those at Old Cairo, and even those of the
palace of al-Bardisi, were thrice fired in honour of al-Alfi,
preparations were immediately begun to oppose him. His partisans were
collected opposite Cairo, and al-Alfi the Less held Giza; but treachery
was among them; Husain Bey (a relative of al-Alfi) was assassinated by
emissaries of al-Bardisi, and Mehemet Ali, with his Albanians, gained
possession of Giza, which was, as usual, given over to the troops to
pillage. In the meanwhile al-Alfi the Great embarked at Rosetta, and not
apprehending opposition, was on his way to Cairo, when a little south of
the town of Manuf he encountered a party of Albanians, and with
difficulty made his escape. He gained the eastern branch of the Nile,
but the river had become dangerous, and he fled to the desert. There he
had several hairbreadth escapes, and at last secreted himself among a
tribe of Arabs at Ras al-Wadi. A change in the fortune of al-Bardisi,
however, favoured his plans for the future. That chief, in order to
satisfy the demands of the Albanians for their pay, gave orders to levy
heavy contributions from the citizens of Cairo; and this new oppression
roused them to rebellion. The Albanians, alarmed for their safety,
assured the populace that they would not allow the order to be executed;
and Mehemet Ali himself caused a proclamation to be made to that effect.
Thus the Albanians became the favourites of the people, and took
advantage of their opportunity. Three days later (March 12th, 1804) they
beset the house of the aged Ibrahim Bey, and that of al-Bardisi, both of
whom effected their escape with difficulty. The Mamelukes in the citadel
directed a fire of shot and shell on the houses of the Albanians which
were situated in the Ezbekia; but, on hearing of the flight of their
chiefs, they evacuated the place; and Mehemet Ali, on gaining possession
of it, once more proclaimed Mahommed Khosrev pasha of Egypt. For one day
and a half he enjoyed the title; the friends of the late Tahir Pasha
then accomplished his second degradation,[22] and Cairo was again the
scene of terrible enormities, the Albanians revelling in the houses of
the Mameluke chiefs, whose hareems met with no mercy at their hands.
These events were the signal for the reappearance of al-Alfi.

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

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

Cairo was ripe for revolt; the pasha was hated for his tyranny and
extortion, and execrated for the deeds of his troops, especially those
of the Delis: the sheiks enjoined the people to close their shops, and
the soldiers clamoured for pay. At this juncture a firman arrived from
Constantinople conferring on Mehemet Ali the pashalic of Jedda; but the
occurrences of a few days raised him to that of Egypt.


  Struggle between Khorshid and Mehemet Ali.

On the 12th of Safar 1220 (May 12th, 1805) the sheiks, with an immense
concourse of the inhabitants, assembled in the house of the kadi; and
the ulema, amid the prayers and cries of the people, wrote a full
statement of the heavy wrongs which they had endured under the
administration of the pasha. The ulema, in answer, were desired to go to
the citadel; but they were apprised of treachery; and on the following
day, having held another council at the house of the kadi, they
proceeded to Mehemet Ali and informed him that the people would no
longer submit to Khorshid. "Then whom will ye have?" said he. "We will
have _thee_," they replied, "to govern us according to the laws; for we
see in thy countenance that thou art possessed of justice and goodness."
Mehemet Ali seemed to hesitate, and then complied, and was at once
invested. On this, a bloody struggle began between the two pashas.
Khorshid, being informed of the insurrection, immediately prepared to
stand a siege in the citadel. Two chiefs of the Albanians joined his
party, but many of his soldiers deserted. Mehemet Ali's great strength
lay in the devotion of the citizens of Cairo, who looked on him as a
deliverer from their afflictions; and great numbers armed themselves,
advising constantly with Mehemet Ali, having the sayyid Omar and the
sheiks at their head, and guarding the town at night. On the 19th of the
same month Mehemet Ali began to besiege Khorshid. After the siege had
continued many days, Khorshid gave orders to cannonade and bombard the
town; and for six days his commands were executed with little
interruption, the citadel itself also lying between two fires. Mehemet
Ali's position at this time was very critical: his troops became
mutinous for their pay; the silahdar, who had commanded one of the
expeditions against the Mamelukes, advanced to the relief of Khorshid;
and the latter ordered the Delis to march to his assistance. The firing
ceased on the Friday, but began again on the eve of Saturday and lasted
until the next Friday. On the day following (May 28th) news came of the
arrival at Alexandria of a messenger from Constantinople. The ensuing
night in Cairo presented a curious spectacle; many of the inhabitants,
believing that this envoy would put an end to their miseries, fired off
their weapons as they paraded the streets with bands of music. The
silahdar, imagining the noise to be a fray, marched in haste towards the
citadel, while its garrison sallied forth and began throwing up
entrenchments in the quarter of Arab al-Yesar, but were repulsed by the
armed inhabitants and the soldiers stationed there; and during all this
time the cannonade and bombardment from the citadel, and on it from the
batteries on the hill, continued unabated.


  Mehemet Ali granted the pashalic.

The envoy brought a firman confirming Mehemet Ali and ordering Khorshid
to go to Alexandria, there to await further orders; but this he refused
to do, on the ground that he had been appointed by a _hatt-i-sherif_.
The firing ceased on the following day, but the troubles of the people
were rather increased than assuaged; murders and robberies were daily
committed by the soldiery, the shops were all shut and some of the
streets barricaded. While these scenes were being enacted, al-Alfi was
besieging Damanhur, and the other beys were returning towards Cairo,
Khorshid having called them to his assistance; but Mehemet Ali forced
them to retreat.

Soon after this, a squadron under the command of the Turkish high
admiral arrived at Aboukir Bay, with despatches confirming the firman
brought by the former envoy, and authorizing Mehemet Ali to continue to
discharge the functions of governor. Khorshid at first refused to yield;
but at length, on condition that his troops should be paid, he evacuated
the citadel and embarked for Rosetta.


  First massacre of the Mamelukes.

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

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

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


  The British expedition of 1807.

On the 17th of March 1807 a British fleet appeared off Alexandria,
having on board nearly 5000 troops, under the command of General A.
Mackenzie Fraser; and the place, being disaffected towards Mehemet Ali,
opened its gates to them. Here they first heard of the death of al-Alfi,
upon whose co-operation they had founded their chief hopes of success;
and they immediately despatched messengers to his successor and to the
other beys, inviting them to Alexandria. The British resident, Major
Missett, having represented the importance of taking Rosetta and
Rahmanieh, to secure supplies for Alexandria, General Fraser, with the
concurrence of the admiral, Sir John Duckworth, detached the 31st
regiment and the Chasseurs Britanniques, accompanied by some field
artillery under Major-General Wauchope and Brigadier-General Meade, on
this service; and these troops entered Rosetta without encountering any
opposition; but as soon as they had dispersed among the narrow streets,
the garrison opened a deadly fire on them from the latticed windows and
the roofs of the houses. They effected a retreat on Aboukir and
Alexandria, after a very heavy loss of 185 killed and 281 wounded,
General Wauchope and three officers being among the former, and General
Meade and nineteen officers among the latter. The heads of the slain
were fixed on stakes on each side of the road crossing the Ezbekia in
Cairo.

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

To return to the unfortunate British expedition. The possession of
Rosetta being deemed indispensable, Brigadier-Generals Sir William
Stewart and Oswald were despatched thither with 2500 men. For thirteen
days a cannonade of the town was continued without effect; and on the
20th of April, news having come in from the advanced guard at Hamad of
large reinforcements to the besieged, General Stewart was compelled to
retreat; and a dragoon was despatched to Lieutenant-colonel Macleod,
commanding at Hamad, with orders to fall back. The messenger, however,
was unable to penetrate to the spot; and the advanced guard, consisting
of a detachment of the 31st, two companies of the 78th, one of the 35th,
and De Roll's regiment, with a picquet of dragoons, the whole mustering
733 men, was surrounded, and, after a gallant resistance, the survivors,
who had expended all their ammunition, became prisoners of war. General
Stewart regained Alexandria with the remainder of his force, having
lost, in killed, wounded and missing, nearly 900 men. Some hundreds of
British heads were now exposed on stakes in Cairo, and the prisoners
were marched between these mutilated remains of their countrymen.


  Final massacre of the Mamelukes.

The beys became divided in their wishes, one party being desirous of
co-operating with the British, the other with the pasha. These delays
proved ruinous to their cause; and General Fraser, despairing of their
assistance, evacuated Alexandria on the 14th of September. From that
date to the spring of 1811 the beys from time to time relinquished
certain of their demands; the pasha on his part granted them what before
had been withheld; the province of the Fayum, and part of those of Giza
and Beni-Suef, were ceded to Shahin; and a great portion of the Sa'id,
on the condition of paying the land-tax, to the others. Many of them
took up their abode in Cairo, but tranquillity was not secured; several
times they met the pasha's forces in battle and once gained a signal
victory. Early in the year 1811, the preparations for an expedition
against the Wahhabis in Arabia being complete, all the Mameluke beys
then in Cairo were invited to the ceremony of investing Mehemet Ali's
favourite son, Tusun, with a pelisse and the command of the army. As on
the former occasion, the unfortunate Mamelukes fell into the snare. On
the 1st of March, Shahin Bey and the other chiefs (one only excepted)
repaired with their retinues to the citadel, and were courteously
received by the pasha. Having taken coffee, they formed in procession,
and, preceded and followed by the pasha's troops, slowly descended the
steep and narrow road leading to the great gate of the citadel; but as
soon as the Mamelukes arrived at the gate it was suddenly closed before
them. The last of those to leave before the gate was shut were Albanians
under Salih Kush. To these troops their chief now made known the pasha's
orders to massacre all the Mamelukes within the citadel; therefore,
having returned by another way, they gained the summits of the walls and
houses that hem in the road in which the Mamelukes were confined, and
some stationed themselves upon the eminences of the rock through which
that road is partly cut. Thus securely placed, they began a heavy fire
on their victims; and immediately the troops who closed the procession,
and who had the advantage of higher ground, followed their example. Of
the betrayed chiefs, many were laid low in a few moments; some,
dismounting, and throwing off their outer robes, vainly sought, sword in
hand, to return, and escape by some other gate. The few who regained the
summit of the citadel experienced the same fate as the rest, for no
quarter was given. Four hundred and seventy Mamelukes entered the
citadel; and of these very few, if any, escaped. One of these is said to
have been a bey. According to some, he leapt his horse from the
ramparts, and alighted uninjured, though the horse was killed by the
fall; others say that he was prevented from joining his comrades, and
discovered the treachery while waiting without the gate. He fled and
made his way to Syria. This massacre was the signal for an
indiscriminate slaughter of the Mamelukes throughout Egypt, orders to
this effect being transmitted to every governor; and in Cairo itself the
houses of the beys were given over to the soldiery. During the two
following days the pasha and his son Tusun rode about the streets and
tried to stop the atrocities; but order was not restored until 500
houses had been completely pillaged. The heads of the beys were sent to
Constantinople.

A remnant of the Mamelukes fled to Nubia, and a tranquillity was
restored to Egypt to which it had long been unaccustomed. In the year
following the massacre the unfortunate exiles were attacked by Ibrahim
Pasha, the eldest son of Mehemet Ali, in the fortified town of Ibrim, in
Nubia. Here the want of provisions forced them to evacuate the place; a
few who surrendered were beheaded, and the rest went farther south and
built the town of New Dongola (correctly Dunkulah), where the venerable
Ibrahim Bey died in 1816, at the age of eighty. As their numbers
thinned, they endeavoured to maintain their little power by training
some hundreds of blacks; but again, on the approach of Ismail, another
son of the pasha of Egypt, sent with an army in 1820 to subdue Nubia and
Sennar, some returned to Egypt and settled in Cairo, while the rest,
amounting to about 100 persons, fled in dispersed parties to the
countries adjacent to Sennar.

  See A. A Paton, _History of the Egyptian Revolution_ (2 vols., 2nd
  ed., enlarged 1870); and FRENCH REVOLUTIONARY WARS.
       (E. S. P.; S. L.-P.; D. S. M.*)


3. _Modern History._

  Wars in Arabia.

(1) _Rule of Mehemet Ali._--Mehemet Ali was now undisputed master of
Egypt, and his efforts henceforth were directed primarily to the
maintenance of his practical independence. The suzerainty of the sultan
he acknowledged, and at the reiterated commands of the Porte he
despatched in 1811 an army of 8000 men, including 2000 horse, under the
command of his son Tusun, a youth of sixteen, against the Wahhabis
(q.v.). After a successful advance, this force met with a serious
repulse at the pass of Jedeida, near Safra, and retreated to Yembo'
(Yambu). In the following year Tusun, having received reinforcements,
again assumed the offensive, and captured Medina after a prolonged
siege. He next took Jidda and Mecca, defeating the Wahhabis beyond the
latter place and capturing their general. But some mishaps followed, and
Mehemet Ali, who had determined to conduct the war in person, left Egypt
for that purpose in the summer of 1813. In Arabia he encountered serious
obstacles from the nature of the country and the harassing mode of
warfare adopted by his adversaries. His arms met with various fortunes;
but on the whole his forces proved superior to those of the enemy. He
deposed and exiled the sharif of Mecca, and after the death of the
Wahhabi leader Saud II. he concluded in 1815 a treaty with Saud's son
and successor, Abdullah. Hearing of the escape of Napoleon from
Elba--and fearing danger to Egypt from the plans of France or Great
Britain--Mehemet Ali returned to Cairo by way of Kosseir and Kena. He
reached the capital on the day of the battle of Waterloo. His return was
hastened by reports that the Turks, whose cause he was upholding in
Arabia, were treacherously planning an invasion of Egypt.

During Mehemet Ali's absence in Arabia his representative at Cairo had
completed the confiscation, begun in 1808, of almost all the lands
belonging to private individuals, who were forced to accept instead
inadequate pensions. By this revolutionary method of land
"nationalization" Mehemet Ali became proprietor of nearly all the soil
of Egypt, an iniquitous measure against which the Egyptians had no
remedy. The attempt which in this year (1815) the pasha made to
reorganize his troops on European lines led, however, to a formidable
mutiny in Cairo. Mehemet Ali's life was endangered, and he sought refuge
by night in the citadel, while the soldiery committed many acts of
plunder. The revolt was reduced by presents to the chiefs of the
insurgents, and Mehemet Ali ordered that the sufferers by the
disturbances should receive compensation from the treasury. The project
of the _Nizam Gedid_ (New System), as the European system was called,
was, in consequence of this mutiny, abandoned for a time.

Tusun returned to Egypt on hearing of the military revolt at Cairo, but
died in 1816 at the early age of twenty. Mehemet Ali, dissatisfied with
the treaty concluded with the Wahhabis, and with the non-fulfilment of
certain of its clauses, determined to send another army to Arabia, and
to include in it the soldiers who had recently proved unruly. This
expedition, under his eldest son Ibrahim Pasha, left in the autumn of
1816. The war was long and arduous, but in 1818 Ibrahim captured the
Wahhabi capital of Deraiya. Abdullah, their chief, was made prisoner,
and with his treasurer and secretary was sent to Constantinople, where,
in spite of Ibrahim's promise of safety, and of Mehemet Ali's
intercession in their favour, they were put to death. At the close of
the year 1819, Ibrahim returned to Cairo, having subdued all present
opposition in Arabia.

Meanwhile the pasha had turned his attention to the improvement of the
manufactures of Egypt, and engaged very largely in commerce. He created
for himself a monopoly in the chief products of the country, to the
further impoverishment of the people, and set up and kept going for
years factories which never paid. But some of his projects were sound.
The work of digging (1819-1820) the new canal of Alexandria, called the
Mahmudiya (after the reigning sultan of Turkey), was specially
important. The old canal had long fallen into decay, and the necessity
of a safe channel between Alexandria and the Nile was much felt. Such
was the object of the canal then excavated, and it answered its purpose;
but the sacrifice of life was enormous (fully 20,000 workmen perished),
and the labour of the unhappy fellahin was forced. Another notable fact
in the economic progress of the country was the development of the
cultivation of cotton in the Delta in 1822 and onwards. The cotton grown
had been brought from the Sudan by Maho Bey, and the organization of the
new industry--from which in a few years Mehemet Ali was enabled to
extract considerable revenues--was entrusted to a Frenchman named Jumel.


  Conquest of the Sudan begun.

In 1820 Mehemet Ali ordered the conquest of the eastern Sudan to be
undertaken. He first sent an expedition westward (Feb. 1820) which
conquered and annexed the oasis of Siwa. Among the pasha's reasons for
wishing to extend his rule southward were the desire to capture the
valuable caravan trade then going towards the Red Sea, and to secure the
rich gold mines which he believed to exist in Sennar. He also saw in the
campaign a means of getting rid of the disaffected troops, and of
obtaining a sufficient number of captives to form the nucleus of the new
army. The forces destined for this service were led by Ismail, then the
youngest son of Mehemet Ali; they consisted of between 4000 and 5000
men, Turks and Arabs, and left Cairo in July 1820. Nubia at once
submitted, the Shagia Arabs immediately beyond the province of Dongola
were worsted, the remnant of the Mamelukes dispersed, and Sennar reduced
without a battle. Mahommed Bey, the defterdar, with another force of
about the same strength, was then sent by Mehemet Ali against Kordofan
with a like result, but not without a hard-fought engagement. In October
1822 Ismail was, with his retinue, burnt to death by Nimr, the _mek_
(king) of Shendi; and the defterdar, a man infamous for his cruelty,
assumed the command of those provinces, and exacted terrible retribution
from the innocent inhabitants. Khartum was founded at this time, and in
the following years the rule of the Egyptians was largely extended and
control obtained of the Red Sea ports of Suakin and Massawa (see SUDAN:
_History_).

In 1824 a native rebellion of a religious character broke out in Upper
Egypt headed by one Ahmad, an inhabitant of Es-Salimiya, a village
situated a few miles above Thebes. He proclaimed himself a prophet, and
was soon followed by between 20,000 and 30,000 insurgents, mostly
peasants, but some of them deserters from the "Nizam Gedid," for that
force was yet in a half-organized state, and in part declared for the
impostor. The insurrection was crushed by Mehemet Ali, and about
one-fourth of Ahmad's followers perished, but he himself escaped and was
never after heard of. Few of these unfortunates possessed any other
weapon than the long staff (_nebbut_) of the Egyptian peasant; still
they offered an obstinate resistance, and the combat in which they were
defeated resembled a massacre. This movement was the last internal
attempt to destroy the pasha's authority.


  Sufferings of the fellahin.

The fellahin, a patient, long-suffering race save when stirred by
religious fanaticism, submitted to the kurbash, freely used by the
Turkish and Bashi Bazuk tax-gatherers employed by Mehemet Ali to enforce
his system of taxation, monopolies, corvee and conscription. Under this
regime the resources of the country were impoverished, while the
finances fell into complete and incomprehensible chaos.

A vivid picture of the condition to which Egypt was reduced is painted
in the report drawn up in 1838 by the British consul-general, Colonel
Campbell:--

  "The government (he wrote), possessing itself of the necessaries of
  life at prices fixed by itself, disposes of them at arbitrary prices.
  The fellah is thus deprived of his harvest and falls into arrears with
  his taxes, and is harassed and bastinadoed to force him to pay his
  debts. This leads to deterioration of agriculture and lessens the
  production. The pasha having imposed high taxes has caused the high
  prices of the necessaries of life. It would be difficult for a
  foreigner now coming to Egypt to form a just idea of the actual state
  of the country as compared with its former state. In regard to the
  general rise in prices, all the ground cultivated under the Mamelukes
  was employed for producing food--wheat, barley, beans, &c.--in immense
  quantities. The people reared fowls, sheep, goats, &c., and the prices
  were one-sixth, or even one-tenth, of those at present. This continued
  until Mehemet Ali became viceroy in 1805. From that period until the
  establishment of monopolies prices have gradually increased; but the
  great increase has chiefly taken place since 1824, when the pasha
  established his regular army, navy and factories."

The conclusion in 1838 of a commercial treaty with Turkey, negotiated by
Sir Henry Bulwer (Lord Dalling), struck a death-blow to the system of
monopolies, though the application of the treaty to Egypt was delayed
for some years. The picture of Egypt under Mehemet Ali is nevertheless
not complete without regard being had to the beneficent side of his
rule. Public order was rendered perfect; the Nile and the highways were
secure to all travellers, Christian or Moslem; the Bedouin tribes were
won over to peaceful pursuits, and genuine efforts were made to promote
education and the study of medicine. To European merchants, on whom he
was dependent for the sale of his exports, Mehemet Ali showed much
favour, and under his influence the port of Alexandria again rose into
importance. It was also under Mehemet Ali's encouragement that the
overland transit of goods from Europe to India via Egypt was resumed.


  Ibrahim in the Morea.

Mehemet Ali was fully conscious that the empire which he had so
laboriously built up might at any time have to be defended by force of
arms against his master Sultan Mahmud II., whose whole policy had been
directed to curbing the power of his too ambitious valis, and who was
under the influence of the personal enemies of the pasha of Egypt,
notably of Khosrev, the grand vizier, who had never forgiven his
humiliation in Egypt in 1803. Mahmud also was already planning reforms
borrowed from the West, and Mehemet Ali, who had had plenty of
opportunity of observing the superiority of European methods of warfare,
was determined to anticipate the sultan in the creation of a fleet and
an army on modern lines, partly as a measure of precaution, partly as an
instrument for the realization of yet wider schemes of ambition. Before
the outbreak of the War of Greek Independence in 1821 he had already
expended much time and energy in organizing a fleet and in training,
under the supervision of French instructors, native officers and
artificers; though it was not till 1829 that the opening of a dockyard
and arsenal at Alexandria enabled him to build and equip his own
vessels. By 1823, moreover, he had succeeded in carrying out the
reorganization of his army on European lines, the turbulent Turkish and
Albanian elements being replaced by negroes and fellahin.[23] His
foresight was rewarded by the invitation of the sultan to help him in
the task of subduing the Greek insurgents, offering as reward the
pashaliks of the Morea and of Syria. Mehemet Ali had already, in 1821,
been appointed governor of Crete, which he had occupied with a small
Egyptian force. In the autumn of 1824 a fleet of sixty Egyptian
war-ships carrying a large force of disciplined troops concentrated in
Suda Bay, and, in the following March, Ibrahim as commander-in-chief
landed in the Morea. But for the action of European powers the
intervention of Mehemet Ali would have been decisive. His naval
superiority wrested from the Greeks the command of the sea, on which the
fate of the insurrection ultimately depended, while on land the Greek
irregular bands were everywhere routed by Ibrahim's disciplined troops.
The history of the events that led up to the battle of Navarino and the
liberation of Greece is told elsewhere (see NAVARINO and GREEK
INDEPENDENCE, WAR OF); the withdrawal of the Egyptians from the Morea
was ultimately due to the action of Admiral Sir Edward Codrington, who
early in August 1828 appeared before Alexandria and induced the pasha,
by no means sorry to have a reasonable excuse, by a threat of
bombardment, to sign a convention undertaking to recall Ibrahim and his
army.


  The Syrian campaigns.

Before the final establishment of the new kingdom of Greece, the Eastern
question had late in 1831 entered into a new and more perilous phase,
owing to the revolt of Mehemet Ali against the sultan on pretext of
chastising the ex-slave Abdullah, pasha of Acre, for refusing to send
back Egyptian fugitives from the effects of Mehemet Ali's "reforms." The
true reason was the refusal of Sultan Mahmud to hand over Syria
according to agreement, and Mehemet Ali's determination to obtain at all
hazards what had been from time immemorial an object of ambition to the
rulers of Egypt. For ten years from this date the relations of sultan
and pasha remained in the forefront of the questions which agitated the
diplomatic world. It was not only the very existence of the Ottoman
empire that seemed to be at stake, but Egypt itself had become more than
ever an object of attention, to British statesmen especially, and in the
issue of the struggle were involved the interests of Great Britain in
the two routes to India by the Isthmus of Suez and the valley of the
Euphrates. The diplomatic and military history of this period will be
found sketched in the article on Mehemet Ali. Here it will suffice to
say that the victorious career of Ibrahim, who once more commanded in
his father's name, beginning with the storming of Acre on the 27th of
May 1832, and culminating in the rout and capture of Reshid Pasha at
Konia on the 21st of December, was arrested by the intervention of
Russia. As the result of endless discussions between the representatives
of the powers, the Porte and the pasha, the convention of Kutaya was
signed on the 14th of May 1833, by which the sultan agreed to bestow on
Mehemet Ali the pashaliks of Syria, Damascus, Aleppo and Itcheli,
together with the district of Adana. The announcement of the pasha's
appointment had already been made in the usual way in the annual firman
issued on the 3rd of May. Adana, reserved for the moment, was bestowed
on Ibrahim under the style of _muhassil_, or collector of the crown
revenues, a few days later.

Mehemet Ali now ruled over a virtually independent empire, subject only
to a moderate tribute, stretching from the Sudan to the Taurus
Mountains. But though he was hailed, especially in France, as the
pioneer of European civilization in the East, the unsound foundations of
his authority were not long in revealing themselves. Scarcely a year
from the signing of the convention of Kutaya the application by Ibrahim
of Egyptian methods of government, notably of the monopolies and
conscription, had driven Syrians, Druses and Arabs, who had welcomed him
as a deliverer, into revolt. The unrest was suppressed by Mehemet Ali in
person, and the Syrians were terrorized and disarmed. But their
discontent encouraged Sultan Mahmud to hope for revenge, and a renewal
of the conflict was only staved off by the anxious efforts of the
powers. At last, in the spring of 1839, the sultan ordered his army,
concentrated under Reshid in the border district of Bir on the
Euphrates, to advance over the Syrian frontier. Ibrahim, seeing his
flank menaced, attacked it at Nezib on the 24th of June. Once more the
Ottomans were utterly routed. Six days later, before the news reached
Constantinople, Mahmud died. Once more the Ottoman empire lay at the
feet of Mehemet Ali; but the powers were now more prepared to meet a
contingency which had been long foreseen. Their intervention was prompt;
and the dubious attitude of France, which led to her exclusion from the
concert and encouraged Mehemet Ali to resist, only led to his obtaining
less favourable terms. (See MEHEMET ALI.)


  Mehemet Ali's authority confined to Egypt.

The end was reached early in 1841. New firmans were issued which
confined the pasha's authority to Egypt, the Sinai peninsula and certain
places on the Arabian side of the Red Sea, and to the Sudan. The most
important of these documents are dated the 13th of February 1841. The
government of the pashalik of Egypt was made hereditary in the family of
Mehemet Ali.[24] A map showing the boundaries of Egypt accompanied the
firman granting Mehemet Ali the pashalik, a duplicate copy being
retained by the Porte. The Egyptian copy is supposed to have been lost
in a fire which destroyed a great part of the Egyptian archives. The
Turkish copy has never been produced and its existence now appears
doubtful. The point is of importance, as in 1892 and again in 1906
boundary disputes arose between Turkey and Egypt (see below). Various
restrictions were laid upon Mehemet Ali, emphasizing his position of
vassalage. He was forbidden to maintain a fleet, and his army was not to
exceed 18,000 men. The pasha was no longer a figure in European
politics, but he continued to occupy himself with his improvements, real
or imaginary, in Egypt. The condition of the country was deplorable; in
1842 a murrain of cattle was followed by a destructive Nile flood; in
1843 there was a plague of locusts, whole villages were depopulated.
Meantime the uttermost farthing was wrung from the wretched fellahin,
while they were forced to the building of magnificent public works by
unpaid labour. In 1844-1845 there was some improvement in the condition
of the country as a result of financial reforms the pasha was compelled
to execute. Mehemet Ali, who had been granted the honorary rank of grand
vizier in 1842, paid a visit to Stamboul in 1846, where he became
reconciled to his old enemy Khosrev Pasha, whom he had not seen since he
spared his life at Cairo in 1803. In 1847 Mehemet Ali laid the
foundation stone of the great barrage across the Nile at the beginning
of the Delta. He was barely persuaded from ordering the barrage to be
built with stone from the pyramids! Towards the end of 1847 the aged
pasha's mind began to give way, and by the following June he was no
longer capable of administering the government. In September 1848
Ibrahim was acknowledged by the Porte as ruler of the pashalik, but he
died in the November following. Mehemet Ali survived another eight
months, dying on the 2nd of August 1849, aged eighty. He had done a
great work in Egypt; the most permanent being the weakening of the tie
binding the country to Turkey, the starting of the great cotton
industry, the recognition of the advantages of European science, and the
conquest of the Sudan.     (F. R. C.)


  Abbas I. and Said Pasha.

(2) _From the Death of Mehemet Ali to the British Occupation._--On
Ibrahim's death in November 1848 the government of Egypt fell to his
nephew Abbas I (q.v.), the son of Tusun. Abbas put an end to the system
of commercial monopolies, and during his reign the railway from
Alexandria to Cairo was begun at the instigation of the British
government. Opposed to European ways, Abbas lived in great seclusion,
and after a reign of less than six years he was murdered (July 1854) by
two of his slaves. He was succeeded by his uncle Said Pasha, the
favourite son of Mehemet Ali, who lacked the strength of mind or
physical health needed to execute the beneficent projects which he
conceived. His endeavour, for instance, to put a stop to the slave
raiding which devastated the Sudan provinces was wholly ineffectual. He
had a genuine regard for the welfare of the fellahin, and a land law of
1858 secured to them an acknowledgment of freehold as against the crown.
The pasha was much under French influence, and in 1856 was induced to
grant to Ferdinand de Lesseps a concession for the construction of the
Suez Canal. Lord Palmerston was opposed to this project, and the British
opposition delayed the ratification of the concession by the Porte for
two years. To the British Said also made concessions--one to the Eastern
Telegraph Company, and another (1854) allowing the establishment of the
Bank of Egypt. He also began the national debt by borrowing L3,293,000
from Messrs Fruhling & Goschen, the actual amount received by the pasha
being L2,640,000. In January 1863 Said Pasha died and was succeeded by
his nephew Ismail, a son of Ibrahim Pasha.


  Ismail's megalomania

The reign of Ismail (q.v.), from 1863 to 1879, was for a while hailed as
introducing a new era into modern Egypt. In spite of his vast schemes of
reform and the _eclat_ of his Europeanizing innovations, his oriental
extravagance led to bankruptcy, and his reign is historically important
simply for its compelling European intervention in the internal affairs
of Egypt. Yet in its earlier years much was done which seemed likely to
give Ismail a more important place in history. In 1866 he was granted by
the sultan a firman--obtained on condition of the increase of the
tribute from L376,000 to L720,000--by which the succession to the throne
of Egypt was made to descend "to the eldest of thy male children and in
the same manner to the eldest sons of thy successors," instead of, after
Turkish law, to the eldest male of the family. In the following year
another firman bestowed upon him the title of _khedive_ in lieu of that
of _vali_, borne by Mehemet Ali and his immediate successors. In 1873 a
further firman placed the khedive in many respects in the position of an
independent sovereign. Ismail re-established and improved the
administrative system organized by Mehemet Ali, and which had fallen
into decay under Abbas's indolent rule; he caused a thorough remodelling
of the customs system, which was in an anarchic state, to be made by
English officials; in 1865 he established the Egyptian post office; he
reorganized the military schools of his grandfather, and gave some
support to the cause of education. Railways, telegraphs, lighthouses,
the harbour works at Suez, the breakwater at Alexandria, were carried
out by some of the best contractors of Europe. Most important of all,
the Suez Canal was opened in 1869. But the funds required for these
public works, as well as the actual labour, were remorselessly extorted
from a poverty-stricken population.

  A striking picture of the condition of the people at this period is
  given by Lady Duff Gordon in _Last Letters from Egypt_. Writing in
  1867 she said: "I cannot describe the misery here now--every day some
  new tax. Every beast, camel, cow, sheep, donkey and horse is made to
  pay. The fellaheen can no longer eat bread; they are living on
  barley-meal mixed with water, and raw green stuff, vetches, | &c. The
  taxation makes life almost impossible: a tax on every crop, on every
  animal first, and again when it is sold in the market; on every man,
  on charcoal, on butter, on salt.... The people in Upper Egypt are
  running away by wholesale, utterly unable to pay the new taxes and do
  the work exacted. Even here (Cairo) the beating for the year's taxes
  is awful."


  Steps leading to the deposition of Ismail.

In the years that followed the condition of things grew worse. Thousands
of lives were lost and large sums expended in extending Ismail's
dominions in the Sudan (q.v.) and in futile conflicts with Abyssinia. In
1875 the impoverishment of the fellah had reached such a point that the
ordinary resources of the country no longer sufficed for the most urgent
necessities of administration; and the khedive Ismail, having repeatedly
broken faith with his creditors, could not raise any more loans on the
European market. The taxes were habitually collected many months in
advance, and the colossal floating debt was increasing rapidly. In these
circumstances Ismail had to realize his remaining assets, and among them
sold 176,602 Suez Canal shares to the British government for
L3,976,582[25] (see BEACONSFIELD). This comparatively small financial
operation brought about the long-delayed crisis and paved the way for
the future prosperity of Egypt, for it induced the British government to
inquire more carefully into the financial condition of the country. In
December 1875 Mr Stephen Cave, M.P., and Colonel (afterwards Sir John)
Stokes, R.E., were sent to Egypt to inquire into the financial
situation; and Mr Cave's report, made public in April 1876, showed that
under the existing administration national bankruptcy was inevitable.
Other commissions of inquiry followed, and each one brought Ismail more
under European control. The establishment of the Mixed Tribunals in
1876, in place of the system of consular jurisdiction in civil actions,
made some of the courts of justice international. The Caisse de la
Dette, instituted in May 1876 as a result of the Cave mission, led to
international control over a large portion of the revenue. Next came (in
November 1876) the mission of Mr (afterwards Lord) Goschen and M.
Joubert on behalf of the British and French bondholders, one result
being the establishment of Dual Control, i.e. an English official to
superintend the revenue and a French official the expenditure of the
country. Another result was the internationalization of the railways and
the port of Alexandria. Then came (May 1878) a commission of inquiry of
which the principal members were Sir Rivers Wilson, Major Evelyn Baring
(afterwards Lord Cromer) and MM. Kremer-Baravelli and de Blignieres. One
result of that inquiry was the extension of international control to the
enormous landed property of the khedive. Driven to desperation, Ismail
made a virtue of necessity and accepted, in September 1878, in lieu of
the Dual Control, a constitutional ministry, under the presidency of
Nubar Pasha (q.v.), with Rivers Wilson as minister of finance and de
Blignieres as minister of public works. Professing to be quite satisfied
with this arrangement, he pompously announced that Egypt was no longer
in Africa, but a part of Europe; but before seven months had passed he
found his constitutional position intolerable, got rid of his irksome
cabinet by means of a secretly-organized military riot in Cairo, and
reverted to his old autocratic methods of government. England and France
could hardly sit still under this affront, and decided to administer
chastisement by the hand of the suzerain power, which was delighted to
have an opportunity of asserting its authority. On the 26th of June 1879
Ismail suddenly received from the sultan a curt telegram, addressed to
him as ex-khedive of Egypt, informing him that his son Tewfik was
appointed his successor. Taken unawares, he made no attempt at
resistance, and Tewfik was at once proclaimed khedive.


  Re-establishment of Dual Control.

  Arabi and the revolt of 1882.

After a short period of inaction, when it seemed as if the change might
be for the worse, England and France summoned up courage to look the
situation boldly in the face, and, in November 1879, re-established the
Dual Control in the persons of Major Baring and M. de Blignieres. For
two years the Dual Control governed Egypt, and initiated the work of
progress that England was to continue alone. Its essential defect was
what might be called insecurity of tenure. Without any efficient means
of self-protection and coercion at its disposal, it had to interfere
with the power, privileges and perquisites of a class which had long
misgoverned the country. This class, so far as its civilian members were
concerned, was not very formidable, because these were not likely to go
beyond the bounds of intrigue and passive resistance; but it contained a
military element who had more courage, and who had learned their power
when Ismail employed them for overturning his constitutional ministry.
Among the mutinous soldiers on that occasion was a fellah officer
calling himself Ahmed Arabi the Egyptian. He was not a man of
exceptional intelligence or remarkable powers of organization, but he
was a fluent speaker, and could exercise some influence over the masses
by a rude kind of native eloquence. Behind him were a group of men, much
abler than himself, who put him forward as the figurehead of a party
professing to aim at protecting the Egyptians from the grasping tyranny
of their Turkish and European oppressors. The movement began among the
Arab officers, who complained of the preference shown to the officers of
Turkish origin; it then expanded into an attack on the privileged
position and predominant influence of foreigners, many of whom, it must
be confessed, were of a by no means respectable type; finally, it was
directed against all Christians, foreign and native.[26] The government,
being too weak to suppress the agitation and disorder, had to make
concessions, and each concession produced fresh demands. Arabi was first
promoted, then made under-secretary for war, and ultimately a member of
the cabinet. The danger of a serious rising brought the British and
French fleets in May 1882 to Alexandria, and after a massacre (11th of
June) had been perpetrated by the Arab mob in that city, the British
admiral bombarded the forts (11th of July 1882). The leaders of the
national movement prepared to resist further aggression by force. A
conference of ambassadors was held in Constantinople, and the sultan was
invited to quell the revolt; but he hesitated to employ his troops
against Mussulmans who were professing merely to oppose Christian
aggression.

(3) _Egypt occupied by the British._--At last the British government
determined to employ armed force, and invited France to co-operate. The
French government declined, and a similar invitation to Italy met with a
similar refusal. England therefore, having to act alone, landed troops
at Ismailia under Sir Garnet Wolseley, and suppressed the revolt by the
battle of Tell-el-Kebir on the 13th of September 1882. The khedive, who
had taken refuge in Alexandria, returned to Cairo, and a ministry was
formed under Sherif Pasha, with Riaz Pasha as one of its leading
members. On assuming office, the first thing it had to do was to bring
to trial the chiefs of the rebellion. Had the khedive and Riaz been
allowed a free hand, Arabi and his colleagues would have found little
mercy. Thanks to the intervention of the British government, their lives
were spared. Arabi pleaded guilty, was sentenced to death, the sentence
being commuted by the khedive to banishment; and Riaz resigned in
disgust. This solution of the difficulty was brought about by Lord
Dufferin, then British ambassador at Constantinople, who had been sent
to Egypt as high commissioner to adjust affairs and report on the
situation. One of his first acts, after preventing the application of
capital punishment to the ringleaders of the revolt, was to veto the
project of protecting the khedive and his government by means of a
Praetorian guard recruited from Asia Minor, Epirus, Austria and
Switzerland, and to insist on the principle that Egypt must be governed
in a truly liberal spirit. Passing in review all the departments of the
administration, he laid down the general lines on which the country was
to be restored to order and prosperity, and endowed, if possible, with
the elements of self-government for future use.


  Sir Evelyn Baring appointed consul-general, 1884.

The laborious task of putting these general indications into a practical
shape fell to Sir Evelyn Baring (Lord Cromer), who arrived as
consul-general and diplomatic agent, in succession to Sir Edward Malet,
in January 1884. At that moment the situation was singularly like that
which had existed on two previous occasions: firstly, when Ismail was
deposed; and secondly, when the Dual Control had undermined the existing
authority without having any power to enforce its own. For the third
time in little more than three years the existing authority had been
destroyed and a new one had to be created. But there was one essential
difference: the power that had now to reorganize the country possessed
in the British army of occupation a support sufficient to command
respect. Without that support Sir Evelyn Baring could have done little
or nothing; with it he did perhaps more than any other single man could
have done. His method may be illustrated by an old story long current in
Cairo. Mehemet Ali was said to have appointed as _mudir_ or governor in
a turbulent district a young and inexperienced Turk, who asked, "But how
am I to govern these people?" "Listen," replied the pasha; "buy the
biggest and heaviest _kurbash_ you can find; hang it up in the centre of
the _mudirieh_, well within your reach, and you will very seldom require
to use it." The British army of occupation was Sir Evelyn's _kurbash_;
it was well within his reach, as all the world knew, and its simple
presence sufficed to prevent disorder and enforce obedience. He had one
other advantage over previous English reformers in Egypt: his position
towards France was more independent. The Dual Control had been abolished
by a khedivial decree of 18th January 1883, and replaced by an English
financial adviser. France naturally objected; but having refused to
co-operate with England in suppressing the revolt, she could not
reasonably complain that her offer of co-operation in the work of
reorganization was declined. But though Dual Control was at an end, the
Caisse de la Dette remained, and this body was to prove a constant clog
on the financial measures of the Egyptian government.


  The Policy of evacuation.

At first the intention of the British government was simply to restore
the power of the khedive, to keep his highness for some time in the
right path by friendly advice, and to withdraw the British troops as
soon as possible. As Lord Granville explained in a circular to the
powers, the position of England in Egypt imposed on her "the duty of
giving advice with the object of securing that the order of things to be
established shall be of a satisfactory character and possess the
elements of stability and progress." But there was to be no embarking on
a general scheme of reforms, which would increase unnecessarily the
responsibilities of the protecting power and necessitate the indefinite
prolongation of the military occupation. So far, therefore, as the
British government had a definite policy in Egypt, it was a _politique
de replatrage_. Even this policy was not strictly adhered to. Mr
Gladstone's cabinet was as unstable as the public opinion it sought to
conciliate. It had its hot fits and its cold fits, and it gave orders
now to advance and now to retreat. In the long run circumstances proved
too strong for it, and it had to undertake a great deal more than it
originally intended. Each little change in the administration engendered
a multitude of others, so that the modest attempts at reform were found
to be like the letting out of water. A tiny rill gradually became a
boisterous stream, and the boisterous stream grew into a great river,
which spread to all sections of the administration and ended by
inundating the whole country.


  The Sudan question.

Of the numerous questions awaiting solution, the first to claim
immediate attention was that of the Sudan. The British government had
begun by excluding it from the problem, and by declaring that for events
in these outlying territories it must not be held responsible. In that
sphere of activity, therefore, the Egyptian government might do as it
thought fit. The principle of limited liability which this attitude
assumed was soon found to be utterly untenable. The Sudan was an
integral part of the khedive's dominions, and caused, even in ordinary
times, a deficit of L200,000 to the Egyptian treasury. At that moment
it was in a state of open rebellion, stirred up by a religious fanatic
who proclaimed himself a mahdi of Islam. An army of 10,000 men under an
English officer, Colonel William Hicks, formerly of the Bombay army,
otherwise Hicks Pasha, had been sent to suppress the revolt, and had
been annihilated in a great battle fought on the 5th of November 1883,
near Obeid. The Egyptian government wished to make a new attempt to
recover the lost province, and the idea was certainly very popular among
the governing class, but Sir Evelyn Baring vetoed the project on the
ground that Egypt had neither soldiers nor money to carry it out. In
vain the khedive and his prime minister, Sherif Pasha, threatened to
resign, and the latter actually carried out his threat. The British
representative remained firm, and it was decided that the Sudan should
be, for the moment at least, abandoned to its fate. Nubar, though as
strongly opposed to the abandonment policy as Sherif, consented to take
his place and accepted somewhat reluctantly the new regime, which he
defined as "the administration of Egypt under the government of Baring."
By this time the Mahdi was master of the greater part of the Sudan, but
Khartum and some other fortified points still held out. The efforts made
to extricate the garrisons, including the mission of General Gordon, the
fall of Khartum, and the Nile Expedition under Lord Wolseley, are
described below separately in the section of this article dealing with
the military operations. The practical result was that the khedive's
authority was limited to the Nile valley north of Wadi Halfa.


  Internal reorganization

With the internal difficulties Sir Evelyn Baring had been struggling
bravely ever since his appointment, trying to evolve out of the
ever-changing policy and contradictory orders of the British government
some sort of coherent line of action, and to raise the administration to
a higher standard. For two or three years it seemed doubtful whether he
would succeed. All over Egypt there was a feeling of unrest, and the
well-meant but not very successful efforts of the British to improve the
state of things were making them very unpopular. The introduction of
English officials and English influence into all the administrative
departments was resented by the native officials, and the action of the
irrigation officers in preventing the customary abuses of the
distribution of water was resented by the great landowners, who had
been, from time immemorial, in the habit of taking as much as they
wanted, to the detriment of the fellahin. Even these latter, who gained
most by the reforms, considered that they had good reason to complain,
for the defeat of Arabi and the re-establishment of order had enabled
the Christian money-lenders to return and insist on the payment of
claims, which were supposed to have been extinguished by the rebellion.
Worst of all, the government was drifting rapidly towards insolvency,
being quite unable to fulfil its obligations to the bondholders and meet
the expenses of administration. All departments were being starved, and
even the salaries of poorly paid officials were in arrear. To free
itself from its financial difficulties the government adopted a heroic
remedy which only created fresh troubles. On the advice of Lord
Northbrook, who was sent out to Cairo in September 1884 to examine the
financial situation, certain revenues which should have been paid into
the Caisse for the benefit of the bondholders were paid into the
treasury for the ordinary needs of the administration. Immediately the
powers protested against this infraction of the law of liquidation, and
the Caisse applied for a writ to the Mixed Tribunals. In this way the
heroic remedy failed, and to the internal difficulties were added
international complications.

Fortunately for Egypt, the British government contrived to solve the
international difficulty by timely concessions to the powers, and
succeeded in negotiating the London Convention of March 1885, by which
the Egyptian government was relieved from some of the most onerous
stipulations of the law of liquidation, and was enabled to raise a loan
of L9,000,000 for an annual payment of L135,000. After paying out of the
capital the sums required for the indemnities due for the burning of
Alexandria and the deficits of the years 1882 and 1883, it still had a
million sterling, and boldly invested it in the improvement of
irrigation. The investment proved most remunerative, and helped very
materially to save the country from bankruptcy and internationalism. The
danger of being again subjected to the evils of an international
administration was very great, for the London Convention contained a
stipulation to the effect that if Egypt could not pay her way at the end
of two years, another international commission would be appointed.

To obviate this catastrophe the British reformers set to work most
energetically. Already something in the way of retrenchment and reform
had been accomplished. The public accounts had been put in order, and
the abuses in the collection of the land tax removed. The constant drain
of money and men for the Sudan had been stopped. A beginning had been
made for creating a new army to replace the one that had been disbanded
and to allow of a portion of the British garrison being withdrawn. In
this work Sir Evelyn Wood had shown much sound judgment as well as great
capacity for military organization, and had formed an efficient force
out of very unpromising material (see the section above on the _Egyptian
Army_). His colleague in the department of public works, Sir Colin
Scott-Moncrieff, had been not less active. By mitigating the hardships
of the _corvee_, and improving the irrigation system, on which the
prosperity of the country mainly depends, he had conferred enormous
benefits on the fellahin, and had laid the foundation of permanent
budgetary equilibrium for the future. Not less active was Sir Edgar
Vincent, the financial adviser, who kept a firm hold on the
purse-strings and ruthlessly cut down expenditure in all departments
except that of irrigation (see S Finance).

The activity of the British officials naturally produced a certain
amount of discontent and resistance on the part of their Egyptian
colleagues, and Lord Granville was obliged to declare very plainly that
such resistance could not be tolerated. Writing (January 1884) to Sir
Evelyn Baring, he said:

  "It should be made clear to the Egyptian Ministers and Governors of
  Provinces that the responsibility which for the time rests on England
  obliges H.M. Government to insist on the adoption of the policy which
  they recommend; and that it will be necessary that those Ministers and
  Governors who do not follow this course should cease to hold their
  offices."


  Relations between British and native officials.

Nubar Pasha, who continued to be prime minister, resisted occasionally.
What he chiefly objected to was direct interference in the provincial
administration and the native tribunals, and he succeeded for a time in
preventing such interference. Sir Benson Maxwell and Mr Clifford Lloyd,
who had been sent out to reform the departments of justice and the
interior, after coming into conflict with each other were both recalled,
and the reforming activity was for a time restricted to the departments
of war, public works and finance. Gradually the tension between natives
and foreigners relaxed, and mutual confidence was established.
Experience had evolved the working principle which was officially
formulated at a much later period: "Our task is not to rule the
Egyptians, but as far as possible to teach the Egyptians to rule
themselves.... European initiative suggests measures to be executed by
Egyptian agency, while European supervision controls the manner in which
they are executed." If that principle had been firmly laid down and
clearly understood at the beginning, a good deal of needless friction
would have been avoided.


  International problems.

The international difficulty remained. The British position in Egypt was
anomalous, and might easily give rise to international complications.
The sultan might well protest against the military occupation of a
portion of his empire by foreign troops. It was no secret that France
was ready to give him diplomatic support, and other powers might adopt a
similar attitude. Besides this, the British government was anxious to
terminate the occupation as soon as possible. With a view to
regularizing the situation and accelerating the evacuation, Sir Henry
Drummond Wolff was sent to Constantinople in August 1885 on a special
mission. On the 24th of October of that year he concluded a preliminary
convention by which an Ottoman and a British high commissioner, acting
in concert with the khedive, should reorganize the Egyptian army,
tranquillize the Sudan by pacific means, and consider what changes might
be necessary in the civil administration. When the two commissioners
were assured of the security of the frontier and the good working and
stability of the Egyptian government, they should present reports to
their respective governments, and these should consult as to the
conclusion of a convention regulating the withdrawal of the English
troops. Mukhtar Pasha and Sir Henry Drummond Wolfe were appointed
commissioners, and their joint inquiry lasted till the end of 1886, when
the former presented his report and the latter went home to report
orally. The remaining stipulations of the preliminary convention were
duly carried out. Sir Henry Drummond Wolff proceeded to Constantinople
and signed on the 22nd of May 1887 the definitive convention, according
to which the occupation should come to an end in three years, but
England should have a right to prolong or renew it in the event of
internal peace or external security being seriously threatened. The
sultan authorised the signature of this convention, but under pressure
of France and Russia he refused to ratify it. Technically, therefore,
the preliminary convention still remains in force, and in reality the
Ottoman commissioner continued to reside in Cairo till the close of
1908.


  Progress of reform.

The steadily increasing prosperity of the country during the years 1886
and 1887 removed the danger of national bankruptcy and international
interference, and induced Sir Evelyn Baring to widen the area of
administrative reforms. In the provinces the local administration and
the methods of dispensing justice were still scandalously
unsatisfactory, and this was the field to which the British
representative next directed his efforts. Here he met with unexpected
opposition on the part of the prime minister, Nubar Pasha, and a
conflict ensued which ended in Nubar's retirement in June 1888. Riaz
Pasha took his place, and remained in office till May 1891. During these
three years the work of reform and the prosperity of the country made
great progress. The new Egyptian army was so far improved that it gained
successes over the forces of the Mahdi; the burden of the national debt
was lightened by a successful conversion; the _corvee_ was
abolished;[27] the land tax was reduced 30% in the poorest provinces,
and in spite of this and other measures for lightening the public
burdens, the budgetary surplus constantly increased; the quasi-judicial
special commissions for brigandage, which were at once barbarous and
inefficient, were abolished; the native tribunals were improved, and Mr
(afterwards Sir John) Scott, an Indian judge of great experience and
sound judgment, was appointed judicial adviser to the khedive. This
appointment was opposed by Riaz Pasha, and led to his resignation on the
plea of ill-health. His successor, Mustafa Pasha Fehmi, continued the
work and co-operated cordially with the English officials. The very
necessary reform of the native tribunals was then taken seriously in
hand. The existing procedure was simplified and accelerated; the working
of the courts was greatly improved by a carefully organized system of
inspection and control; the incompetent judges were eliminated and
replaced by men of better education and higher moral character; and for
the future supply of well-qualified judges, barristers, and law
officials, an excellent school of law was established. Later on the
reforming activity was extended to prisons, public health, and
education, and has attained very satisfactory results.


  Accession of Abbas.

In January 1892 the khedive Tewfik, who had always maintained cordial
relations with Sir Evelyn Baring, died suddenly, and was succeeded by
his son, Abbas Hilmi, a young man without political experience, who
failed at first to understand the peculiar situation in which a khedive
ruling under British protection is necessarily placed. Aspiring to
liberate himself at once from foreign control, he summarily dismissed
Mustafa Pasha Fehmi (15th January 1893), whom he considered too amenable
to English influence, and appointed in his place Fakhri Pasha, who was
not a _persona grata_ at the British Agency. Such an incident, which
might have constituted a precedent for more important acts of a similar
kind, could hardly be overlooked by the British representative. He had
always maintained that what Egypt most required, and would require for
many years to come, was an order of things which would render
practically impossible any return to that personal system of government
which had well-nigh ruined the country. In this view the British agent
was warmly supported by Lord Rosebery, then secretary of state for
foreign affairs. The young khedive was made therefore to understand that
he must not make such changes in the administration without a previous
agreement with the representative of the protecting power; and a
compromise was effected by which Fakhri Pasha retired, and the post of
premier was confided once more to Riaz. With this compromise the
friction between the khedive and Sir Evelyn Baring, who had now become
Lord Cromer, did not end. For some time Abbas Hilmi clung to his idea of
liberating himself from all control, and secretly encouraged a
nationalist and anti-British agitation in the native press; but he
gradually came to perceive the folly, as well as the danger to himself,
of such a course, and accordingly refrained from giving any overt
occasion for complaint or protest. In like manner the relations between
the British officials and their Egyptian colleagues gradually became
more cordial, so that it was found possible at last to reform the local
administration in the provinces according to the recommendations of Mr
(afterwards Sir) Eldon Gorst, who had been appointed adviser to the
ministry of the interior. Nubar Pasha, it is true, who succeeded Riaz as
prime minister in April 1894, objected to some of Mr Gorst's
recommendations, and in November 1895 resigned. He was succeeded by
Mustafa Fehmi, who had always shown a conciliatory spirit, and who had
been on that account, as above stated, summarily dismissed by the
khedive in January 1893. After his reinstatement the Anglo-Egyptian
condominium worked without serious friction.


  Fashoda.

The success of the Anglo-Egyptian condominium, and the consequent
economic and financial prosperity of Egypt proper, rendered it possible,
during 1896-1898, to recover from the Mahdists the Sudanese provinces
(see _Military Operations_), and to delimit in that part of Africa, in
accordance with Anglo-Egyptian interests, the respective spheres of
influence of Great Britain and France. The arrangement was not effected
without serious danger of a European conflict. Taking advantage of the
temporary weakness of Egypt, the French government formed the project of
seizing the Upper Nile valley and uniting her possessions in West Africa
with those at the entrance to the Red Sea. With this object a small
force under Major Marchand was sent from the French Congo into the
Bahr-el-Ghazal, with orders to occupy Fashoda on the Nile; whilst a
Franco-Abyssinian Expedition was despatched from the eastward, to join
hands with Major Marchand. The small force from the French Congo reached
its destination, and a body of Abyssinian troops, accompanied by French
officers, appeared for a short time a little higher up the river; but
the grand political scheme was frustrated by the victorious advance of
an Anglo-Egyptian force under General Kitchener and the resolute
attitude of the British government. Major Marchand had to retire from
Fashoda, and as a concession to French susceptibilities he was allowed
to retreat by the Abyssinian route. By an agreement signed by Lord
Salisbury and the French ambassador on the 21st of March 1899, and
appended to Art. IV. of the Anglo-French convention of June 14th, 1898,
which dealt with the British and French spheres of influence in the
region of the Niger, France was excluded from the basin of the Nile, and
a line marking the respective spheres of influence of the two countries
was drawn on the map from the northern frontier of the Congo Free State
to the southern frontier of the Turkish province of Tripoli.


  The Anglo-Egyptian Sudan.

The administration of the Sudan (q.v.) was organized on the basis of an
agreement between the British and Egyptian governments signed on the
19th of January 1899. According to that agreement the British and
Egyptian flags are used together, and the supreme military and civil
command is vested in a governor-general, who is appointed by the khedive
on the recommendation of the British government, and who cannot be
removed without the British government's consent. Neither consular
jurisdiction, nor that of the mixed tribunals, was permitted, the Sudan
being made absolutely free of the international fetters which bound
Egypt. Sir Reginald Wingate, the sirdar of the Egyptian army (in which
post he succeeded Lord Kitchener at the close of 1899) was named
governor-general, and in the work of regeneration of the country, the
officials, British, Egyptian and Sudanese, had the cordial co-operation
of the majority of the inhabitants.


  Egypt's growing prosperity.

The growing prosperity of Egypt in the opening years of the 20th century
was very marked, and is reflected in the annual reports on the country
supplied to the British foreign office by Lord Cromer. Thus, in 1901 he
was able to declare that "the foundations on which the well-being and
material prosperity of a civilized community should rest have been
laid.... The institution of slavery is virtually defunct. The _corvee_
has been practically abolished. Law and order everywhere reign supreme.
The _curbash_ is no longer employed as an instrument of government." So
little danger to internal peace was apprehended that during this year
Arabi Pasha, who had been in exile in Ceylon since 1882, was permitted
to return to Egypt. This happy condition had been brought about largely
as the result of giving fiscal reform, accompanied by substantial relief
to the taxpayers, the first place in the government's programme, and
with the abolition of octroi duties in 1902 disappeared the last of the
main defects in the fiscal system as existing at the time of the British
occupation. In these conditions the machinery of government, despite its
many imperfections and anomalies, worked smoothly. Land increased in
value as irrigation schemes were completed, and European capital was
increasingly eager to find employment in the country. The bulk of the
fellahin enjoyed a material prosperity to which they had been strangers
for centuries. In the midst of this return of plenty Lord Cromer (in his
report for 1903) sounded a note of warning:--

  "As regards moral progress (he wrote), all that can be said is that it
  must necessarily be slower than advance in a material direction. I
  hope and believe, however, that some progress is being made. In any
  case the machinery which will admit of progress has been created. The
  schoolmaster is abroad.... Every possible facility and every
  encouragement are afforded for the Egyptians to advance along the path
  of moral improvement. More than this no government can do. It remains
  for the Egyptians to take advantage of the opportunities offered to
  them."


  The Anglo-French understanding of 1904.

The facilities enjoyed by the British and Egyptian governments for
securing the material if not the moral development of Egypt were greatly
enlarged in 1904, as the result of the understanding then come to
between France and Great Britain. The natural irritation in France
arising from the British occupation of the Nile valley, and the
non-fulfilment of the pledge to withdraw the British garrison from
Egypt, which had grown less acute with the passing of years, flamed out
afresh at the time of the Fashoda crisis, while the Anglo-Boer war of
1899-1902 led to another access of irritation against England. During
1903 a great change came over public opinion on both sides of the
Channel, with the result that the statesmen of both countries were
enabled to complete negotiations settling many points in dispute between
the two nations. On the 8th of April 1904 a declaration was signed by
the representatives of France and Great Britain which virtually
recognized the dominant position of France in Morocco and of Britain in
Egypt. The chief provisions concerning Egypt were:--

  "His Britannic Majesty's government declare that they have no
  intention of altering the political status of Egypt.

  "The government of the French Republic, for their part, declare that
  they will not obstruct the action of Great Britain in that country by
  asking that a limit of time be fixed for the British occupation, or in
  any other manner.

  "His Britannic Majesty's government, for their part, will respect the
  rights which France, in virtue of treaties, conventions and usage,
  enjoys in Egypt."

Similar declarations and engagements were made by Germany, Austria and
Italy. Annexed to the Anglo-French agreement was the text of a proposed
khedivial decree altering the relations between Egypt and the foreign
bondholders. With the consent of the powers this decree (promulgated on
the 28th of November 1904) came into operation on the 1st of January
1905. The combined effect of the declaration and the khedivial decree
was great. The first-named put an end to an anomalous situation and gave
a practically valid sanction to the presence of Britain in Egypt,
removing all ground for the reproach that Great Britain was not
respecting its international obligations. In effect it was a European
recognition that Britain was the protecting power in Egypt. It put a
period to a question which had long embittered the relations between
England and France, and locally it caused the cessation of the
systematic opposition of the French agents in Cairo to everything
tending to strengthen the British position--however beneficial to Egypt
the particular scheme opposed might be. Scarcely less important were the
results of the khedivial decree. By it Egypt achieved in effect
financial independence. The power of the Caisse de la Dette, which had
virtually controlled the execution of the international agreements
concerning the finances, was swept away, together with almost all the
other financial fetters binding Egypt. The Railway and Port of
Alexandria Board ceased to exist. For the first time since 1875 Egypt
was free to control her own revenue. In return she pledged the greater
part of the land tax to the service of the debt. The functions of the
Caisse were restricted to the receipt of the funds necessary for this
service. It was entirely deprived of its former power to interfere in
the machinery of government. Moreover, some L10,000,000, being
accumulated surpluses in the hands of the Caisse after meeting the
charges of the debt, were handed over to the Egyptian treasury. The
Egyptian government was henceforth free to take full advantage of the
financial prosperity of the country.


  Evils of the Capitulations.

In one respect the Anglo-French agreement made no alteration--it left
untouched the extra-territoriality enjoyed by Europeans in Egypt in
virtue of the treaties with Turkey, i.e. the system of Capitulations.
One of the anomalies under that system had, it is true, been got rid of,
for, as has been stated, consular jurisdiction in civil matters had been
replaced in 1876 by that of the Mixed Tribunals. In criminal cases,
however, foreign consuls still exercised jurisdiction, but the main evil
of the Capitulations regime was the absence of any proper machinery for
enacting laws applicable to the whole of the inhabitants of Egypt. No
change could be made in any law applicable to Europeans without the
unanimous consent of fifteen foreign powers--a state of affairs wholly
incompatible with the condition of Egypt in the 20th century, "an
oriental country which has assimilated a very considerable portion of
European civilization and which is mainly governed by European methods."
It was, however, far easier to acknowledge that the Capitulations regime
was defective and had outlived its time than to devise a remedy and get
all the nations interested to accept it. The solution favoured by Lord
Cromer (vide Blue-books, _Egypt No. 1_ (1906), pp. 1-8, and _Egypt No.
1_ (1907), pp. 10-26) was the creation of a council--distinct from the
existing native legislative council and assembly--composed of Europeans,
which should have the power to pass legislation which when promulgated
by the Egyptian government, with the assent of the British government,
would bind all foreigners resident in Egypt. Every reservation for the
benefit of British subjects should enure for the benefit of subjects of
other powers. The jurisdiction exercised by consuls in civil and
criminal affairs Lord Cromer proposed should cease _pari passu_ with the
provision by the Egyptian government, under the powers conferred by the
treaty required to set up the new council, of courts having competence
to deal with such matters, various safeguards being introduced to
prevent injustice in criminal cases. As to civil cases the proposal was
to make permanent the Mixed Tribunals, hitherto appointed for
quinquennial periods (so that if not reappointed consular jurisdiction
in civil cases would revive).


  The pan-Islamic movement.

While the removal of ancient jealousies among the European powers
interested in Egypt helped to smooth the path pursued by the Egyptian
administration under the guiding hand of Great Britain, the intrigues of
the Turks and the danger of a revival of Moslem fanaticism threatened
during 1905-1906 to disturb the peace of the country. A party had also
arisen, whose best-known leader was Mustafa Kamel Pasha (1874-1908),
which held that Egypt was ready for self-government and which saw in the
presence of the British a hindrance to the attainment of their ideal.
This "national" party lent what weight it had to the pan-Islamic
agitation which arose in the summer and autumn of 1905, regardless of
the fact that a pan-Islamic triumph meant the re-assertion of direct
Turkish rule in Egypt and the end of the liberty the Egyptians enjoyed.
The pan-Islamic press, allowed full licence by the Cairo authorities,
spread abroad rumours that the Egyptian government intended to construct
fortifications in the Sinai peninsula with the design of menacing the
railway, under construction by Turkey, from Damascus to Mecca. This
baseless report led to what is known as the Taba incident (see below).
This incident inflamed the minds of many Egyptians, and almost all the
opposition elements in the country were united by the appeal to
religious fanaticism, of which the incident was partly the effect and
partly the cause. The inflammatory writing of the newspapers indicated,
encouraged by many persons holding high positions both inside and
outside Egypt, created, by every process of misrepresentation, an
anti-Christian and anti-European feeling among the mass of the people.
After more than a quarter of a century of just rule, i.e. since the
accession of Tewfik, the tyranny of the Turkish system was apt to be
forgotten, while the appeal to rally in support of their khalif found a
response in the hearts of many Egyptians. The feeling entertained by
large numbers even of the educated class of Egyptians was strikingly
illustrated by the terms of an anonymous letter received by Lord Cromer
in May 1906. The writer, probably a member of the Ulema class,
addressing the British agent as the reformer of Egypt, said:--

  " ... He must be blind who sees not what the English have wrought in
  Egypt; the gates of justice stand open to the poor; the streams flow
  through the land and are not stopped by order of the strong; the poor
  man is lifted up and the rich man pulled down, the hand of the
  oppressor and the briber is struck when outstretched to do evil. Our
  eyes see these things and they know from whom they come.... While
  peace is in the land the spirit of Islam sleeps.... But it is said,
  'There is war between England and Abdul Hamid Khan.' If that be so a
  change must come. The words of the Imam are echoed in every heart, and
  every Moslem hears only the cry of the Faith.... Though the Khalif
  were hapless as Bayezid, cruel as Murad, or mad as Ibrahim, he is the
  shadow of God, and every Moslem must leap up at his call.... You will
  say, 'The Egyptian is more ungrateful than a dog, which remembers the
  hand that fed him. He is foolish as the madman who pulls down the
  roof-tree of his house upon himself.' It may be so to worldly eyes,
  but in the time of danger to Islam the Moslem turns away from the
  things of this world and thirsts only for the service of his Faith,
  even though he looks in the face of death...."


  Denshawai.

To establish confidence in the minds of the Egyptian public that the
authorities could maintain order and tranquillity, it was determined to
increase permanently the strength of the British garrison. An incident
occurred in June 1906 which illustrated the danger which might arise if
anything happened to beget the idea that the protecting power had
weakened its hold. While mounted infantry of the British army were
marching from Cairo to Alexandria, five officers went (on the 13th of
June) to the village of Denshawai to shoot pigeons.[28] An attack was
made on the party by the villagers. The officers were told by their
guide that they might shoot, but the villagers had not given permission
and were incensed at the shooting of their pigeons by other officers in
the previous year. A premeditated attack was made on the officers; a gun
seized from one of them went off and slightly injured four natives--one
a woman. The attack had been preceded by a trifling fire at a threshing
floor, either accidentally caused (but not by the officers' shots) or
lit as a signal for the assault. Captain S. C. Bull of the 6th Dragoons
received serious injuries and died a few hours later, and two other
officers were seriously injured. A number of persons were arrested and
tried by a special tribunal created in 1895 to deal with offences
against the army of occupation. On the 27th of the same month four of
the ringleaders were sentenced to death, others received various terms
of imprisonment,[29] and seven were sentenced to fifty lashes. The
executions and floggings were carried out the next day at the scene of
the outrage and in the presence of some five hundred natives. The
quieting effect that this drastic action might have had was marred by
the fact that certain members of the British parliament called in
question the justice of the sentences--passed unanimously by a court of
which the best English and the best native judge were members. For a
time there was considerable ferment in Egypt. The Anglo-Egyptian
authorities received, however, the firm support of Sir Edward Grey, the
foreign secretary in the liberal administration formed in December 1905.
As far as responsible statesmen were concerned the change of government
in Great Britain made no difference in the conduct of Egyptian affairs.


  The Taba incident.

The Taba incident, to which reference has been made, arose in the
beginning of 1906 over the claim of the sultan of Turkey to jurisdiction
in the Sinai peninsula. The origin of the dispute dated back, however,
to 1892, when Abbas Hilmi became khedive. Mehemet Ali and his successors
up to and including Tewfik had not only administered the Sinai peninsula
but certain posts on the Hejaz or Arabian side of the gulf of Akaba. The
firman of investiture issued by the sultan on the occasion of the
succession of Abbas differed, however, from the text of former firmans,
the intention being, apparently, to exclude Egypt from the
administration of the Sinai peninsula. The British government intervened
and after considerable pressure upon Turkey obtained a telegram (dated
the 8th of April 1892) from the grand vizier in which it was declared
that the _status quo_ was maintained in the Sinai peninsula, but that
the sultan resumed possession of the posts in the Hejaz heretofore
garrisoned by Egypt. To this last course Great Britain raised no
objection. As officially stated by the British government at the time,
the eastern frontier of the Sinai peninsula was taken to be a line
running in a south-easterly direction from Rafa, a place on the
Mediterranean, east of El Arish, to the head of the gulf of Akaba. The
fort of Akaba and other posts farther east Egypt abandoned. So matters
rested until in 1905 in consequence of lawlessness among the Bedouins of
the peninsula a British official was appointed commandant and inspector
of the peninsula and certain administrative measures taken. The report
was spread by pan-Islamic agents that the intention of the Egyptian
government was to construct fortifications on the frontier near Akaba,
to which place the Turks were building a branch railway from the
Damascus-Mecca line. In January 1906 the sultan complained to the
British ambassador at Constantinople of Egyptian encroachments on
Turkish territory, whereupon the khedive asked that the frontier should
be delimited, a request which Turkey rejected. A small Egyptian force
was then directed to occupy Taba, a port near Akaba but on the western
side of the gulf. Before this force could reach Taba that place had been
seized by the Turkish commandant at Akaba. A period of considerable
tension ensued, the Turks removing the boundary posts at Rafa and
sending strong reinforcements to the frontier. The British government
intervened on behalf of the khedive and consistently maintained that the
Rafa-Akaba line must be the frontier. In April a conference was held
between the khedive and Mukhtar Pasha, the Ottoman commissioner. It then
appeared that Turkey was unwilling to recognize the British
interpretation of the telegram of the 8th of April 1892. Turkey claimed
that the peninsula of Sinai consisted only of the territory south of a
straight line from Akaba to Suez, and that Egyptian territory north of
that line was traced from Rafa to Suez. As a compromise Mukhtar Pasha
suggested as the frontier a line drawn direct from Rafa to Ras Mahommed
(the most southern point of the Sinai peninsula), which would have left
the whole of the gulf of Akaba in Turkish territory. In other words the
claim of the Porte was, to quote Lord Cromer:--

  "to carry the Turkish frontier and strategical railways to Suez on the
  banks of the canal; or that if the Ras Mahommed line were adopted, the
  Turkish frontier would be advanced to the neighbourhood of Nekhl, i.e.
  within easy striking distance of Egypt, and that ... the gulf of Akaba
  ... would practically become a _mare clausum_ in the possession of
  Turkey and a standing menace to the security of the trade route to the
  East."

Such proposals could not be entertained by Great Britain; and as the
sultan remained obstinate the British ambassador on the 3rd of May
presented a note to the Porte requiring compliance with the British
proposals within ten days. The Turkish ambassador in London was informed
by Sir Edward Grey, foreign secretary, that if it were found that
Turkish suzerainty in Egypt were incompatible with the rights of the
British government to interfere in Egyptian affairs, and with the
British occupation, the British position in Egypt would be upheld by the
whole force of the empire. Thereupon the sultan gave way and agreed (on
the 14th of May) that the line of demarcation should start at Rafa and
run towards the south-east "in an approximately straight line as far as
a point on the gulf of Akaba at least 3 m. distant from Akaba."[30] The
Turkish troops were withdrawn from Taba, and the delimitation of the
frontier was undertaken by a joint Turco-Egyptian commission. An
agreement was signed on the 1st of October finally settling the frontier
line.

With the ending of this dispute and the strengthening of the British
garrison in Egypt a demonstration was given of the ability of the
protecting power to maintain its position. At the same time
encouragement was given to that section of Egyptian society which sought
the reform of various Moslem institutions without injury to the
principles underlying the faith of Islam: a more truly national movement
than that of the agitators who clamoured for parliamentary government.


  Resignation of Lord Cromer.

In April 1907, a few days after the appearance of his report for 1906,
in which the "Nationalist" and pan-Islamic movements were shown to be
detrimental to the welfare of Egypt, Lord Cromer resigned his post of
British agent and consul-general. His resignation, dictated by reasons
of health, was described by Sir Edward Grey as "the greatest personal
loss which the public service of this country (Britain) could suffer."
Lord Cromer's work was in a sense complete. He left the country in a
state of unexampled material prosperity, free from the majority of the
international fetters with which it was bound when he took up his task
in 1883, and with the legitimate expectation that the work he had done
would endure. The magnitude of the task he had accomplished is shown by
the preceding pages, and it need only be added that the transformation
effected in Egypt and the Sudan, during his twenty-four years' occupancy
of the British Agency, was carried out in every department under his
guidance and inspiration. Lord Cromer was succeeded by Sir Eldon Gorst,
who had served in Egypt eighteen years under him, and was at the time of
his appointment to Cairo an assistant under secretary of state for
foreign affairs.

Notwithstanding, or, rather, as a consequence of, the unexampled
material prosperity of the country, 1907 was a year of severe financial
crisis, due to over-trading, excessive credit and the building mania
induced by the rapid economic progress of Egypt, and aggravated by the
unfavourable monetary conditions existing in America and Europe during
the latter part of the year. Though the crisis had results disastrous to
the speculators, the position of the fellahin was hardly affected; the
cotton crop was marketed with regularity and at an average price higher
than that of 1906, while public revenue showed a satisfactory increase.
The noisy "Nationalist" agitation which was maintained during this
period of financial stringency reacted unfavourably on public order.
Although the degree of insecurity prevailing in the provinces was
greatly exaggerated--serious crime in 1907 being less than in the
preceding year--an increasing number of crimes were left untraced to
their authors. The release of the Denshawai prisoners in January 1908
and the death of Mustafa Kamel in the following month had a quieting
effect on the public mind; while the fact that in the elections
(December 1907) for the legislative council and the general assembly
only 5% of the electors went to the polls, afforded a striking
commentary alike on the appreciation of the average Egyptian of the
value of parliamentary institutions and of the claims of the
"Nationalist" members of the assembly to represent the Egyptian people.
The "Nationalists" were, too, divided into many warring
sections--Mahommed Bey Ferid, chosen as successor to Mustafa Kamel, had
to contend with the pretensions of several other "leaders." The khedive,
moreover, markedly abstained from any association with the agitation of
the Nationalists, who viewed with disfavour his highness's personal
friendship with Sir Eldon Gorst. The agitators gained their chief
strength from the support accorded them by certain Radical politicians
in England. A number of members of the council and assembly visited
England in July 1908 and were received by Sir Edward Grey, who gave them
assurances that Great Britain would always strive to remedy the
legitimate grievances of Egyptians.

The establishment of constitutional rule in Turkey in the summer of 1908
excited the hopes of the Egyptian Nationalists, and a deputation was
sent to Constantinople to confer with the Young Turk committee. From the
Young Turks, however, the deputation received no encouragement for their
agitation and returned with the advice to work in co-operation with the
British. In view of the rumours current, Sir Eldon Gorst, in the form of
an interview in _El Mokattam_, a widely read native paper, restated
(October 1908) the British view as to the occupation of the country and
the demand for a parliament. Great Britain, he declared, had no
intention of proclaiming a protectorate over Egypt; on the other hand,
recent events in Turkey in no way affected the question of
self-government in Egypt. It would be folly to think of introducing
unrestricted parliamentary government at present, the conditions for its
successful working not existing. The "wild and foolish" agitation on
this question only served to confirm the impression that the Egyptians
were not yet fit to govern themselves. At the same time steps were being
taken to give them a much greater part in the management of local
affairs. If the Egyptians showed that the existing institutions and the
new provincial councils could do useful work, it would prove the best
argument for extending their powers. Sir Eldon Gorst's statements were
approved by the British government.

In November 1908 Mustafa Fehmi, who had been premier since 1895,
resigned, and was succeeded by Boutros Pasha, a Copt of marked ability,
who had been for several years foreign minister. Boutros incurred the
enmity of the "Nationalists" and was murdered in February 1910.
     (D. M. W.; F. R. C.)

  AUTHORITIES.--D. A. Cameron, _Egypt in the Nineteenth Century_
  (London, 1898), a clear and useful summary of events up to 1882; E.
  Dicey, _The Story of the Khedivate_ (London, 1902); J. C. McCoan,
  _Egypt under Ismail_ (London, 1899); P. Mouriez, _Histoire de
  Mehemet-Ali_ (4 vols., Paris, 1855-1858); L. Brehier, _L'Egypte de
  1789 a 1900_ (Paris, 1901); C. de Freycinet, _La Question d'Egypte_
  (Paris, 1905). See also MEHEMET ALI.

  For the period immediately preceding and during the British occupation
  the standard authority is Lord Cromer's _Modern Egypt_ (2 vols.,
  London, 1908). In this invaluable work the history of Egypt from 1875
  to 1892 and that of the Anglo-Egyptian Sudan from 1882 to 1907 is
  treated fully. Lord Cromer's annual reports (1888-1906) to the British
  government on the affairs of Egypt should also be consulted. Next in
  interest are Alfred (Lord) Milner's _England in Egypt_ (11th ed.,
  London, 1904), and Sir A. Colvin's _The Making of Modern Egypt_
  (London, 1906). Consult also _Khedives and Pashas_ (London, 1884), by
  C. F. Moberly Bell (published anonymously); D. M. Wallace, _Egypt and
  the Egyptian Question_ (London, 1883); W. S. Blunt, _Secret History of
  the English Occupation of Egypt_ (2nd ed., London, 1907), a partisan
  record; C. v. Malortie, _Egypt_, _Native Rulers and Foreign
  Interference_, 2 vols. (London, 1883); O. Borelli, _Choses politiques
  d'Egypte_, 1883-1895 (Paris, 1895); H. Resener, _Agypten unter
  englischer Okkupation_ (Berlin, 1896). Morley's _Life of Gladstone_
  and Fitzmaurice's _Life of Granville_ throw considerable light on the
  inner history of the period 1880-1893. See further the historical
  works cited in SUDAN: _Anglo-Egyptian_, and those given at the end of
  the first section of this article.

  For military operations 1882-1899 see C. Royle, _The Egyptian
  Campaigns 1882 to 1899_, revised ed. (London, 1900); H. Brackenbury,
  _Narrative of the Advance of the River Column of the Nile
  Expeditionary Force_ (Edinburgh, 1885); Sir W. F. Butler, _Campaign of
  the Cataracts_ (London, 1887); Count A. E. W. Gleichen, _With the
  Camel Corps up the Nile_ (London, 1888); _Gordon's Last Journal_
  (London, 1885); Sir C. W. Wilson, _From Korti to Khartum_ (Edinburgh,
  1886); J. Grant, _Cassell's History of the War in the Soudan_, 6 vols.
  (London, 1885 et seq.); "An Officer," _Sudan Campaigns_ 1896-1899
  (London, 1899); G. W. Steevens, _With Kitchener to Khartum_
  (Edinburgh, 1898); W. S. Churchill, _The River War_, new edition
  (London, 1902).

  Bibliographical notes for each section of this article are given in
  their several places. The following bibliographies may be consulted:
  Ibrahim Hilmi, _Literature of Egypt and the Soudan_, 2 vols. (London,
  1886-1888); H. Jolowicz, _Bibliotheca aegyptiaca_ (Leipzig, 1858;
  supplement, 1861); M. Hartmann, _The Arabic Press of Egypt_ (London,
  1899).     (F. R. C.)


MILITARY OPERATIONS OF 1882-1885

  Bombardment of Alexandria.

In February 1879 a slight outbreak of discharged officers and soldiers
occurred at Cairo, which led to the despatch of British and French ships
to Alexandria. On the 26th of June of that year Ismail Pasha was removed
from Egypt, and Tewfik assumed the khediviate, becoming practically the
_protege_ of the two western powers. On the 1st of February 1881 a more
serious disturbance arose at Cairo from the attempt to try three
colonels, Ahmed Arabi, Ali Fehmy, and Abd-el-Al, who had been arrested
as the ringleaders of the military party. The prisoners were released by
force, and proceeded to dictate terms to the khedive. Again British and
French warships were despatched to Alexandria, and were quickly
withdrawn, their presence having produced no apparent impression. It
soon became clear that the khedive was powerless, and that the military
party, headed by Arabi, threatened to dominate the country. The "dual
note," communicated to the khedive on the 6th of January 1881, contained
an intimation that Great Britain and France were prepared to afford
material support if necessary; but the fall of Gambetta's ministry
produced a reaction, and both governments proceeded to minimize the
meaning of their language. The khedive was practically compelled to form
a government in which Arabi was minister of war and Mahmud Sami premier,
and Arabi took steps to extend his influence throughout his army. The
situation now became critically serious: for the third time ships were
sent to Alexandria, and on the 25th of May 1882 the consuls-general of
the two powers made a strong representation to Mahmud Sami which
produced the resignation of the Egyptian ministry, and a demand, to
which the khedive yielded, by the military party for the reinstatement
of Arabi. The attitude of the troops in Alexandria now became
threatening; and on the 29th the British residents pointed out that they
were "absolutely defenceless." This warning was amply justified by the
massacres of the 11th of June, during which more than one hundred
persons, including an officer and two seamen, were killed in the streets
of Alexandria, almost under the guns of the ships in harbour. It was
becoming clear that definite action would have to be taken, and on the
15th the channel squadron was ordered to Malta. By the end of June
twenty-six warships, representing the navies of Great Britain, France,
Germany, Italy, Austria, Russia, the United States, Spain, Greece and
Turkey, lay off the port of Alexandria, and large numbers of refugees
were embarked. The order received by Admiral Sir Beauchamp Seymour
(afterwards Lord Alcester) on the 3rd of July was as follows:--

  "Prevent any attempt to bar channel into port. If work is resumed on
  earthworks, or fresh guns mounted, inform military commander that you
  have orders to prevent it; and if not immediately discontinued,
  destroy earthworks and silence batteries if they open fire, having
  given sufficient notice to population, shipping and foreign
  men-of-war."

On the 9th the admiral received a report that working parties had been
seen in Fort Silsileh "parbuckling two smoothbore guns--apparently
32-pounders--towards their respective carriages and slides, which were
facing in the direction of the harbour." Fort Silsileh was an old work
at the extreme east of the defences of Alexandria, and its guns do not
bear on the harbour. On the 10th an ultimatum was sent to Toulba Pasha,
the military commandant, intimating that the bombardment would commence
at sunrise on the following morning unless "the batteries on the isthmus
of Ras-el-Tin and the southern shore of the harbour of Alexandria" were
previously surrendered "for the purpose of disarming." The fleet
prepared for action, and the bearer of the reply, signed by the
president of the council, and offering to dismount three guns in the
batteries named, only succeeded in finding the flagship late at night.
This proposal was rejected, and at 7 A.M. on the 11th of July the
"Alexandra" opened fire and the action became general. The attacking
force was disposed in three groups: (1) the "Alexandra," "Sultan" and
"Superb," outside the reef, to engage the Ras-el-Tin and the earthworks
under weigh; (2) the "Monarch," "Invincible" and "Penelope," inside the
harbour, to engage the Meks batteries; and (3) the "Inflexible" and
"Temeraire," to take up assigned stations outside the reef and to
co-operate with the inshore squadron. The gunboats "Beacon," "Bittern,"
"Condor," "Cygnet" and "Decoy" were to keep out of fire at first and
seek opportunities of engaging the Meks batteries. Meks fort was
silenced by about 12.45 P.M., and a party from the "Invincible" landed
and disabled the guns. As the fire delivered under weigh was not
effective, the offshore squadron anchored at about 10.30 A.M., and
succeeded in silencing Fort Ras-el-Tin at about 12.30 P.M., and Fort
Adda, by the explosion of the main magazine, at 1.35 P.M. The
"Inflexible" weighed soon after 8 A.M. and engaged Ras-el-Tin,
afterwards attacking Forts Pharos and Adda. The "Condor," followed by
the "Beacon," "Bittern" and "Decoy," engaged Fort Marabout soon after 8
A.M. till 11 A.M., when the gunboats were recalled. After the works were
silenced, the ships moved in closer, with a view to dismount the
Egyptian guns. The bombardment ceased at 5 P.M.; but a few rounds were
fired by the "Inflexible" and "Temeraire" on the morning of the 12th at
the right battery in Ras-el-Tin lines.

  The bombardment of the forts of Alexandria is interesting as a gauge
  of the effect to be expected from the fire of ships under specially
  favourable conditions. The Egyptians at different times during the day
  brought into action about 33 R.M.L. guns (7-in. to 10-in.), 3 R.B.L.
  guns (40 prs.), and 120 S.B. guns (6.5-in. and 10-in.), with a few
  mortars. These guns were disposed over a coast-line of about 10 sea
  miles, and were in many cases indifferently mounted. The Egyptian
  gunners had been little trained, and many of them had never once
  practised with rifled ordnance. Of seventy-five hits on the hulls of
  the ships only five can with certainty be ascribed to projectiles from
  rifled guns, and thirty were unquestionably due to the old
  smoothbores, which were not provided with sights. The total loss
  inflicted was 6 killed and 27 wounded. The British ships engaged fired
  1741 heavy projectiles (7-in. to 16-in.) and 1457 light (7-prs. to
  64-prs.), together with 33,493 machine-gun and rifle bullets. The
  result was comparatively small. About 8 rifled guns and 19 smoothbores
  were dismounted or disabled and 4 and 1 temporarily put out of action
  respectively. A considerable portion of this injury was inflicted,
  after the works had been silenced, by the deliberate fire of the
  ships. As many as twenty-eight rifled guns and 140 smoothbores would
  have opened fire on the following day. The Egyptians made quite as
  good a stand as could be expected, but were driven from their guns,
  which they were unable to use with adequate effect; and the
  bombardment of Alexandria confirms previous experience that the fire
  of ships cannot really compete with that of well-mounted and
  well-handled guns on shore.

In the afternoon of the 12th, fires, which were the work of
incendiaries, began to break out in the best quarters of Alexandria; and
the town was left to murder and pillage till the following day, when a
party of bluejackets and marines was landed at about 3 P.M.


  British expedition under Sir Garnet Wolseley.

  Tell-el-Kebir.

Military intervention being now imperatively demanded, a vote of credit
for L2,300,000 was passed in the British House of Commons on the 27th of
July. Five days later the French government failed to secure a similar
vote, and Great Britain was left to deal with the Egyptian question
alone. An expeditionary force detailed from home stations and from
Malta was organized in two divisions, with a cavalry division, corps
troops, and a siege train, numbering in all about 25,000 men. An Indian
contingent numbering about 7000 combatants, complete in all arms and
with its own transport, was prepared for despatch to Suez. General Sir
Garnet Wolseley was appointed commander-in-chief, with
Lieutenant-General Sir J. Adye as chief of the staff. The plan of
operations contemplated the seizure of Ismailia as the base for an
advance on Cairo, Alexandria and its suburbs to be held defensively, and
the Egyptian forces in the neighbourhood to be occupied by
demonstrations. The expeditionary force having rendezvoused at
Alexandria, means were taken by Rear-Admiral Hoskins and Sir W. Hewett
for the seizure of the Suez canal. Under orders from the former, Captain
Fairfax, R.N., occupied Port Said on the night of 19th August, and
Commander Edwards, R.N., proceeded down the canal, taking possession of
the _gares_ and dredgers, while Captain Fitzroy, R.N., occupied Ismailia
after slight opposition. Before nightfall on the 20th of August the
canal was wholly in British hands. Meanwhile, leaving Sir E. Hamley in
command at Alexandria, Sir G. Wolseley with the bulk of the
expeditionary force arrived at Port Said on the 20th of August, a naval
demonstration having been made at Abukir with a view to deceive the
enemy as to the object of the great movement in progress. The advance
from Ismailia now began. On the 21st Major-General Graham moved from
Ismailia with about 800 men and a small naval force, occupying Nefiche,
the junction with the Suez line, at 1.30 A.M. without opposition. On the
22nd he made a reconnaissance towards Suez, and on the 23rd another to
El-Magfar, 4 m. from Nefiche. It now appeared that the enemy had dammed
the sweet-water canal and blocked the railway at Tell-el-Mahuta, where
entrenchments had been thrown up and resistance seemed to be
contemplated. At 4 A.M. on the 24th Sir Garnet Wolseley advanced with 3
squadrons of cavalry, 2 guns, and about 1000 infantry, placed under the
orders of Lieutenant-General Willis. The enemy showed in force,
estimated at 7000 with 12 guns, and a somewhat desultory action ensued.
Reinforcements from Ismailia were ordered up, and the British cavalry,
operating on the right, helped to check the enemy's attack, which showed
little vigour. At night the troops, now reinforced by the Guards
Brigade, an infantry battalion, 2 cavalry regiments and 10 guns,
bivouacked on the ground. Early on the morning of the 25th the advance
was continued to Tell-el-Mahuta, which the enemy evacuated, while the
mounted troops and horse artillery pressed on to Mahsama, capturing the
Egyptian camp, with 7 guns and large quantities of ammunition and
supplies. On the same evening Major-General Graham, with about 1200
marines (artillery and light infantry), reached Mahsama, and on the
following day he occupied Kassassin without opposition. The advance
guard had now outrun its communications and was actually short of food,
while a considerable force was distributed at intervals along the line
Ismailia-Kassassin. The situation on the 27th tempted attack by an
enterprising enemy, and Major-General Graham's force, consisting of a
squadron of the 19th Hussars, the York and Lancaster Regiment, the duke
of Cornwall's Light Infantry, the Marine Artillery Battalion and two
R.H.A. guns, short of ammunition, was in danger of being overwhelmed by
vastly superior numbers from Tell-el-Kebir. On the 28th Major-General
Graham's troops were attacked, and after repulsing the enemy, made a
general advance about 6.45 P.M. The cavalry, summoned by heliograph from
Mahsama, co-operated, and in a moonlight charge inflicted considerable
loss. The British casualties amounted to 14 killed and 83 wounded.
During the lull which followed the first action of Kassassin, strenuous
efforts were made to bring up supplies and troops and to open up railway
communication to the front. On the 9th of September the Egyptians again
attacked Kassassin, but were completely repulsed by 9 A.M., with a loss
of 4 guns, and were pursued to within extreme range of the guns of
Tell-el-Kebir. The British casualties were 3 killed and 78 wounded. The
three following days were occupied in concentrating troops at Kassassin
for the attack on Tell-el-Kebir, held by about 38,000 men with 60 guns.
The Egyptian defences consisted of a long line of trench (2-1/2 m.)
approximately at right angles to the railway and the sweet-water canal.
At 11 P.M. on the 12th of September the advance of about 15,000 men
commenced; the 1st division, under Lieutenant-General Willis, was on the
right, and the 2nd division, under Lieutenant-General Hamley, was on the
left. Seven batteries of artillery, under Brigadier-General Goodenough,
were placed in the centre. The cavalry, under Major-General Drury Lowe,
was on the right flank, and the Indian contingent, under Major-General
Macpherson, starting one hour later, was ordered to move south of the
sweet-water canal. The night was moonless, and the distance to be
covered about 6-1/4 m. The ground was perfectly open, slightly
undulating, and generally firm gravel. The conditions for a night march
were thus ideal; but during the movement the wings closed towards each
other, causing great risk of an outbreak of firing. The line was,
however, rectified, and after a halt the final advance began. By a
fortunate accident the isolated outwork was just missed in the darkness
by the left flank of the 2nd Division; otherwise a premature alarm would
have been given, which must have changed all the conditions of the
operation. At dawn the Highland Brigade of the 2nd Division struck the
enemy's trenches, and carried them after a brief struggle. The 1st
Division attacked a few minutes later, and the cavalry swept round the
left of the line of entrenchments, cutting down any fugitives who
attempted resistance and reaching the enemy's camp in rear. The Indian
contingent, on the south of the canal, co-operated, intercepting the
Egyptians at the canal bridge. The opposition encountered at some points
was severe, but by 6 A.M. all resistance was at an end. The British loss
amounted to 58 killed, 379 wounded and 22 missing; nearly 2000 Egyptians
were killed, and more than 500 wounded were treated in hospital. An
immediate pursuit was ordered, and the Indian contingent, under
Major-General Macpherson, reached Zagazig, while the cavalry, under
Major-General Drury Lowe, occupied Belbeis and pushed on to Cairo, 65 m.
from Tell-el-Kebir, next day. On the evening of the 14th the 10,000
troops occupying Abbasia barracks, and 5000 in the citadel of Cairo,
surrendered. On the 15th General Sir Garnet Wolseley, with the brigade
of Guards under H.R.H. the duke of Connaught, entered the city.

The prompt following up of the victory at Tell-el-Kebir saved Cairo from
the fate of Alexandria and brought the rebellion to an end. The Egyptian
troops at Kafr Dauar, Abukir and Rosetta surrendered without opposition,
and those at Damietta followed on the 23rd of September, after being
threatened with attack. On the 25th the khedive entered Cairo, where a
review of the British troops was held on the 30th. The expeditionary
force was now broken up, leaving about 10,000 men, under Major-General
Sir A. Alison, to maintain the authority of the khedive. In twenty-five
days, from the landing at Ismailia to the occupation of Cairo, the
rebellion was completely suppressed, and the operations were thus
signally successful.


  The Sudan question.

The authority of the khedive and the maintenance of law and order now
depended absolutely on the British forces left in occupation. Lord
Dufferin, who had been sent to Cairo to draw up a project of
constitutional reforms, advocated the re-establishment of a native army,
not to exceed 5000 to 6000 men, with a proportion of British officers,
for purely defence purposes within the Delta; and on the 13th of
December 1882 Sir Evelyn Wood left England to undertake the organization
of this force, with the title of sirdar. Lord Dufferin further advised
the formation of a gendarmerie, which "should be in a great measure a
mounted force and empowered with a semi-military character" (despatch of
January 1st, 1883). The strength of this military police force was fixed
at 4400 men with 2562 horses, and Baker Pasha (General Valentine Baker)
was entrusted with its formation, with the title of inspector-general.

In a despatch of the 6th of February 1883 Lord Dufferin dealt with the
Sudan, and stated that Egypt "could hardly be expected to acquiesce" in
a policy of withdrawal from her Southern territories. At the same time
he pointed out that,

  "Unhappily, Egyptian administration in the Sudan had been almost
  uniformly unfortunate. The success of the present mahdi in raising the
  tribes and extending his influence over great tracts of country was a
  sufficient proof of the government's inability either to reconcile the
  inhabitants to its rule or to maintain order. The consequences had
  been most disastrous. Within the last year and a half the Egyptians
  had lost something like 9000 men, while it was estimated that 40,000
  of their opponents had perished."

Moreover, to restore tranquillity in the Sudan,

  "the first step necessary was the construction of a railway from
  Suakin to Berber, or what, perhaps, would be more advisable, to
  Shendi, on the Nile. The completion of this enterprise would at once
  change all the elements of the problem."


  Disaster to Hicks Pasha.

The immense responsibilities involved were most imperfectly understood
by the British government. Egyptian sovereignty in the Sudan dates from
1820, when Mehemet Ali sent a large force into the country, and
ultimately established his authority over Sennar and Kordofan. In 1865
Suakin and Massawa were assigned to Egyptian rule by the sultan, and in
1870 Sir Samuel Baker proceeded up the Nile to the conquest of the
Equatorial provinces, of which General Gordon was appointed
governor-general in 1874. In the same year Darfur and Harrar were
annexed, and in 1877 Gordon became governor-general of the Sudan, where,
with the valuable assistance of Gessi Pasha, he laboured to destroy the
slave trade and to establish just government. In August 1879 he returned
to Cairo, and was succeeded by Raouf Pasha. Misrule and oppression in
every form now again prevailed throughout the Sudan, while the slave
traders, exasperated by Gordon's stern measures, were ready to revolt.
The authority of Egypt was represented by scattered garrisons of armed
men, badly officered, undisciplined and largely demoralized. In such
conditions a leader only was required to ensure widespread and dangerous
rebellion. A leader appeared in the person of Mahommed Ahmed, born in
1848, who had taken up his abode on Abba Island, and, acquiring great
reputation for sanctity, had actively fomented insurrection. In August
1881 a small force sent by Raouf Pasha to arrest Mahommed Ahmed was
destroyed, and the latter, proclaiming himself the mahdi, stood forth as
the champion of revolt. Thus, at the time when the Egyptian army was
broken up at Tell-el-Kebir, the Sudan was already in flames. On the 7th
of June 1882, 6000 men under Yusef Pasha, advancing from Fashoda, were
nearly annihilated by the mahdists. Payara and Birket in Kordofan
quickly fell, and a few days before the battle of Tell-el-Kebir was
fought, the mahdi, with a large force, was besieging El Obeid. That town
was captured, after an obstinate defence, on the 17th of January 1883,
by which time almost the whole of the Sudan south of Khartum was in open
rebellion, except the Bahr-el-Ghazal and the Equatorial provinces, where
for a time Lupton Bey and Emin Pasha were able to hold their own.
Abd-el-Kader, who had succeeded Raouf, telegraphed to Cairo for 10,000
additional troops, and pointed out that if they were not sent at once
four times this number would be required to re-establish the authority
of the government in the Sudan. After gaining some small successes,
Abd-el-Kader was superseded by Suliman Niagi on the 20th of February
1883, and on the 26th of March Ala-ed-din Pasha was appointed
governor-general. Meanwhile 5000 men, who had served in the Egyptian
army, were collected and forcibly despatched to Khartum via Suakin. In
March 1883 Colonel William Hicks, late of the Bombay army, who in
January had been appointed by the khedive chief of the staff of the army
of the Sudan, found himself at Khartum with nine European officers and
about 10,000 troops of little military value. The reconquest of the
Sudan having been determined upon, although Sir E. Malet reported that
the Egyptian government could not supply the necessary funds, and that
there was great risk of failure, Colonel Hicks, who had resigned his
post on the 23rd of July, and had been appointed commander-in-chief,
started from Khartum on 9th September, with a total force of about
10,000 men, including non-combatants, for Kordofan. On the 22nd of May
Sir E. Malet had informed Sherif Pasha that,

  "although Colonel Hicks finds it convenient to communicate with Lord
  Dufferin or with me, it must not be supposed that we endorse in any
  way the contents of his telegrams.... Her Majesty's government are in
  no way responsible for his operations in the Sudan, which have been
  undertaken under the authority of His Highness's government."

Colonel Hicks was fully aware of the unfitness of his rabble forces for
the contemplated task, and on the 5th of August he telegraphed: "I am
convinced it would be best to keep the two rivers and province of
Sennar, and wait for Kordofan to settle itself." Early in November the
force from Khartum was caught by the mahdists short of water at Kashgil,
near El Obeid, and was almost totally destroyed, Colonel Hicks, with all
his European officers, perishing. Sinister rumours having reached Cairo,
Sir E. Baring (Lord Cromer), who had succeeded Sir E. Malet, telegraphed
that "if Colonel Hicks's army is destroyed, the Egyptian government will
lose the whole of the Sudan, unless some assistance from the outside is
given," and advised the withdrawal to some post on the Nile. On the
following day Lord Granville replied: "We cannot lend English or Indian
troops; if consulted, recommend abandonment of the Sudan within certain
limits"; and on the 25th he added that "Her Majesty's government can do
nothing in the matter which would throw upon them the responsibilities
for operations in the Sudan." In a despatch of the 3rd of December Sir
E. Baring forcibly argued against British intervention in the affairs of
the Sudan, and on the 13th of December Lord Granville telegraphed that
"Her Majesty's government recommend the ministers of khedive to come to
an early decision to abandon all territory south of Assuan, or, at
least, of Wadi Halfa." On the 4th of January 1884 Sir E. Baring was
directed to insist upon the policy of evacuation, and on the 18th
General Gordon left London to assist in its execution.


  Defeat of General Baker.

The year 1883 brought a great accession of power to the mahdi, who had
captured about 20,000 rifles, 19 guns and large stores of ammunition. On
the Red Sea littoral Osman Digna, a slave dealer of Suakin, appointed
amir of the Eastern Sudan, raised the local tribes and invested Sinkat
and Tokar. On the 16th of October and the 4th of November Egyptian
reinforcements intended for the former place were destroyed, and on the
2nd of December a force of 700 men was annihilated near Tamanieb. On the
23rd of December General Valentine Baker, followed by about 2500 men,
gendarmerie, blacks, Sudanese and Turks, with 10 British officers,
arrived at Suakin to prepare for the relief of Sinkat and Tokar. The
khedive appears to have been aware of the risks to be incurred, and in a
private letter he informed the general that "I rely upon your prudence
and ability not to engage the enemy except under the most favourable
circumstances." The tragedy of Kashgil was repeated on the 4th of
February 1884, when General Baker's heterogeneous force, on the march
from Trinkitat to Tokar, was routed at El Teb by an inferior body of
tribesmen. Of 3715 men, 2375, with 11 European officers, were killed.
Suakin was now in danger, and on the 6th of February British bluejackets
and marines were landed for the defence of the town.


  British expedition under Sir G. Graham: battles of El Teb and Tamanieb.

Two expeditions in the Sudan led by British officers having thus ended
in disaster, and General Gordon with Lieutenant-Colonel J. D. Stewart
having reached Khartum on the 18th of February, the policy of British
non-intervention in regard to Sudan affairs could no longer be
maintained. Public opinion in England was strongly impressed by the fact
that the Egyptian garrisons of Tokar and Sinkat were perishing within
striking distance of the Red Sea littoral. A British force about 4400
strong, with 22 guns, made up of troops from Egypt and from units
detained on passage from India, was rapidly concentrated at Suakin and
placed under the orders of Major-General Sir G. Graham, with
Major-Generals Sir R. Buller and J. Davis as brigadiers. News of the
fall of Sinkat, where the starving garrison, under Tewfik Bey, made a
gallant sortie and was cut to pieces, reached Suakin on the 12th of
February. On the 24th General Graham's force disembarked at Trinkitat
and received information of the surrender of Tokar. At 8 A.M. on the
29th the force advanced towards Tokar in square, and came under fire at
11.20 A.M. from the enemy entrenched at El Teb. The tribesmen made
desperate efforts to rush the square, but were repulsed, and the
position was taken by 2 P.M. The cavalry, 10th and 19th Hussars, under
Brigadier-General Sir H. Stewart, became involved in a charge against an
unbroken enemy, and suffered somewhat severely. The total British loss
was 34 killed and 155 wounded; that of the tribesmen was estimated at
1500 killed. On the following day Tokar was reached, and on the 2nd of
March the force began its return to Suakin, bringing away about 700
people belonging to the late garrison and the civil population, and
destroying 1250 rifles and a quantity of ammunition found in a
neighbouring village. On the 9th of March the whole force was back at
Suakin, and on the evening of the 11th an advance to Tamai began, and
the force bivouacked and formed a zeriba in the evening. Information was
brought by a native that the enemy had assembled in the Khor Ghob, a
deep ravine not far from the zeriba. At about 8.30 A.M. on the 13th the
advance began in echelon of brigade squares from the left. The left and
leading square (2nd Brigade) moved towards the khor, approaching at a
point where a little ravine joined it. The enemy showing in front, the
leading face of the square was ordered to charge up to the edge of the
khor. This opened the square, and a mass of tribesmen rushed in from the
small ravine. The brigade was forced back in disorder, and the naval
guns, which had been left behind, were temporarily captured. After a
severe hand-to-hand struggle, in which the troops behaved with great
gallantry, order was restored and the enemy repulsed, with the aid of
the fire from the 1st Brigade square and from dismounted cavalry. The
1st Brigade square, having a sufficient field of fire, easily repelled
all attempts to attack, and advancing as soon as the situation had been
restored, occupied the village of Tamai. The British loss was 109 killed
and 104 wounded; of the enemy nearly 2000 were killed. On the following
day the force returned to Suakin.

Two heavy blows had now been inflicted on the followers of Osman Digna,
and the road to Berber could have been opened, as General Graham and
Brigadier-General Sir H. Stewart suggested. General Gordon, questioned
on the point, telegraphed from Khartum, on the 7th of March, that he
might be cut off by a rising at Shendi, adding, "I think it, therefore,
most important to follow up the success near Suakin by sending a small
force to Berber." He had previously, on the 29th of February, urged that
the Suakin-Berber road should be opened up by Indian troops. This, and
General Gordon's proposal to send 200 British troops to Wadi Halfa, was
opposed by Sir E. Baring, who, realizing soon afterwards the gravity of
the situation, telegraphed on the 16th of March:--

  "It has now become of the utmost importance not only to open the road
  between Suakin and Berber, but to come to terms with the tribes
  between Berber and Khartum."

The government refused to take this action, and Major-General Graham's
force was employed in reconnaissances and small skirmishes, ending in
the destruction of the villages in the Tamanieb valley on 27th March. On
the 28th the whole force was reassembled at Suakin, and was then broken
up, leaving one battalion to garrison the town.


  Entanglement of General Gordon at Khartum.

The abrupt disappearance of the British troops encouraged the tribesmen
led by Osman Digna, and effectually prevented the formation of a native
movement, which might have been of great value. The first attempt at
intervention in the affairs of the Sudan was made too late to save
Sinkat and Tokar. It resulted only in heavy slaughter of the tribesmen,
which afforded no direct or indirect aid to General Gordon or to the
policy of evacuation. The public announcement of the latter was a grave
mistake, which increased General Gordon's difficulties, and the
situation at Khartum grew steadily worse. On the 24th of March Sir E.
Baring telegraphed:--

  "The question now is, how to get General Gordon and Colonel Stewart
  away from Khartum.... Under present circumstances, I think an effort
  should be made to help General Gordon from Suakin, if it is at all a
  possible military operation.... We all consider that, however
  difficult the operations from Suakin may be, they are more practicable
  than any operations from Korosko and along the Nile."

A telegram from General Gordon, received at Cairo on the 19th of April,
stated that

  "We have provisions for five months and are hemmed in.... Our position
  will be much strengthened when the Nile rises.... Sennar, Kassala and
  Dongola are quite safe for the present."

At the same time he suggested "an appeal to the millionaires of America
and England" to subscribe money for the cost of "2000 or 3000 nizams"
(Turkish regulars) to be sent to Berber. A cloud now settled down upon
Khartum, and subsequent communications were few and irregular. The
foreign office and General Gordon appeared to be somewhat at cross
purposes. The former hoped that the garrisons of the Sudan could be
extricated without fighting. The latter, judging from the tenor of some
of his telegrams, believed that to accomplish this work entailed the
suppression of the mahdi's revolt, the strength of which he at first
greatly underestimated. He had pressed strongly for the employment of
Zobeir as "an absolute necessity for success" (3rd of March); but this
was refused, since Sir H. Gordon advised at this time that it would be
dangerous. On the 9th of March General Gordon proposed, "if the
immediate evacuation of Khartum is determined upon irrespective of
outlying towns," to send down the "Cairo _employes_" and the garrison to
Berber with Lieutenant-Colonel J. D. Stewart, to resign his commission,
and to proceed with the stores and the steamers to the equatorial
provinces, which he would consider as placed under the king of the
Belgians. On the 13th of March Lord Granville gave full power to General
Gordon to "evacuate Khartum and save that garrison by conducting it
himself to Berber without delay," and expressed a hope that he would not
resign his commission.


  Relief expedition: question of route.

By the end of March 1884 Sir E. Baring and the British officers in Egypt
were convinced that force would have to be employed, and the growing
danger of General Gordon, with the grave national responsibility
involved, began to be realized in Great Britain. Sir Henry Gordon,
however, who was in personal communication with Mr Gladstone, considered
that his brother was in no peril, and for some time disbelieved in the
need for a relief expedition. Meanwhile it was at least necessary to
evolve some plan of action, and on the 8th of April the adjutant-general
addressed a memorandum to the secretary of state for war detailing the
measures required for placing 6500 British troops "in the neighbourhood
of Shendi." The battle of the routes began much earlier, and was
continued for some months. Practically the choice lay between the Nile
and the Suakin-Berber road. The first involved a distance of 1650 m.
from Cairo along a river strewn with cataracts, which obstructed
navigation to all but small boats, except during the period of high
water. So great was this obstruction that the Nile had never been a
regular trade route to the Sudan. The second entailed a desert march of
about 250 m., of which one section, Obak-Bir Mahoba (52 m.), was
waterless, and the rest had an indifferent water supply (except at
Ariab, about half-way to Berber), capable, however, of considerable
development. From Berber the Nile is followed (210 m.) to Khartum. This
was an ancient trade route with the Sudan, and had been used without
difficulty by the reinforcements sent to Hicks Pasha in 1883, which were
accompanied by guns on wheels. The authorities in Egypt, headed by
General Stephenson, subsequently supported by the Admiral Lord John Hay,
who sent a naval officer to examine the river as far as Dongola, were
unanimous in favour of the Suakin-Berber route. From the first
Major-General Sir A. Clarke, then inspector-general of fortifications,
strongly urged this plan, and proposed to begin at once a metre gauge
railway from Suakin, to be constructed by Indian labour under officers
skilled in laying desert lines. Some preliminary arrangements were made,
and on the 14th of June the government sanctioned certain measures of
preparation at Suakin. On the other side were the adjutant-general (Lord
Wolseley) and a small number of officers who had taken part in the Red
River expedition of 1870. The memorandum of the adjutant-general above
referred to was based on the hypothesis that Khartum could not hold out
beyond the 15th of November, and that the expedition should reach Berber
by the 20th of October. Steamers were to be employed in such reaches as
proved practicable, but the force was to be conveyed in special
whale-boats, by which "the difficulty of transport is reduced to very
narrow limits." The mounted force was to consist of 400 men on native
horses and 450 men on horses or camels. The question of routes continued
to be the subject of animated discussion, and on the 29th of July a
committee of three officers who had served in the Red River expedition
reported:--

  "We believe that a brigade can easily be conveyed in small boats from
  Cairo to Dongola in the time stated by Lord Wolseley; and, further,
  that should it be necessary to send a still larger force by water to
  Khartum, that operation will present no insuperable difficulties."


  Lord Wolseley sent out; Nile route adopted.

This most inconclusive report, and the baseless idea that the adoption
of the Nile route would involve no chance of bloodshed, which the
government was anxious to avoid, seem to have decided the question. On
the 8th of August the secretary of state for war informed General
Stephenson that "the time had arrived when some further measures for
obtaining accurate information as to his (General Gordon's) position,
and, if necessary, for tendering him assistance, should be adopted."
General Stephenson still urged the Suakin-Berber route, and was informed
on the 26th of August that Lord Wolseley would be appointed to take over
the command in Egypt for the purposes of the expedition, for which a
vote of credit had been taken in the House of Commons on the 5th of
August. On the 9th of September Lord Wolseley arrived at Cairo, and the
plan of operations was somewhat modified. A camel corps of 1100 men
selected from twenty-eight regiments at home was added, and the
"fighting force to be placed in line somewhere in the neighbourhood of
Shendi" was fixed at 5400. The construction of whale-boats began on the
12th of August, and the first batch arrived at Wadi Halfa on the 14th of
October, and on the 25th the first boat was hauled through the second
cataract. The mounted forces proceeded up the banks, and the first
half-battalion embarked at Gemai, 870 m. from Khartum, on the 5th of
November, ten days before the date to which it had been assumed General
Gordon could hold out. In a straggling procession the boats worked their
way up to Korti, piloted by Canadian _voyageurs_. The labour was very
great, and the troops, most of whom were having their first lesson in
rowing, bore the privations of their unaccustomed conditions with
admirable cheerfulness. By the 25th of December 2220 men had reached
Korti, of whom about 800 only had been conveyed by the whale-boats, the
last of which did not arrive till the 27th of January. Beyond Korti lay
the very difficult section of the river to Abu Hamed, which was quite
unknown. Meanwhile news of the loss of the "Abbas" and of the murder of
Colonel J. D. Stewart and his party on the 18th of September had been
received. A letter from Gordon, dated the 4th of November and received
on the 17th of November, stated that his steamers would await the
expedition at Metemma, and added, "We can hold out forty days with ease;
after that it will be difficult." In his diary, on the 13th of December,
when his difficulties had become extreme, he noted that "if the
expeditionary force does not come in ten days, the town may fall."


  Stewart's Desert Column; battle of Abu Klea wells.

  Failure of relief expedition.

It was clear at Korti that something must be done at once; and on the
13th of December 1100 men, with 2200 camels, under General Sir H.
Stewart, were despatched to occupy Jakdul wells, 96 m. on the desert
route to Metemma. Stewart returned on the 5th of January, and started
again on the 8th, with orders to establish a fort at Abu Klea and to
occupy Metemma. The Desert Column, 1800 men, with 2880 camels in poor
condition and 153 horses, found the enemy in possession of Abu Klea
wells on the 16th, and was desperately attacked on the 17th. The want
of homogeneity of the force, and the unaccustomed tactics imposed upon
the cavalry, somewhat hampered the defence, and the square was broken at
the left rear corner. Driven back upon the camels in the centre, the
troops fought hand to hand with the greatest gallantry. Order was
quickly restored, and the attack was repulsed, with a loss of 74 killed
and 94 wounded. At least 1100 of the enemy were killed. The wells being
occupied and a zeriba formed, the column started on the evening of the
18th. The wrong road was taken, and great confusion occurred, during the
night, but at dawn this was rectified; and after forming a rough fort
under fire, by which General Sir H. Stewart was fatally wounded, an
advance was made at 3 P.M. The square was again heavily attacked, but
the Arabs could not get to close quarters and in the evening a bivouac
was formed on the Nile. The British losses on this day were 23 killed
and 98 wounded. The Desert Column was now greatly exhausted. On the 20th
the village of Gubat was occupied; and on the following day Sir C.
Wilson, on whom the command had devolved, advanced against Metemma,
which was found too strong to assault. On this day General Gordon's four
steamers arrived; and on the morning of the 24th Sir C. Wilson, with 20
British soldiers in red coats and about 280 Sudanese, started in the
"Bordein" and "Telahawiyeh" for Khartum. The "Bordein" grounded on the
following day, and again on the 26th, by which twenty-four hours were
lost. At 11 A.M. on the 28th Khartum was sighted, and it soon became
clear that the town was in the hands of the enemy. After reconnoitring
farther, the steamers turned and proceeded down stream under a heavy
fire, the Sudanese crews showing signs of disaffection. The
"Telahawiyeh" was wrecked on the 29th of January and the "Bordein" on
the 31st, Sir C. Wilson's party being rescued on the 4th of February by
Lord C. Beresford in the "Safieh," which had come up from Gubat on
receipt of news carried there by Lieutenant Stuart Wortley in a
row-boat. Khartum had been taken and General Gordon killed on the
morning of the 26th of January 1885, having thus held out thirty-four
days beyond the date when he had expected the end. The garrison had been
reduced to starvation; and the arrival of twenty British soldiers, with
orders to return at once, could not have affected the situation. The
situation of the Desert Column and of its transport was most imperfectly
understood at Korti, where impossible plans were formed. Fortunately
Major-General Sir R. Buller, who arrived at Gubat on the 11th of
February, decided upon withdrawal, thus averting impending disaster, and
by the 16th of March the Desert Column had returned to Korti.

The advance from Korti of the River Column, under Major-General Earle,
began on the 28th of December, and great difficulties of navigation were
encountered. On the 10th of February an action was fought at Kirbekan
with about 800 of the enemy, entailing a loss of 10 killed, including
Major-General Earle, and 47 wounded. The column, now commanded by
Brigadier-General Brackenbury, continued its slow advance, and on the
morning of the 24th of February it was about 26 m. below Abu Hamed, a
point where the Korosko desert route strikes the Nile, 350 m. from
Khartum. Here it received orders to retire, and it reached Korti on the
8th of March.


  Suakin operations.

The verbal message received from General Gordon on the 30th of December
1884 rendered the extreme danger of the position at Khartum painfully
apparent, and the secretary of state for war, acting on Sir E. Baring's
advice, offered to make an active demonstration from Suakin. To this
proposal Lord Wolseley demurred, but asked that ships of war should be
sent to Suakin, and that "marines in red coats should be frequently
landed and exercised." Lord Hartington replied that the government did
not consider that a demonstration of this kind could be effective, and
again suggested stronger measures. On the 8th of January 1885 Lord
Wolseley repeated that "the measures you propose will not assist my
operations against Khartum," adding:--

  "I have from first endeavoured to impress on government that I am
  strong enough to relieve Khartum, and believe in being able to send a
  force, when returning by way of Berber, to Suakin, to open road and
  crush Osman Digna."

On this very day the small Desert Column started from Korti on its
hazardous mission to the relief of a town fully 270 m. distant, held by
a starving garrison, and invested by 30,000 fighting men, mostly armed
with good rifles. Before reaching the Nile the Desert Column had lost
300 men and was unable to take Metemma, while its transport had
completely broken down. On the 8th of February Lord Wolseley
telegraphed, "The sooner you can now deal with Osman Digna the better,"
and recommended the despatch of Indian troops to Suakin, to "co-operate
with me in keeping road to Berber open." On the 11th of February, the
day on which Sir R. Buller most wisely decided to withdraw the Desert
Column from a position of extreme danger, it was determined at Korti
that the River Column should proceed to attack Berber, and Lord Wolseley
accepted the proposal of the government to make a railway from Suakin,
telegraphing to Lord Harrington:--

  "By all means make railway by contract to Berber, or as far as you
  can, during summer. It will be invaluable as a means of supply, and I
  recommend it being begun immediately. Contract to be, if possible, for
  so much per ton military stores and supplies and men carried, per
  mile."


  Battle of Hashin.

Every effort was now concentrated upon sending an expeditionary force to
Suakin, and before the end of March about 13,000 men, including a
brigade from India and a field battery from New South Wales, with nearly
7000 camels and 1000 mules, were there assembled. Lieutenant-General Sir
G. Graham was placed in command of this force, with orders to break down
the power of Osman Digna and to press the construction of the railway
towards Berber. The troops at Suakin, on arrival, were much harassed by
small night attacks, which ceased as soon as the scattered camps were
drawn together. On the 19th of March Sir G. Graham, with the cavalry
brigade and the infantry of the Indian contingent, reconnoitred as far
as Hashin, finding the country difficult on account of the dense mimosa
scrub. The enemy occupied the hills and fired upon the cavalry. On the
20th Sir G. Graham, with about 9000 men, again advanced to Hashin, and
Dehilbat hill was taken by the Berkshire regiment and the Royal Marines.
A squadron of the 9th Royal Lancers, which was dismounted in the thick
bush, was driven back with the loss of 9 men; but elsewhere the Arabs
never succeeded in closing, and the troops returned to Suakin in the
afternoon, leaving the East Surrey regiment in a zeriba covering some
low hills near Hashin village. The total British loss was 9 killed and
39 wounded.


  McNeill's zeriba.

On the 22nd of March a force, consisting of two British and three Indian
battalions, with a naval brigade, a squadron of lancers, two companies
of engineers, and a large convoy of camels carrying water and supplies,
under Major-General Sir J. McNeill, started from Suakin for Tamai, with
orders to form a half-way zeriba. The advance was much impeded by the
dense bush, and the force halted at Tofrik, about 6 m. out, at 10.30
A.M. A native had brought information that the enemy intended to attack
while the zeriba was being formed, and this actually occurred. The force
was caught partly unprepared soon after 2.30 P.M., and severe fighting
took place. The enemy were repulsed in about twenty minutes, the naval
brigade, the Berkshire regiment, the Royal Marines, and the 15th Sikhs
showing the greatest gallantry. The casualties, including those among
non-combatants, were 150 killed, 148 missing, and 174 wounded. More than
500 camels were killed. The tribesmen lost more than 1000 killed. As
soon as firing was heard at Suakin, Sir G. Graham, with two battalions
of Guards and a battery of horse artillery, started for Tofrik, but
returned on being assured that reinforcements were not required. On the
24th and 26th convoys proceeding in square to Tofrik were attacked, the
enemy being repulsed without difficulty. On the 2nd of April a force
exceeding 7000 men, with 14 guns and 1600 transport animals, started
from Suakin at 4.30 A.M., and bivouacked twelve hours later at Tesela
Hill. Next morning an advance was made towards Tamai, and a number of
huts in the Khor Ghob were burned. The force then returned to Suakin.
The railway was now pushed on without interruption, reaching Otao on the
30th. On the night of the 6th of May a combined movement was made from
Suakin and Otao, which resulted in the surprise and break-up of a force
of the enemy under Mahommed Sardun, and the capture of a large number of
sheep and goats. The moral effect of this operation was marked, and
large numbers of tribesmen placed themselves unconditionally at the
disposal of Sir G. Graham. A great native movement could now have been
organized, which would have kept the route to Berber and enabled the
railway to be rapidly pushed forward.


  Political and military situation at end of operations.

Meanwhile many communications had passed between the war office and Lord
Wolseley, who at first believed that Berber could be taken before the
summer. In a long despatch of the 6th of March he discussed the general
situation, and pointed out that although the force at his disposal "was
amply sufficient" for raising the siege of Khartum and defeating the
mahdi, the conditions were changed by the fall of the town. It was now
"impossible ... to undertake any offensive operations until about the
end of the summer," when twelve additional British battalions, four
strong squadrons of British cavalry, and two R.H.A. batteries, together
with a large extension of the Wadi Halfa railway, eleven steamers, and
three hundred more whale-boats, would be required. He considered it
necessary to hold Dongola, and he reported that he was "distributing
this army along the left bank of the Nile, on the open reach of water"
between the Hannek cataract and Abu Dom, opposite Merawi. On the 30th of
March Lord Wolseley quitted the army and proceeded to Cairo. A cloud
having arisen on the frontiers of Afghanistan, the withdrawal of the
troops from the Sudan was ordered on the 11th of May. On the formation
of Lord Salisbury's cabinet, the new secretary of state for war, Mr W.
H. Smith, inquired whether the retirement could be arrested, but
Major-General Sir R. Buller reported that the difficulties of
reoccupation would be great, and that if Dongola was to be held, a fresh
expedition would be required. On the 22nd of June, before the British
rearguard had left Dongola, the mahdi died. The withdrawal of the Suakin
force began on the 17th of May, and the friendly tribes, deprived of
support, were compelled to make terms with Osman Digna, who was soon
able to turn his attention to Kassala, which capitulated in August,
nearly at the same time as Sennar.

The failure of the operations in the Sudan had been absolute and
complete, and the reason is to be sought in a total misconception of the
situation, which caused vacillation and delay, and in the choice of a
route by which, having regard to the date of the decision, the relief of
General Gordon and Khartum was impossible. (G. S. C.)


MILITARY OPERATIONS IN EGYPT AND THE SUDAN, 1885 TO 1896

The operations against Mahdism during the eleven years from the end of
the Nile expedition and the withdrawal from the Sudan to the
commencement of the Dongola campaign will be more easily understood if,
instead of narrating them in one chronological sequence, the operations
in each province are considered separately. The mahdi, Mahommed Ahmed,
died at Omdurman on the 22nd of June 1885. He was succeeded by the
principal khalifa, Abdullah el Taaisha, a Baggara Arab, who for the next
thirteen years ruled the Sudan with despotic power. Cruel, vicious,
unscrupulous and strong, the country groaned beneath his oppression. He
removed all possible rivals, concentrated at Omdurman a strong military
force composed of men of his own tribe, and maintained the ascendancy of
that tribe over all others. As the British troops retired to Upper
Egypt, his followers seized the evacuated country, and the khalifa
cherished the idea, already formulated by the mahdi, of the conquest of
Egypt, but for some years he was too much occupied in quelling risings,
massacring the Egyptians in the Sudan, and fighting Abyssinia, to move
seriously in the matter.

_Upper Egypt._--Mahommed el Kheir, dervish amir of Dongola, however,
advanced towards the frontier in the autumn of 1885, and at the end of
November came in touch with the frontier field force, a body of some
3000 men composed in nearly equal parts of British and Egyptian troops.
A month of harassing skirmishes ensued, during which the Egyptian troops
showed their mettle at Mograka, where 200 of them held the fort against
a superior number of dervishes, and in combats at Ambigol, Kosha and
Firket. Sir Frederick Stephenson, commanding the British army of
occupation in Egypt, then concentrated the frontier field force at
Firket, and attacked the main body of the enemy at Ginnis on the 30th of
December 1885, completely defeating it and capturing two guns and twenty
banners. It was here the new Egyptian army received its baptism of fire
and acquitted itself very creditably. Although checked, the dervishes
were not discouraged, and continued to press upon the frontier in
frequent raids, and thus in many bloody skirmishes the fighting
qualities of the Egyptian troops were developed. In April 1886 the
frontier was drawn back to Wadi Halfa, a fortified camp at the northern
end of the desolate defile, Batn-el-Hagar, through which the Nile
tumbles amid black, rocky hills in a succession of rapids, and debouches
on a wide plain. The protection of the frontier was now left in the
hands of the Egyptian army, a British force remaining at Assuan, 200 m.
to the north, as a reserve in case of emergency, and two years later
even this precaution was deemed unnecessary.

In October 1886 Wad en Nejumi, the amir who had defeated Hicks Pasha in
Kordofan three years before, and led the assault at Khartum when General
Gordon was slain in January 1885, replaced Mahommed el Kheir as
"commander of the force for the conquest of Egypt," and brought large
reinforcements to Dongola. An advanced column under Nur-el-Kanzi
occupied Sarras in April 1887, was attacked by the Egyptian force under
Colonel H. Chermside on the 28th of that month, and after a stubborn
resistance was defeated with great loss. Nur-el-Kanzi was killed and ten
standards taken.


  Battle of Toski.

The troubles in Darfur and with Abyssinia (q.v.) induced the khalifa to
reduce the garrisons of the north; nevertheless, the dervishes
reoccupied Sarras, continued active in raids and skirmishes, and
destroyed the railway south of Sarras, which during the Nile expedition
of 1884 and 1885 had been carried as far as Akasha. It was not until May
1889 that an invasion of the frontier on a large scale was attempted. At
this time the power and prestige of the khalifa were at their height:
the rebellions in Darfur and Kordofan had been stamped out, the
anti-mahdi was dead, and even the dervish defeat by the Abyssinians had
been converted by the death of King John and the capture of his body
into a success. It was therefore an opportune time to try to sweep the
Turks and the British into the sea. On the 22nd of June Nejumi was at
Sarras with over 6000 fighting men and 8000 followers. On the 2nd of
July Colonel J. Wodehouse headed off a part of this force from the river
at Argin, and, after a sharp action, completely defeated it, killing
900, among whom were many important amirs, and taking 500 prisoners and
12 banners, with very small loss to his own troops. A British brigade
was on its way up stream, but the sirdar, who had already arrived to
take the command in person, decided not to wait for it. The Egyptian
troops, with a squadron of the 20th Hussars, concentrated at Toski, and
thence, on the 3rd of August, General Grenfell, with slight loss, gained
a decisive victory. Wad en Nejumi, most of his amirs, and more than 1200
Arabs were killed; 4000 prisoners and 147 standards were taken, and the
dervish army practically destroyed. No further serious attempts were
made to disturb the frontier, of which the most southerly outpost was at
once advanced to Sarras.

The escape from Omdurman of Father Ohrwalder and of two of the captive
nuns in December 1891, of Father Rossignoli in October 1894, and of
Slatin Bey in February 1895, revealed the condition of the Sudan to the
outside world, threw a vivid light on the rule of the khalifa, and
corroborated information already received of the discontent which
existed among the tribes with the oppression and despotism under which
they lived.

_The Eastern Sudan._--In 1884 Colonel Chermside, governor of the Red Sea
littoral, entered into arrangements with King John of Abyssinia for the
relief of the beleaguered Egyptian garrisons. Gera, Amadib, Senhit and
Gallabat were, in consequence, duly succoured, and their garrisons and
Egyptian populations brought away to the coast by the Abyssinians in
1885. Unfortunately famine compelled the garrison of Kassala to
capitulate on the 30th of July of that year, and Osman Digna hurried
there from Tamai to raise a force with which to meet the Abyssinian
general, Ras Alula, who was preparing for its relief. By the end of
August Osman Digna had occupied Kufit, in the Barea country, with 10,000
men and entrenched himself. On the 23rd of September Ras Alula attacked
him there with an equal number of men and routed him with great
slaughter. Over 3000 dervishes with their principal amirs, except Osman
Digna, lay dead on the field, and many more were killed in the pursuit.
The Abyssinians lost 40 officers and 1500 men killed, besides many more
wounded. Instead of marching on to Kassala, Ras Alula, who at this time
was much offended by the transfer of Massawa by the Egyptians to Italy,
made a triumphant entry into Asmara, and absolutely refused to make any
further efforts to extricate Egyptian garrisons from the grip of the
khalifa. Meanwhile Osman Digna, who had fled from Kufit to Kassala,
wreaked his vengeance upon the unhappy captives at Kassala.


  Handub.

  Battle of Afafit.

In the neighbourhood of Suakin there were many tribes disaffected to the
khalifa's cause, and in the autumn of 1886 Colonel H. Kitchener, who was
at the time governor of the Red Sea littoral, judiciously arranged a
combination of them to overthrow Osman Digna, with the result that his
stronghold at Tamai was captured on the 7th of October, 200 of his men
killed, and 50 prisoners, 17 guns and a vast store of rifles and
ammunition captured. For about a year there was comparative quiet. Then
at the end of 1887 Osman Digna again advanced towards Suakin, but his
force at Taroi was routed by the "Friendlies," and he fell back on
Handub. Kitchener unsuccessfully endeavoured to capture Osman Digna on
the 17th of January 1888, but in the attack was himself severely
wounded, and was shortly after invalided. Later in the year Osman Digna
collected a large force and besieged Suakin. In December the sirdar
arrived with reinforcements from Cairo, and on the 20th sallied out and
attacked the dervishes in their trenches at Gemaiza, clearing the whole
line and inflicting considerable loss on the enemy, who retired towards
Handub, and the country was again fairly quiet for a time. During 1889
and 1890 Tokar became the centre of dervish authority, while Handub
continued to be occupied for the khalifa. In January 1891 Osman Digna
showed signs of increased activity, and Colonel (afterwards Sir Charles)
Holled Smith, then governor of the Red Sea littoral, attacked Handub
successfully on the 27th and occupied it, then seized Trinkitat and Teb,
and on the 19th of February fought the decisive action of Afafit,
occupied Tokar, and drove Osman Digna back to Temrin with a loss of 700
men, including all his chief amirs. This action proved the final blow to
the dervish power in the neighbourhood of Suakin, for although raiding
continued on a small scale, the tribes were growing tired of the
khalifa's rule and refused to support Osman Digna.

In the spring of 1891 an agreement was made between England and Italy by
which the Italian forces in Eritrea were at liberty, if they were able,
to capture and occupy Kassala, which lay close to the western boundary
of their new colony, on condition that they restored it to Egypt at a
future day when required to do so. Three years passed before they
availed themselves of this agreement. In 1893 the dervishes, 12,000
strong, under Ahmed Ali, invaded Eritrea, and were met on the 29th of
December at Agordat by Colonel Arimondi with 2000 men of a native force.
Ahmed Ali's force was completely routed and himself killed, and in the
following July Colonel Baratieri, with 2500 men, made a fine forced
march from Agordat, surprised and captured Kassala on the 17th of that
month, and continued to hold it for three years and a half.

  _The Abyssinian Frontier._--On the Abyssinian frontier Ras Adal was in
  command of a considerable force of Abyssinians early in 1886, and in
  June of that year he invaded Gallabat and defeated the dervishes on
  the plain of Madana; the dervish amir Mahommed Wad Ardal was killed
  and his camp captured. In the following year the amir Yunis ed Dekeim
  made two successful raids into Abyssinian territory, upon which Ras
  Adal collected an enormous army, said to number 200,000 men, for the
  invasion of the Sudan. The khalifa sent the amir Hamdan Abu Angar, a
  very skilful leader, with an army of over 80,000 men against him. Abu
  Angar entered Abyssinia and, in August 1887, attacked Ras Adal in the
  plain of Debra Sin and, after a prolonged battle, defeated the
  Abyssinians, captured their camp, and marched on Gondar, the ancient
  capital of Abyssinia, which he sacked, and then returned into
  Gallabat. King John, the negus of Abyssinia, burning to avenge this
  defeat, marched, in February 1889, with an enormous army to Gallabat,
  where the amir Zeki Tumal commanded the khalifa's forces, some 60,000
  strong, and had strongly fortified the town and the camp. On the 9th
  of March 1889 the Abyssinians made a terrific onslaught, stormed and
  burnt the town, and took thousands of prisoners. A small party of
  dervishes still held a zeriba when King John was struck by a stray
  bullet. The Abyssinians decided to retire, fighting ceased, and they
  moved off with their prisoners and the wounded negus. That night the
  king died, and the greater part of the army having gone ahead with the
  prisoners, a party of Arabs pursued the rearguard, which consisted of
  the king's bodyguard, routed them, and captured the king's body, which
  was sent to Omdurman to confirm the report of a brilliant victory sent
  by Zeki Tumal to the khalifa. Internal strife prevented the new negus
  of Abyssinia from prosecuting the war, which thus, in spite of the
  Abyssinian success, resulted in the increased prestige of the khalifa.
  From this time, however, the dervishes ceased to trouble the
  Abyssinians.

  _Darfur and Kordofan._--On the outbreak of the mahdi's rebellion
  Slatin Bey was governor of the province, and when Madibbo, the
  insurgent sheikh of Rizighat, attacked and occupied Shakka and was
  following up his success, Slatin twice severely defeated him, and,
  having concentrated his forces at El Fasher, repulsed the enemy again
  at Om Shanga. Mahdism, however, spread over Darfur in spite of
  Slatin's efforts to stay it. He fought no fewer than twenty-seven
  actions in various parts of his province, but his own troops, in
  course of time, became infected with the new faith and deserted him.
  He was obliged to surrender at Dara in December 1883, and was a
  prisoner, first at Obeid and then at Omdurman, until he escaped in
  1895. In January 1884 Zogal, the new dervish amir of the province,
  attacked El Fasher, where Said Bey Guma and an Egyptian garrison 1000
  strong with 10 guns was still holding out, and captured it. He also
  reduced the Jebel Marra district, where the loyal hill-people gave him
  some trouble.

  After the death of the mahdi in 1885, Madibbo revolted against the
  khalifa, but was defeated by Karamalla, the dervish amir of the
  Bahr-el-Ghazal, and was caught and executed. A war then sprang up
  between Karamalla and Sultan Yusef, who had succeeded Zogal as amir of
  Darfur. Yusef was joined in 1887 by Sultan Zayid, the black ruler of
  Jebel Marra, and Karamalla's trusted general, Ketenbur, was defeated
  with great slaughter at El Towaish on the 29th of June 1887. Osman wad
  Adam (Ganu), amir of Kordofan, was sent by the khalifa to Karamalla's
  assistance. He forced back the Darfurians near Dara on the 26th of
  December, routed Zayid in a second battle, entered El Fasher, and, in
  1888, became complete master of the situation, the two sultans being
  killed. The Darfurian chiefs then allied themselves with Abu Gemaiza,
  sheikh of the Masalit Arabs, who had proclaimed himself "Khalifa
  Osman," and was known as the anti-mahdi. The revolt assumed large
  proportions, and became the more dangerous to Abdullah, the khalifa,
  by reason of its religious character, wild rumours spreading over the
  country and reaching to Egypt and Suakin of the advent to power of an
  opposition mahdi. Abu Gemaiza attacked a portion of Osman Adam's
  force, under Abd-el-Kader, at Kebkebia, 30 m. from El Fasher, and
  almost annihilated it on the 16th of October 1888; and a week later
  another large force of Osman Adam met with the same fate at the same
  place. Instead of following up his victories, Abu Gemaiza retired to
  Dar Tama to augment his army, to which thousands flocked as the news
  of his achievements spread far and wide. He again advanced to El
  Fasher in February 1889, but was seized with smallpox. His army,
  however, under Fiki Adam, fought a fierce battle close to El Fasher on
  the 22nd, which resulted in its defeat and dispersion, and Abu Gemaiza
  himself dying the following day, the movement collapsed.

  In 1891 Darfur and Kordofan were again disturbed, and Sultan Abbas
  succeeded in turning the dervishes out of the Jebel Marra district.
  Two years later a saint of Sokoto, Abu Naal Muzil el Muhan, collected
  many followers and for a time threatened the khalifa's power, but the
  revolt gradually died out.

  _The Bahr-el-Ghazal._--The first outbreak in favour of Mahdism in the
  Bahr-el-Ghazal took place at Liffi in August 1882, when the Dinka
  tribe, under Jango, revolted and was defeated by Lupton Bey with
  considerable slaughter at Tel Gauna, and again in 1883 near Liffi. In
  September of that year Lupton's captain, Rufai Aga, was massacred with
  all his men at Dembo, and Lupton, short of ammunition, was forced to
  retire to Dem Suliman, where he was completely cut off from Khartum.
  After gallantly fighting for eighteen months he was compelled by the
  defection of his troops to surrender on the 21st of April 1884 to
  Karamalla, the dervish amir of the province. He died at Omdurman in
  1888.

  In 1890 the Shilluks in the neighbourhood of Fashoda rose against the
  khalifa, and the dervish amir of Gallabat, Zeki Tumal, was engaged for
  two years in suppressing the rebellion. He got the upper hand in 1892,
  and was recalled to oppose an Italian force said to be advancing from
  Massawa; but on reporting that it was impossible to invade Eritrea, as
  the khalifa wished him to do, he was summoned to Omdurman and put to
  death. The country then relapsed into its original barbarous
  condition, and dervish influence was nominal only. In 1892 the Congo
  State expedition established posts up to the seventh parallel of north
  latitude. In 1893 the dervish amir, Abu Mariam, fought with the Dinka
  tribe and was killed and his force destroyed, the fugitives taking
  refuge in Shakka. In the following year the Congo expedition
  established further posts, and in consequence the khalifa sent 3000
  men, under the amir Khatem Musa, from Shakka to reoccupy the
  Bahr-el-Ghazal. The Belgians at Liffi retired before him, and he
  entered Faroga. Famine and disease broke out in Khatem Musa's camp in
  1895, and a retreat was made towards Kordofan.

  _Equatoria._--In the Equatorial Province, which extended from the
  Albert Nyanza to Lado, Emin Bey, who had a force of 1300 Egyptian
  troops and 3000 irregulars, distributed among many stations, held out,
  hoping for reinforcements. In March 1885, however, Amadi fell to the
  dervishes, and on the 18th of April Karamalla arrived near Lado, the
  capital, and sent to inform Emin of the fall of Khartum. Emin and
  Captain Casati, an Italian, moved south to Wadelai, giving up the
  northern posts, and opened friendly relations with Kabarega, king of
  Unyoro. On the 26th of February 1886 Emin received despatches from
  Cairo via Zanzibar, from which he learned all that had occurred during
  the previous three years, and that "he might take any step he liked,
  should he decide to leave the country." He determined to remain where
  he was and "hold together, as long as possible, the remnant of the
  last ten years." His troops were in a mutinous state, wishing to go
  north rather than south, as Emin had ordered them to do, and
  unsuccessfully endeavoured to carry him with them by force.

  His communications to Europe through Zanzibar led to the relief
  expedition under H. M. Stanley, which went to his rescue by way of the
  Congo in 1887, and after encountering incredible dangers and
  experiencing innumerable sufferings, met with Emin and Casati at
  Nsabe, on the Albert Nyanza, on the 29th of April 1888. Stanley went
  back in May to pick up his belated rearguard, leaving Mounteney
  Jephson and a small escort to accompany Emin round his province. The
  southern garrisons decided to go with Emin, but the troops at Labore
  mutinied, and a general revolt broke out, headed by Fadl-el-Maula,
  governor of Fabbo. On arriving at Dufile in August 1888, Emin and
  Jephson were made prisoners by the Egyptian mutineers. In the meantime
  the arrival of Stanley at Lake Albert had caused rumours, which
  quickly spread to Omdurman, of a great invading white pasha, with the
  result that in July the khalifa sent up the river three steamers and
  six barges, containing 4000 troops, to oppose this new-comer. In
  October Omar-Saleh, the Mahdist commander, took Rejaf and sent
  messengers to Dufile to summon Emin to surrender; but on the 15th of
  November the mutineers released both Emin and Jephson, who returned to
  Lake Albert with some 600 refugees, and joined Stanley in February
  1889. The expedition arrived at Zanzibar at the end of the year.

  Emin's mutinous troops kept the dervishes at bay between Wadelai and
  Rejaf, and eventually severely defeated them, driving them back to
  Rejaf. They did not, however, follow up their victory, and under the
  leadership of Fadl-el-Maula Bey remained about Wadelai, while the
  dervishes strengthened their post at Rejaf. In 1893 Fadl-el-Maula Bey
  and many of his men took service with Baert of the Congo State
  expedition. The bey was killed fighting the dervishes at Wandi in
  January 1894, and the remnant of his men eventually were found by
  Captain Thruston from Uganda on the 23rd of March 1894 at Mahagi, on
  the Albert Nyanza, whither they had drifted from Wadelai in search of
  supplies. They were enlisted by Thruston and brought back under the
  British flag to Uganda.

  In consequence of the Franco-Congolese Treaty of 1894, Major
  Cunningham and Lieutenant Vandeleur were sent from Uganda to Dufile,
  where they planted the British flag on the 15th of January 1895.


SUDAN OPERATIONS, 1896-1900

  Dongola campaign, 1896.

The wonderful progress--political, economical and social--which Egypt
had made during British occupation, so ably set forth in Sir Alfred
Milner's _England in Egypt_ (published in 1892), together with the
revelation in so strong a light of the character of the khalifa's
despotism in the Sudan and the miserable condition of his misgoverned
people, as detailed in the accounts of their captivity at Omdurman by
Father Ohrwalder and Slatin Bey (published in 1892 and 1896), stirred
public opinion in Great Britain, and brought the question of the
recovery of the Sudan into prominence. A change of ministry took place
in 1895, and Lord Salisbury's cabinet, which had consistently assailed
the Egyptian policy of the old, was not unwilling to consider whether
the flourishing condition of Egyptian finance, the prosperity of the
country and the settled state of its affairs, with a capable and proved
little army ready to hand, did not warrant an attempt being made to
recover gradually the Sudan provinces abandoned by Egypt in 1885 on the
advice of Mr Gladstone's government.

Such being the condition of public and official sentiment, the crushing
defeat of the Italians by the Abyssinians at the battle of Adowa on the
1st of March 1896, and the critical state of Kassala--held by Italy at
British suggestion, and now closely invested by the dervishes--made it
not only desirable but necessary to take immediate action.

On the 14th of March 1896 Major-General Sir H. Kitchener, who succeeded
Sir Francis Grenfell as sirdar of the Egyptian army in 1892, received
orders to reoccupy Akasha, 50 m. south of Sarras, and to carry the
railway on from Sarras. Subsequent operations were to depend upon the
amount of resistance he encountered. On the 20th of March Akasha was
occupied without opposition by an advanced column of Egyptian troops
under Major J. Collinson, who formed an entrenched camp there. The
reserves of the Egyptian army were called out, and responded with
alacrity. The troops were concentrated at Wadi Halfa; the railway
reconstruction, under Lieutenant E. P. Girouard, R.E., pushed southward;
and a telegraph line followed the advance. At the commencement of the
campaign the Egyptian army, including reserves, consisted of 16
battalions of infantry, of which 6 were Sudanese, 10 squadrons of
cavalry, 5 batteries of artillery, 3 companies of garrison artillery,
and 8 companies of camel corps, and it possessed 13 gunboats for river
work. Colonel H. M. L. Rundle was chief of the staff; Major F. R.
Wingate was head of the intelligence department, with Slatin Bey as his
assistant; and Colonel A. Hunter was in command of Sarras, and south.
The 1st battalion of the North Staffordshire regiment moved up from
Cairo to join the Egyptian army.

In the meantime the advance to Akasha had already relieved the pressure
at Kassala, Osman Digna having withdrawn a considerable force from the
investing army and proceeded with it to Suakin. To meet Osman Digna's
movement Lieutenant-Colonel G. E. Lloyd, the Suakin commandant, advanced
to the Taroi Wells, 19 m. south of Suakin, on the 15th of April to
co-operate with the "Friendlies," and with Major H. M. Sidney, advancing
with a small force from Tokar. His cavalry, under Major M. A. C. B.
Fenwick, went out to look for Sidney's force, and were surprised by a
large number of dervishes. Fenwick, with some 40 officers and men,
seized an isolated hill and held it through the night, repulsing the
dervishes, who were the same night driven back with such heavy loss in
attacking Lloyd's zeriba that they retired to the hills, and comparative
quiet again reigned at Suakin. At the end of May an Indian brigade
arrived for garrison duty, and the Egyptian troops were released for
service on the Nile.

The dervishes first came in contact with the Egyptian cavalry on the
Nile near Akasha, on the 1st of May, and were repulsed. The army
concentrated at Akasha early in June, and on the 6th Kitchener moved to
the attack of Firket 16 m. away, where the amir Hamuda, with 3000 men,
was encamped. The attack was made in two columns: one, under Colonel
Hunter, marching along the river-bank, approached Firket from the north;
while the other, under Major Burn-Murdoch, making a detour through the
desert, approached it from the south. The co-operation of the two
columns was admirably timed, and on the morning of the 7th the dervish
camp was surrounded, and, after a sharp fight, Hamuda and many amirs and
about 1000 men were killed, and 500 prisoners taken. The dash and
discipline of the Egyptian troops in this victory were a good augury for
the future.

By the end of June the railway was advanced beyond Akasha, and
headquarters were at Kosha, 10 m. farther south. Cholera and fever were
busy both with the North Staffordshire regiment at Gemai, whither they
had been moved on its approach, and with the Egyptian troops at the
front, and carried off many officers and men. The railway reached Kosha
early in August; the cholera disappeared, and stores were collected and
arrangements steadily made for a farther advance. The North
Staffordshire moved up to the front, and in September the army moved on
Kerma, which was found to be evacuated, the dervishes having crossed the
river to Hafir. There they were attacked by the gunboats and Kitchener's
artillery from the opposite bank, and forced to retire, with their
commander, Wad Bishara, seriously wounded. Dongola was bombarded by the
gunboats and captured by the army on the 23rd of September. Bishara and
his men retreated, but were pursued by the Egyptians until the retreat
became a hopeless rout. Guns, small arms and ammunition, with large
stores of grain and dates, were captured, many prisoners taken, while
hundreds surrendered voluntarily, among them a brother of the amir Wad
en Nejumi. The dervish Dongola army had practically ceased to exist.
Debba was seized on the 3rd October, Korti and Merawi occupied soon
after, and the principal sheiks came in and submitted to the sirdar. The
Dongola campaign was over, and the province recovered to Egypt. The
Indian brigade at Suakin returned to India, and was replaced by
Egyptians. The North Staffordshire returned to Cairo. The work of
consolidation began, and preparations were made for a farther advance
when everything should be ready.


  The Sudan campaign, 1897.

The railway up the right bank of the Nile was continued to Kerma, in
order to evade the difficulties of the 3rd cataract; but the sirdar had
conceived the bold project of cutting off the great angle of the Nile
from Wadi Halfa to Abu Hamed, involving nearly 600 m. of navigation and
including the 4th cataract, by constructing a railway across the Nubian
desert, and so bringing his base at Wadi Halfa within a few hours of his
force, when it should have advanced to Abu Hamed, instead of ten days.
Early in 1897 this new line of railway was commenced from Wadi Halfa
across the great Nubian desert 230 m. to Abu Hamed. The first-mentioned
line reached Kerma in May, and by July the second had advanced 130 m.
into the desert towards Abu Hamed, when it became necessary, before it
was carried farther, to secure that terminus by an advance from Merawi.

In the meantime the khalifa was not idle. He occupied Abu Klea wells and
Metemma; recalled the amir Ibrahim Khalil, with 4000 men, from the
Ghezira; brought to Omdurman the army of the west under Mahmud--some
10,000 men; entrusted the line of the Atbara--Ed Darner, Adarama, Asubri
and El Fasher--to Osman Digna; constructed defences in the Shabluka
gorge; and personally superintended the organization and drill of the
forces gathered at Omdurman, and the collection of vast stores of food
and supplies of camels for offensive expeditions.

Towards the end of June the chief of the Jaalin tribe, Abdalla wad Said,
who occupied Metemma, angered by the khalifa, made his submission to
Kitchener and asked for support, at the same time foolishly sending a
defiant letter to the khalifa. The sirdar sent him rifles and ammunition
across the desert from Korti; but before they arrived, Mahmud's army,
sent by the khalifa, swept down on Metemma on the 1st of July and
massacred Abdalla wad Said and his garrison.

On the 29th of July, after several reconnaissances, Major-General
Hunter, with a flying column, marched up the Nile from near Merawi to
Abu Hamed, 133 m. distant, along the edge of the Monassir desert. He
arrived on the 7th of August and captured it by storm, the dervishes
losing 250 killed and 50 prisoners. By the end of the month the gunboats
had surmounted the 4th cataract and reached Abu Hamed. Berber was found
to be deserted, and occupied by Hunter on the 5th of September, and in
the following month a large force was entrenched there. The khalifa,
fearing an attack on Omdurman, moved Osman Digna from Adarama to Shendi.
In the 23rd of October Hunter, with a flying column lightly equipped,
left Berber for Adarama, which he burned on the 2nd of November, and
after reconnoitring for 40 m. up the Atbara, returned to Berber. The
Nile was falling, and Kitchener decided to keep the gunboats above the
impassable rapid at Um Tuir, 4 m. north of the confluence of the Atbara
with the Nile, where he constructed a fort. The gunboats made repeated
reconnaissances up the river, bombarding Metemma with effect. The
railway reached Abu Hamed on the 4th of November, and was pushed rapidly
forward along the right bank of the Nile towards Berber.

The forces of the khalifa remaining quiet, the sirdar visited Kassala
and negotiated with the Italian General Caneva for its restoration to
Egypt. The Italians were anxious to leave it; and on Christmas day 1897
Colonel (afterwards General Sir Charles) Parsons, with an Egyptian force
from Suakin, took it formally over, together with a body of Arab
irregulars employed by the Italians. These troops were at once
despatched to capture the dervish posts at Asabri and El Fasher, which
they did with small loss.


  Sudan campaign, 1898.

On his return from Kassala to Berber the sirdar received information of
an intended advance of the khalifa northward. He at once ordered a
concentration of Egyptian troops towards Berber, and telegraphed to
Cairo for a British brigade. By the end of January the concentration was
complete, and the British brigade, under Major-General Gatacre, was at
Dakhesh, south of Abu Hamed. Disagreement among the khalifa's generals
postponed the dervish advance and gave Kitchener much-needed time. But
at the end of February, Mahmud crossed the Nile to Shendi with some
12,000 fighting men, and with Osman Digna advanced along the right bank
of the Nile to Aliab, where he struck across the desert to Nakheila, on
the Atbara, intending to turn Kitchener's left flank at Berber. The
sirdar took up a position at Ras el Hudi, on the Atbara. His force
consisted of Gatacre's British brigade (1st Warwicks, Lincolns,
Seaforths and Camerons) and Hunter's Egyptian division (3 brigades under
Colonels Maxwell, MacDonald and Lewis respectively), Broadwood's
cavalry, Tudway's camel corps and Long's artillery. The dervish army
reached Nakheila on the 20th of March, and entrenched themselves there
in a formidable zeriba. After several reconnaissances in which fighting
took place with Mahmud's outposts, it was ascertained from prisoners
that their army was short of provisions and that great leakage was going
on. Kitchener, therefore, did not hurry. He sent his flotilla up the
Nile and captured Shendi, the dervish depot, on the 27th of March. On
the 4th of April he advanced to Abadar. A final reconnaissance was made
on the 5th. On the following day he bivouacked at Umdabia, where he
constructed a strong zeriba, which was garrisoned by an Egyptian
battalion, and on the night of the 7th he marched to the attack of
Mahmud's zeriba, which, after an hour's bombardment on the morning of
the 8th of April, was stormed with complete success. Mahmud and several
hundred dervishes were captured, 40 amirs and 3000 Arabs killed, and
many more wounded; the rest escaped to Gedaref. The sirdar's casualties
were 80 killed and 472 wounded.

Preparations were now made for the attack on the khalifa's force at
Omdurman; and in the meantime the troops were camped in the
neighbourhood of Berber, and the railway carried on to the Atbara. At
the end of July reinforcements were forwarded from Cairo; and on the
24th of August the following troops were concentrated for the advance at
Wad Hamad, above Metemma, on the western bank of the 6th
cataract:--British division, under Major-General Gatacre, consisting of
1st Brigade, commanded by Colonel A. G. Wauchope (1st Warwicks,
Lincolns, Seaforths and Camerons), and 2nd Brigade, commanded by Colonel
the Hon. N. G. Lyttelton (1st Northumberlands and Grenadier Guards, 2nd
Lancashire and Rifle Brigade); Egyptian division, under Major-General
Hunter, consisting of four brigades, commanded by Colonels MacDonald,
Maxwell, Lewis and Collinson; mounted troops--21st Lancers, camel corps,
and Egyptian cavalry; artillery, under Colonel Long, 2 British
batteries, 5 Egyptian batteries, and 20 machine guns; detachment of
Royal Engineers. The flotilla, under Commander Keppel, R.N., consisted
of 10 gunboats and 5 transport steamers. The total strength was nearly
26,000 men.


  Battle of Omdurman.

While the army moved along the west bank of the river, a force of Arab
irregulars or "Friendlies" marched along the east bank, under command of
Major Stuart-Wortley and Lieutenant Wood, to clear it of the enemy as
far as the Blue Nile; and on the 1st of September the gunboats bombarded
the forts on both sides of the river and breached the great wall of
Omdurman. Kitchener met with no opposition; and on the 1st of September
the army bivouacked in zeriba at Egeiga, on the west bank of the Nile,
within 4 m. of Omdurman. Here, on the morning of the 2nd of September,
the khalifa's army, 40,000 strong, attacked the zeriba, but was repulsed
with slaughter. Kitchener then moved out and marched towards Omdurman,
when he was again twice fiercely attacked on the right flank and rear,
MacDonald's brigade bearing the brunt. MacDonald distinguished himself
by his tactics, and completely repulsed the enemy. The 21st Lancers
gallantly charged a body of 2000 dervishes which was unexpectedly met in
a khor on the left flank, and drove them westward, the Lancers losing a
fifth of their number in killed and wounded. The khalifa was now in full
retreat, and the sirdar, sending his cavalry in pursuit, marched into
Omdurman. The dervish loss was over 10,000 killed, as many wounded, and
5000 prisoners. The khalifa's black flag was captured and sent home to
Queen Victoria. The British and Egyptian casualties together were under
500. The European prisoners of the khalifa found in Omdurman--Charles
Neufeld, Joseph Ragnotti, Sister Teresa Grigolini, and some 30
Greeks--were released; and on Sunday the 4th of September the sirdar,
with representatives from every regiment, crossed the river to Khartum,
where the British and Egyptian flags were hoisted, and a short service
held in memory of General Gordon, near the place where he met his death.

The results of the battle of Omdurman were the practical destruction of
the khalifa's army, the extinction of Mahdism in the Sudan, and the
recovery of nearly all the country formerly under Egyptian authority.

The khalifa fled with a small force to Obeid in Kordofan. The British
troops were quickly sent down stream to Cairo, and the sirdar, shortly
afterwards created Lord Kitchener of Khartum, was free to turn his
attention to the reduction of the country to some sort of order.


  Captain Marchand at Fashoda.

He had first, however, to deal with a somewhat serious matter--the
arrival of a French expedition at Fashoda, on the White Nile, some 600
m. above Khartum. He started for the south on the 10th of September,
with 5 gunboats and a small force, dispersed a body of 700 dervishes at
Reng on the 15th, and four days later arrived at Fashoda, to find the
French Captain Marchand, with 120 Senegalese soldiers, entrenched there
and the French flag flying. He arranged with Marchand to leave the
political question to be settled by diplomacy, and contented himself
with hoisting the British and Egyptian flags to the south of the French
flag, and leaving a gunboat and a Sudanese battalion to guard them. He
then steamed up the river and established a post at Sobat; and after
sending a gunboat up the Bahr-el-Ghazal to establish another post at
Meshra-er-Rek, he returned to Omdurman. The French expedition had
experienced great difficulties in the swampy region of the
Bahr-el-Ghazal, and had reached Fashoda on the 10th of July. It had been
attacked by a dervish force on the 25th of August, and was expecting
another attack when Kitchener arrived and probably saved it from
destruction. The Fashoda incident was the subject of important
diplomatic negotiations, which at one time approached an acute phase;
but ultimately the French position was found to be untenable, and on the
11th of December Marchand and his men returned to France by the Sobat,
Abyssinia and Jibuti. In the following March the spheres of interest of
Great Britain and France in the Nile basin were defined by a declaration
making an addition to Article IV. of the Niger convention of the
previous year.

During the sirdar's absence from Omdurman Colonel Hunter commanded an
expedition up the Blue Nile, and by the end of September had occupied
and garrisoned Wad Medani, Sennar, Karkoj and Roseires. In the meantime
Colonel Parsons marched with 1400 men from Kassala on the 7th of
September, to capture Gedaref. He encountered 4000 dervishes under the
amir Saadalla outside the town, and after a desperate fight, in which he
lost 50 killed and 80 wounded, defeated them and occupied the town on
the 22nd. The dervishes left 500 dead on the field, among whom were four
amirs. Having strongly entrenched himself, Parsons beat off, with heavy
loss to the dervishes, two impetuous attacks made on the 28th by Ahmed
Fedil. But the garrison of Gedaref suffered from severe sickness, and
Colonel Collinson was sent to their aid with reinforcements from
Omdurman. He steamed up the Blue Nile and the Rahad river to
Ain-el-Owega, whence he struck across the desert, reaching Gedaref on
the 21st of October, to find that Ahmed Fedil had gone south with his
force of 5000 men towards Roseires. Colonel Lewis, who was at Karkoj
with a small force, moved to Roseires, where he received reinforcements
from Omdurman, and on the 26th of December caught Ahmed Fedil's force as
it was crossing the Blue Nile at Dakheila, and after a very severe fight
cut it up. The dervish loss was 500 killed, while the Egyptians had 24
killed and 118 wounded. Two thousand five hundred fighting men
surrendered later, and the rest escaped with Ahmed Fedil to join the
khalifa in Kordofan.


  Operations in the Sudan, 1899.

On the 25th of January 1899 Colonel Walter Kitchener was despatched by
his brother, in command of a flying column of 2000 Egyptian troops and
1700 Friendlies, which had been concentrated at Faki Kohi, on the White
Nile, some 200 m. above Khartum, to reconnoitre the khalifa's camp at
Sherkela, 130 m. west of the river, in the heart of the Baggara country
in Kordofan, and if possible to capture it. The position was found to be
a strong one, occupied by over 6000 men; and as it was not considered
prudent to attack it with an inferior force at such a distance from the
river base, the flying column returned. No further attempt was made to
interfere with the khalifa in his far-off retreat until towards the end
of the year, when, good order having been generally established
throughout the rest of the Sudan, it was decided to extend it to
Kordofan.


  Death of the khalifa.

In the autumn of 1899 the khalifa was at Jebel Gedir, a hill in southern
Kordofan, about 80 m. from the White Nile, and was contemplating an
advance. Lord Kitchener concentrated 8000 men at Kaka, on the river, 380
m. south of Khartum, and moved inland on the 20th of October. On
arriving at Fongor it was ascertained that the khalifa had gone north,
and the cavalry and camel corps having reconnoitred Jebel Gedir, the
expedition returned. On the 13th November the amir Ahmed Fedil debouched
on the river at El Alub, but retired on finding Colonel Lewis with a
force in gunboats. Troops and transport were then concentrated at Faki
Kohi, and Colonel Wingate sent with reinforcements from Khartum to take
command of the expedition and march to Gedid, where it was anticipated
the khalifa would be obliged to halt. A flying column, comprising a
squadron of cavalry, a field battery, 6 machine guns, 6 companies of the
camel corps, and a brigade of infantry and details, in all 3700 men,
under Wingate, left Faki Kohi on the 21st of November. The very next day
he encountered Ahmed Fedil at Abu Aadel, drove him from his position
with great loss, and captured his camp and a large supply of grain he
was convoying to the khalifa. Gedid was reached on the 23rd, and the
khalifa was ascertained to be at Om Debreikat. Wingate marched at
midnight of the 24th, and was resting his troops on high ground in front
of the khalifa's position, when at daybreak of the 25th his picquets
were driven in and the dervishes attacked. They were repulsed with great
slaughter, and Wingate advancing, carried the camp. The khalifa Abdullah
el Taaisha, unable to rally his men, gathered many of his principal
amirs around him, among whom were his sons and brothers, Ali Wad Helu,
Ahmed Fedil, and other well-known leaders, and they met their death
unflinchingly from the bullets of the advancing Sudanese infantry. Three
thousand men and 29 amirs of importance, including Sheik-ed-din, the
khalifa's eldest son and intended successor, surrendered. The dervish
loss in the two actions was estimated at 1000 killed and wounded, while
the Egyptian casualties were only 4 killed and 29 wounded. Thus ended
the power of the khalifa and of Mahdism.

On the 19th of January 1900 Osman Digna, who had been so great a
supporter of Mahdism in the Eastern Sudan, and had always shown great
discretion in securing the safety of his own person, was surrounded and
captured at Jebel Warriba, as he was wandering a fugitive among the
hills beyond Tokar.

  The reconquest of Dongola and the Sudan provinces during the three
  years from March 1896 to December 1898, considering the enormous
  extent and difficulties of the country, was achieved at an
  unprecedentedly small cost, while the main item of expenditure--the
  railway--remains a permanent benefit to the country. The figures
  are:--

    Railways     LE.1,181,372
    Telegraphs         21,825
    Gunboats          154,934
    Military          996,223
                 ------------
    Total        LE.2,354,354

  Towards this expense the British government gave a grant-in-aid of
  L800,000, and the balance was borne by the Egyptian treasury. The
  railway, delayed by the construction of the big bridge over the
  Atbara, was opened to the Blue Nile opposite Khartum, 187 m. from the
  Atbara, at the end of 1899.     (R. H. V.)


FOOTNOTES:

  [1] By the Greek and Roman geographers Egypt was usually assigned to
    Libya (Africa), but by some early writers the Nile was thought to
    mark the division between Libya and Asia. The name occurs in Homer as
    [Greek: Aigyptos], but is of doubtful origin.

  [2] A vivid description of Cairo during the prevalence of plague in
    1835 will be found in A. W. Kinglake's _Eothen_.

  [3] A _kantar_ equals 99 lb.

  [4] To the ministry of public instruction was added in 1906 a
    department of agriculture and technical instruction.

  [5] The place of publication is London unless otherwise stated.

  [6] The figures of the debt are always given in L sterling. The
    budget figures are in LE. (pounds Egyptian), equal to L1, 0s. 6d.

  [7] _Egypt_, No. 1 (1905), p. 20.

  [8] Similar mortality, though on a smaller scale, recurred in 1889,
    when Sudanese battalions coming from Suakin were detained temporarily
    in Cairo.

  [9] Formerly transcribed _hau_ or "heap"-problems.

  [10] Clepsydras inscribed in hieroglyphic are found soon after the
    Macedonian conquest.

  [11] Annual reports of the progress of the work are printed in the
    _Sitzungsberichte_ of the Berlin Academy of Sciences; see also Erman,
    _Zur agyptischen Sprachforschung_, ib. for 1907, p. 400, showing the
    general trend of the results.

  [12] In the temple of Philae, where the worship of Isis was permitted
    to continue till the reign of Justinian, Brugsch found demotic
    inscriptions with dates to the end of the 5th century.

  [13] The Arabic dialects, which gradually displaced Coptic as
    Mahommedanism supplanted Christianity, adopted but few words of the
    old native stock.

  [14] In the articles referring to matters of Egyptology in this
    edition, Graecized forms of Old Egyptian names, where they exist, are
    commonly employed; in other cases names are rendered by their actual
    equivalents in Coptic or by analogous forms. Failing all such means,
    recourse is had to the usual conventional renderings of hieroglyphic
    spelling, a more precise transcription of the consonants in the
    latter being sometimes added.

  [15] It seems that "acrophony" (giving to a sign the value of the
    first letter of its name) was indulged in only by priests of the
    latest age, inventing fantastic modes of writing their "vain
    repetitions" on the temple walls.

  [16] In the prehistoric age when absolute dating is out of reach a
    "sequence dating" by means of the sequence of types in pottery,
    tools, &c., has been proposed in Petrie's _Diospolis Parva_, pp. 4 et
    sqq. The earliest prehistoric graves yet known are placed at S.D. 30,
    and shortly before S.D. 80 the period of the first historic dynasty
    is entered.

  [17] Ten-day periods as subdivisions of the month can be traced as
    far back as the Middle Kingdom. The day consisted of twenty-four
    hours, twelve of day (counted from sunrise to sunset) and twelve of
    night; it began at sunrise.

  [18] For the "sequence" dating (S.D.) used by archaeologists for the
    prehistoric period see above (S Art and Archaeology, ad init. note).

  [19] Reisner (_Early Dynastic Cemeteries_, p. 126), from his work in
    the prehistoric cemeteries, believes that Egypt was too uncivilized
    at that early date to have performed this scientific feat.

  [20] The history of Hatshepsut has been very obscure, and the
    mutilations of her cartouches have been variously accounted for.
    Recent discoveries by M. Legrain at Karnak and Prof. Petrie at Sinai
    have limited the field of conjecture. The writer has followed M.
    Naville's guidance in his biography of the queen (in T. M. Davis,
    _The Tomb of Hatshopsitu_, London, 1906, pp. 1 et seq.), made with
    very full knowledge of the complicated data.

  [21] This, it may be remarked, is the time vaguely represented by the
    Dodecarchy of Herodotus.

  [22] Khosrev Pasha afterwards filled several of the highest offices
    at Constantinople. He died on the 1st of February 1855. He was a
    bigot of the old school, strongly opposed to the influences of
    Western civilization, and consequently to the assistance of France
    and Great Britain in the Crimean War.

  [23] The work was carried out under the supervision of the Frenchman,
    Colonel Seve, who had turned Mahommedan and was known in Islam as
    Suleiman Pasha. The effectiveness of the new force was first tried in
    the suppression of a revolt of the Albanians in Cairo (1823) by six
    disciplined Sudanese regiments; after which Mehemet Ali was no more
    troubled with military _emeutes_.

  [24] THE DYNASTY OF MEHEMET ALI.

                               (i.) Mehemet Ali,
                               b. 1769, d. 1849.
                                      |
         +-------------+----------+---+-------+--------------+-------------+
         |             |          |           |              |             |
   (ii.) Ibrahim,   Tusun,      Ismail,   (iv.) Said,   Abdul Halim,   Mehemet Ali,
      b. 1789,     b. 1796,     b. 1798,    b. 1823,      b. 1831,     the Younger,
      d. 1848.     d. 1816.     d. 1822.    d. 1863.      d. 1894.      and other
         |             |                      |                         children.
         |      (iii.) Abbas I.,            Tusun
         |      b. 1813, d. 1854.          d. 1876.
         |             |
         |         El Hami.
         |             |
         |          Amina (married the Khedive Tewfik).
         |
     +---+-----------+--------------------+
     |               |                    |
    Ahmed,   (v.) Ismail (Khedive),  Mustapha Fazil,
   d. 1858.    b. 1830, d. 1895.       d. 1875.
                     |
                  +--+-------------+-------------+------------+
                  |                |             |            |
             (vi.) Tewfik,   Hussein Kamil.   Hassan.   8 other children.
           b. 1853, d. 1892.
                  |
                  +------------------+------------+
                  |                  |            |
           (vii.) Abbas II.,   Mehemet Ali.   2 daughters.
               b. 1874.
                  |
                  +----------------+--------------+
                  |                |              |
            Mahommed Abdul,   Abdul Kader,   4 daughters.
               b. 1890.         b. 1902.

  [25] Part of this money was devoted to an expedition sent against
    Abyssinia in 1876 to avenge losses sustained in the previous year.
    The new campaign was, however, equally unsuccessful.

  [26] Lord Cromer, writing in 1905, declared that the movement "was,
    in its essence, a genuine revolt against misgovernment," and "was not
    essentially anti-European" (vide _Egypt No. 1_, 1905, p. 2).

  [27] Except in so far as it was necessary to call out men to guard
    the banks of the Nile in the season of high flood.

  [28] The Egyptians keep large numbers of pigeons, which are allowed
    to be shot only by permission of the village omdeh (head-man). After
    the occurrence here related, officers were prohibited from shooting
    pigeons in any circumstances.

  [29] On the 8th of January 1908, the anniversary of the khedive's
    accession, the whole of the Denshawai prisoners were pardoned and
    released. For the Denshawai incident see the British parliamentary
    papers, _Egypt No. 3_ and _Egypt No. 4_ of 1906.

  [30] See _Egypt No. 2_ (1906), Correspondence respecting the
    Turco-Egyptian Frontier in the Sinai Peninsula (with a map).




EHRENBERG, CHRISTIAN GOTTFRIED (1795-1876), German naturalist, was born
at Delitzsch in Saxony on the 19th of April 1795. After studying at
Leipzig and Berlin, where he took the degree of doctor of medicine in
1818, he was appointed professor of medicine in the university of Berlin
(1827). Meanwhile in 1820 he was engaged in a scientific exploration
conducted by General von Minutoli in Egypt. They investigated parts of
the Libyan desert, the Nile valley and the northern coasts of the Red
Sea, where Ehrenberg made a special study of the corals. Subsequently
parts of Syria, Arabia and Abyssinia were examined. Some results of
these travels and of the important collections that had been made were
reported on by Humboldt in 1826; and afterwards Ehrenberg was enabled to
bring out two volumes _Symbolae physicae_ (1828-1834), in which many
particulars of the mammals, birds, insects, &c., were made public. Other
observations were communicated to scientific societies. In 1829 he
accompanied Humboldt through eastern Russia to the Chinese frontier. On
his return he gave his attention to microscopical researches. These had
an important bearing on some of the infusorial earths used for polishing
and other economic purposes; they added, moreover, largely to our
knowledge of the microscopic organisms of certain geological formations,
especially of the chalk, and of the modern marine and freshwater
accumulations. Until Ehrenberg took up the study it was not known that
considerable masses of rock were composed of minute forms of animals or
plants. He demonstrated also that the phosphorescence of the sea was due
to organisms. He continued until late in life to investigate the
microscopic organisms of the deep sea and of various geological
formations. He died in Berlin on the 27th of June 1876.

  PUBLICATIONS.--_Die Infusionsthierchen als vollkommene Organismen_ (2
  vols. fol., Leipzig, 1838); _Mikrogeologie_ (2 vols. fol., Leipzig,
  1854); and "Fortsetzung der mikrogeologischen Studien," in _Abhandl.
  der k. Akad. der Wissenschaft_ (Berlin, 1875).




EHRENBREITSTEIN, a town of Germany, in the Prussian Rhine province, on
the right bank of the Rhine, facing Coblenz, with which it is connected
by a railway bridge and a bridge of boats, on the main line of railway
Frankfort-on-Main-Cologne. Pop. (including the garrison) 5300. It has an
Evangelical and two Roman Catholic churches, a Capuchin monastery,
tanneries, soap-works and a considerable trade in wine. Above the town,
facing the mouth of the Mosel, on a rock 400 ft. high, lies the
magnificent fortress of Ehrenbreitstein, considered practically
impregnable. The sides towards the Rhine and the south and south-east
are precipitous, and on the south side, on which is the winding
approach, strongly defended. The central fort or citadel is flanked by a
double line of works with three tiers of casemate batteries. The works
towards the north and north-east end in a separate outlying fort. The
whole forms a part of the system of fortifications which surround
Coblenz.

The site of the castle is said to have been occupied by a Roman fort
built in the time of the emperor Julian. In the rith century the castle
was held by a noble named Erembert, from whom it is said to have derived
its name. In the 12th century it came into the possession of Archbishop
Hillin (de Fallemagne) of Trier, who strengthened the defences in 1153.
These were again extended by Archbishop Henry II. (de Fenetrange) in
1286, and by Archbishop John II. of Baden in 1481. In 1631 it was
surrendered by the archbishop elector Philip Christopher von Soetern to
the French, but was recovered by the Imperialists in 1637 and given to
the archbishop elector of Cologne. It was restored to the elector of
Trier in 1650, but was not strongly fortified until 1672. In 1688 the
French bombarded it in vain, but in 1759 they took it and held it till
1762. It was again blockaded in 1795, 1796 and 1797, in vain; but in
1799 they starved it into surrender, and at the peace of Luneville in
1801 blew it up before evacuating it. At the second peace of Paris the
French paid 15,000,000 francs to the Prussian government for its
restoration, and from 1816 to 1826 the fortress was reconstructed by
General E. L. Aster (1778-1855).







End of the Project Gutenberg EBook of Encyclopaedia Britannica, 11th
Edition, Volume 9, Slice 1, by Various

*** END OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK ENCYC. BRITANNICA, VOL 9 SL 1 ***

***** This file should be named 32860.txt or 32860.zip *****
This and all associated files of various formats will be found in:
        https://www.gutenberg.org/3/2/8/6/32860/

Produced by Marius Masi, Don Kretz and the Online
Distributed Proofreading Team at https://www.pgdp.net


Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions
will be renamed.

Creating the works from public domain print editions means that no
one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation
(and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without
permission and without paying copyright royalties.  Special rules,
set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to
copying and distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works to
protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm concept and trademark.  Project
Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if you
charge for the eBooks, unless you receive specific permission.  If you
do not charge anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the
rules is very easy.  You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose
such as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and
research.  They may be modified and printed and given away--you may do
practically ANYTHING with public domain eBooks.  Redistribution is
subject to the trademark license, especially commercial
redistribution.



*** START: FULL LICENSE ***

THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE
PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK

To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free
distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work
(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project
Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project
Gutenberg-tm License (available with this file or online at
https://gutenberg.org/license).


Section 1.  General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg-tm
electronic works

1.A.  By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm
electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to
and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property
(trademark/copyright) agreement.  If you do not agree to abide by all
the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy
all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your possession.
If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project
Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the
terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or
entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.

1.B.  "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark.  It may only be
used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who
agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement.  There are a few
things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works
even without complying with the full terms of this agreement.  See
paragraph 1.C below.  There are a lot of things you can do with Project
Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement
and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
works.  See paragraph 1.E below.

1.C.  The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the Foundation"
or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project
Gutenberg-tm electronic works.  Nearly all the individual works in the
collection are in the public domain in the United States.  If an
individual work is in the public domain in the United States and you are
located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from
copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative
works based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg
are removed.  Of course, we hope that you will support the Project
Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting free access to electronic works by
freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm works in compliance with the terms of
this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with
the work.  You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by
keeping this work in the same format with its attached full Project
Gutenberg-tm License when you share it without charge with others.

1.D.  The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern
what you can do with this work.  Copyright laws in most countries are in
a constant state of change.  If you are outside the United States, check
the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement
before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or
creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project
Gutenberg-tm work.  The Foundation makes no representations concerning
the copyright status of any work in any country outside the United
States.

1.E.  Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:

1.E.1.  The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate
access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear prominently
whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work on which the
phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the phrase "Project
Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed,
copied or distributed:

This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with
almost no restrictions whatsoever.  You may copy it, give it away or
re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included
with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org

1.E.2.  If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is derived
from the public domain (does not contain a notice indicating that it is
posted with permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied
and distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees
or charges.  If you are redistributing or providing access to a work
with the phrase "Project Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the
work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1
through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the
Project Gutenberg-tm trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or
1.E.9.

1.E.3.  If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted
with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution
must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional
terms imposed by the copyright holder.  Additional terms will be linked
to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works posted with the
permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work.

1.E.4.  Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm
License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this
work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm.

1.E.5.  Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this
electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with
active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project
Gutenberg-tm License.

1.E.6.  You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any
word processing or hypertext form.  However, if you provide access to or
distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format other than
"Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official version
posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site (www.gutenberg.org),
you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a
copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon
request, of the work in its original "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other
form.  Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg-tm
License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.

1.E.7.  Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,
performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works
unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.8.  You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing
access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works provided
that

- You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
     the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method
     you already use to calculate your applicable taxes.  The fee is
     owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he
     has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the
     Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation.  Royalty payments
     must be paid within 60 days following each date on which you
     prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax
     returns.  Royalty payments should be clearly marked as such and
     sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the
     address specified in Section 4, "Information about donations to
     the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation."

- You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies
     you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he
     does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm
     License.  You must require such a user to return or
     destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium
     and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of
     Project Gutenberg-tm works.

- You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any
     money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the
     electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days
     of receipt of the work.

- You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
     distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works.

1.E.9.  If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg-tm
electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set
forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from
both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and Michael
Hart, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark.  Contact the
Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below.

1.F.

1.F.1.  Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable
effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread
public domain works in creating the Project Gutenberg-tm
collection.  Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain
"Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or
corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual
property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a
computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by
your equipment.

1.F.2.  LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right
of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project
Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project
Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all
liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal
fees.  YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT
LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE
PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH F3.  YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE
TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE
LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR
INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH
DAMAGE.

1.F.3.  LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a
defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can
receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a
written explanation to the person you received the work from.  If you
received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with
your written explanation.  The person or entity that provided you with
the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a
refund.  If you received the work electronically, the person or entity
providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to
receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund.  If the second copy
is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further
opportunities to fix the problem.

1.F.4.  Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth
in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS' WITH NO OTHER
WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO
WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTIBILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.

1.F.5.  Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied
warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages.
If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the
law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be
interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by
the applicable state law.  The invalidity or unenforceability of any
provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions.

1.F.6.  INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the
trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone
providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in accordance
with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production,
promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works,
harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees,
that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do
or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg-tm
work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any
Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any Defect you cause.


Section  2.  Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm

Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of
electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers
including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers.  It exists
because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from
people in all walks of life.

Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the
assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's
goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will
remain freely available for generations to come.  In 2001, the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure
and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future generations.
To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4
and the Foundation web page at https://www.pglaf.org.


Section 3.  Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation

The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit
501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the
state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal
Revenue Service.  The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification
number is 64-6221541.  Its 501(c)(3) letter is posted at
https://pglaf.org/fundraising.  Contributions to the Project Gutenberg
Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent
permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state's laws.

The Foundation's principal office is located at 4557 Melan Dr. S.
Fairbanks, AK, 99712., but its volunteers and employees are scattered
throughout numerous locations.  Its business office is located at
809 North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887, email
business@pglaf.org.  Email contact links and up to date contact
information can be found at the Foundation's web site and official
page at https://pglaf.org

For additional contact information:
     Dr. Gregory B. Newby
     Chief Executive and Director
     gbnewby@pglaf.org


Section 4.  Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg
Literary Archive Foundation

Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide
spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of
increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be
freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest
array of equipment including outdated equipment.  Many small donations
($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt
status with the IRS.

The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating
charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United
States.  Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a
considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up
with these requirements.  We do not solicit donations in locations
where we have not received written confirmation of compliance.  To
SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any
particular state visit https://pglaf.org

While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we
have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition
against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who
approach us with offers to donate.

International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make
any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from
outside the United States.  U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.

Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation
methods and addresses.  Donations are accepted in a number of other
ways including including checks, online payments and credit card
donations.  To donate, please visit: https://pglaf.org/donate


Section 5.  General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
works.

Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project Gutenberg-tm
concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared
with anyone.  For thirty years, he produced and distributed Project
Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support.


Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed
editions, all of which are confirmed as Public Domain in the U.S.
unless a copyright notice is included.  Thus, we do not necessarily
keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition.


Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search facility:

     https://www.gutenberg.org

This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm,
including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to
subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.