be 
refembling the peculiar privileges of the ladies of that ifland.—~ 
“The Lycians, fays he, lib. 1. p. 82, make ufe of the Cretan 
“ and 
having informed us that in Egypt brothers were permitted to intermarry with 
their fifters, in imitation of Ifis whofe marriage with her brother Ofiris had 
been productive of fuch fignal advantage, &c, proceeds thus—aAiz ds riwlas ras allie, 
* For thefe reafons,”.(that.is to fay from the veneration of the Egyptians for — 
Ifis, and from their fenfe of the benefits which ‘had accrued from her excellent 
ndminiftration after the death of her hufband) §* It has become a cuftom that 
«© more power and honour fhould be allotted to the queen than to the king, 
« and that among private people in their matrimonial contraéts, command is 
“* given to the wife over the hufband, the hyfbands therein promifing to obey 
“ their wives in all things,” 
Herodotus alfo, in his enumeration of the many cuftoms in which the Egyp- 
tians differ from the reft of mankind, mentions fome particulars refpe€ting their 
-women which feem to) indicate a marked fuperiority in that fex over the other. 
Among the Egyptians, fays he, Lib, ii, p. 119, the women tranfaét matters of 
trade and retailing, but the men, remaining in their houfes, weave. And, after 
fome other whimfical and ridiculous ufages, he adds in the next page that there 
is no obligation on fons to provide for their parents if they fhould be unwilling, 
but that, even though againft their will, daughters are obliged to make fuch 
provifion. Which laft circumftance feems to imply fome peculiar advantages in 
the women refpedting their patrimony, as it would feem unreafonable that the 
weaker fex fhould be particularly burthened ynlefs the laws had furnithed them with 
fufficient ability. 
This however is merely conjecture, and the Lycian cuftom ftill remains the 
only inftance in point. And indeed, notwithftanding the authorities above cited, 
there is, in my opinion, much reafon to doubt that the women in Egypt in reality 
pofleffed any confiderable degree of fuperiority. In every country where a plu- 
“rality of:wives is allowed, the fair fex mult always be more or Icfs degraded, 
and that: Polygamy was permitted among the Egyptians we know from Diodorus 
Siculus, who tells us, Lib. 1..p. o1, that in Egypt the priefts were confined 
to one wife, but that all others, might marry as many as they pleafed,—- 
Tapovos o% map Alyuntiors oF pay Wepre pce, rv 0 wArwy boas av exasog mpoonla—A cuftom 
which appears to me wholly inconfiftent with the law enforcing obedience in 
; hufbands, 
