362 



EGYPT. 





PART I. HISTORY. 



Hinaty. f\vo\n all the ancient nations which have been distin- 

 guishei! in history, there is none more worthy of our no- 

 tice than the kingdom of Egypt. If not the birth-place, it 

 was the early protector of the sciences; and cherished every 

 species of knowledge, which was known or cultivated in 

 remote times. It was the principal source from which 

 the Grecians derived their information; and, after all its 

 windings and enlargements, we may still trace the stream 

 of our knowledge to the banks of die Nile. Every an- 

 cient nation lays claim to a higher origin than legitimate 

 history can sanction ; and Egypt extends its claims to a 

 fabulous period. 



Antiquity of To extend the existence of Egypt as a nation to more 

 than a hundred thousand years, is evidently fictitious ; 

 and the period 473,000 at Babylon, or 1,907,000, with 

 more extravagant calculations still, which are found in 

 the Indian chronology, are sufficient to convince us, that 

 the pretensions are excessive, and the calculations un- 

 true. There is a degree of vanity which every nation 

 feels about its origin and its honour ; and to this may in 

 some degree be ascribed the extravagant claims of an- 

 cient nations. But this tendency is not sufficient to ac- 

 count for the inconceivable pretensions of Egypt, Chal- 

 dea, and Hindostan ; nor are we certain that we shall be 

 able to point out precisely the source of such claims. As 

 Egypt was anciently divided into different kingdoms, the 

 reign of cotemporary princes might be stated in tradi- 

 tionary history, as the reign of successive kings; but 

 even this is quite inadequate to account for the incredible 

 length of years, to which their pretensions extend. We 

 have heard of a poetical and solar method of calculation 

 in the East, in which a thousand years of the former are 

 only equal to one of the latter. The Caliyoug of the In- 

 dian astronomers is clearly an imaginary period, as well 

 as many other times and calculations so often alluded to 

 in the ancient annals of the East. 



It is impossible to ascertain correctly the circumstan- 

 ces which gave rise to these modes of reckoning, or the 

 occurrences which from time to time enlarged or changed 

 them ; but we may easily believe, that, having once de- 

 parted from the plain path of rigid calculation, they 

 uould branch out into many bye- ways, according to the 

 ignorance, the fashion, or the fancy of the times. It ap- 

 pears that the earliest mode of reckoning was by the ap- 

 pearance and departure of the sun, when the evening or 

 the morning marked the conclusion of a day. The chan- 

 ges of the moon, too, were periods of calculation. The 

 revolution of the moon, and that of other planets whose 

 courses were of short duration, appear to have been de- 

 nominated years ; as were also the terms of three and of 

 four months. We speak not of the distinctions between 

 'he lunar and the solar year; for that was a mode of 

 leckoning comparatively of recent date, and not once to 

 l>e named among the circumstances, which have contri- 

 buted to occasion the extravagance and uncertainty of re- 

 mote calculations. But whether we have ascertained the 

 true sources of those incredible pretensions, or even ap- 

 proximated their genuine causes, yet there cannot remain 

 .1 doubt that their history is fabulous, and cannot be e\- 





plained by the present modes or measures of reckoning. 

 The want, or very imperfect method, of re-cording an- 

 cient factsjj leaves lls without the means 01' entering 

 completely into their history ; and we must i-or.tcnt our- 

 selves with partial inductions, or even with probable con- 

 jectures. 



Mencs is the first king of Egypt who is presented to ,,, 

 our notice; but the circumstances of his reign distinctly ' 

 imply, that the age in which he lived was an advanced 

 period of the Egyptian history. The arrangements which 

 he made did not belong to rude times ; the wealth and 

 the luxury of his court, were far removed from the savage 

 .state, and the magnificence which he introduced into the 

 services of religion, manifest an improvement in the arts, 

 and a progress in the splendour of society. Sir Isaac New- 

 ton ascribes to him the building of Memphis, which was 

 not founded, or at least not famous, in the time of Homer; 

 for it was Thebes and not Memphis which he celebrated 

 as the glory of Egypt. Norden supposes that the latter 

 was adorned from the ruins of the former ; but even it' 

 this be true, it would not imply dial Memphis was un- 

 built till Thebes was in ruins. It will only shew, that, 

 as the ancient capital was deserted, the new city was 

 adorned with some works of art, which had been admired 

 in the city of Thebes. 



The imperfect state of the Egyptian history, in die pe- A Toi( j ^ 

 riod under review, is further apparent, from die deficicn- the history, 

 cy of its annals immediately after the time which we 

 have supposed to have been filled up by the reign of 

 Menes. A list has been presented of 330 kings, many 

 of whom were probably cotcmporaries, and not a few of 

 them perhaps imaginary. For if the reign of Menes was 

 in some degree described, and did exhibit features of emi- 

 nence and improvement, it is not likely dial a period in 

 immediate succession would be so void of information, 

 and bear so many marks of romance and fiction. From 

 the 1400 yuaia >vK;<,l, ic fancifully ascribed to this inter- 

 val, there is scarcely a circumstance which could claim 

 attention, by any promise of entertainment or know- 

 ledge. For the story of the Shepherd kings, which seems 

 to be connected with this place, is too obscure and unde- 

 fined to excite much interest, or merit much notice. It 

 cannot, however, be altogether passed over, as it is evi- 

 dently entwined with die history of Egypt. 



Various conjectures have been formed concerning that 

 race of obscure kings ; and some have supposed that it 

 is the history of the Israelites in Egypt, misrepresented 

 by fable, magnified and deformed by the uncertain tra- 

 ditions of ancient times. But die history of that people 

 in Egypt has no resemblance to a reign of kings. In the 

 time of Joseph, they must have had influence at the 

 court of Pharaoh ; but their subsequent condition in E- 

 gypt was a state of degradation, and affords a tale of mi- 

 sery and oppression. The Shepherd kings must have 

 been cruel and severe, for their memory was detested ; 

 and their reign must have been previous to die abode of 

 the Israelites in the kingdom of Pharaoh ; for when Ja- 

 cob and his sons went down into that country, a shep- 

 herd was an " -abomination to the Egyptians." 



