ORIGIN OF EGYPTIAN CIVILIZATION—NAVILLE. 568 
which I think to be an indiction. The rites of the foundation of 
temples are very similar to what they will be in Roman times. 
Hieroglyphs are sculptured, very archaic in appearance; they are 
the first rudiments of the hieroglyphical alphabet, which is already 
fully developed in the fourth and fifth dynasties. 
Very interesting religious objects are the slate palettes, having on 
one side near the middle a circular depression surrounded by a ring. 
These slates are often sculptured, and bear animals or war scenes, 
or representations of festivals, such as that of Striking the Anu. 
On such slates with a depression there are sculptures on both sides. 
Therefore I can not admit, with Professor Petrie, that these depres- 
sions were made for mixing green paint. If that was their purpose, 
there was no reason for their being so large as that found at Heira- 
conpolis, and for being adorned with such fine sculptures, not to 
speak of their being quite inappropriate for mixing colors. I believe 
this depression contained a religious emblem, a piece of wood or 
precious stone, which had the form either of a knob or of a bud. It 
corresponds exactly with the description which Quintus Curtius gives 
us of the appearance of the god in the oasis of Jupiter Ammon. The 
god had the form of an “ umbilicus.” This knob on the Hieraconpolis 
palette has a guard of two panthers or leopards; in other cases, of 
two dogs. This is not the only form of the god who had the name of 
Bat. We may be a bull with one or two heads, and also a tree. In 
that case the two leopards are replaced by two other spotted animals, 
giraffes, one standing on either side of the tree. We have here an 
example of tree worship, such as was practiced in Crete and in the 
/Hgean islands. 
In conclusion, such are the principal features of the civilization 
of the early Egyptian dynasties. It belongs to a nation formed by 
an indigenous stock, of African origin, among which settled con- 
querors coming from Arabia, from the same starting point as the 
Chaldeans. This explains a certain similarity between Egypt and 
Babylon. The foreign element was not Semitic. They belonged, 
like the natives, to the Hamitic stock; therefore they easily amalga- 
mated with the aborigines, into whom they infused their more pro- 
eressive and active spirit. The result was the Egyptians such as we 
know them under the first three dynasties, or, as we call that time, 
the Thinite period. At the end of it something took place which 
we can not yet explain—a sudden bound from the rude culture of the 
Thinites to the refinement in art and industry and to the literary 
erowth which are exhibited by the fourth dynasty and afterwards. 
Has there been a new invasion, coming this time from Asia? It is 
possible; but there again we have no historical evidence of any kind, 
and we have to resort to conjecture. 
