December 6, 1894] 



NATURE 



123 



The volume which we have in our hands, although it 

 is nowhere stated in it, seems to be the first of a series 

 which M. Maspero intends to devote to the history of the 

 ancient nations of the East ; and indeed the original 

 French work began to appear in weekly numbers with 

 the general title of Histoire Ancienne des Penples dc 

 rOrient some time ago. It is necessary to state this in 

 order that the reader may not confuse the new work of 

 M. Maspero with the small and older work, the first 

 edition of which appeared in Paris so far back as 1875, 

 for although both books run on the same lines, and have 

 the same aim, and the smaller originated the idea of the 

 larger, yet the scale of the new work has been so greatly 

 increased that it practically forms a new and indepen- 

 dent treatise on Oriental history and archaeology. The 

 first work ran through four editions at least, and was ex- 

 ceedingly popular ; but the new work, with its beautiful 

 illustrations, is intended to be in France what Rawlinson's 

 " Ancient Monarchies" was in England. 



M. Maspero divides the first volume of his history 

 into two parts : the first treats of Egypt, and the second 

 of Ancient Chaldasa, six chapters being devoted to the 

 former subject, and three to the latter. A detailed de- 

 scription of the formation of Egypt as a land is folio wed 

 by an account of the Nile and of its influence upon the 

 history of the country and its people. The civilisation 

 of Egypt, according to M. Maspero, sprang up in the 

 country on the banks of the Nile, which was bounded 

 by Gebel Silsila on the south, Buto in the Delta on the 

 north, the mountain of Bakha on the east, and the 

 mountain of Manu on the west. The origin of the people 

 who produced it is difficult to trace, for the camp of 

 Egyptologists is divided in opinion on the matter. Many 

 scholars hold that the Egyptians came from Asia, but 

 not all who are of this opinion agree as to the route 

 followed by them into Egypt. Some would have them 

 enter Egypt by the Isthmus of Suez, and having gained 

 possession of the Delta, make their way up to Memphis, 

 Heliopolis, and further south ; others would have them 

 cross the Red Sea to Kosseir and so thence to Coptos, 

 and thus account partially for the traditions which made 

 Abydos in Upper Egypt the oldest city in Egypt ; and 

 again, others would make them cross over from the 

 Arabian Peninsula by the Straits of Bab el-Mandeb into 

 Africa, and skirting the Abyssinian mountains, enter 

 Egypt from the south. The first theory holds water so 

 long as we assume that the Egyptians made their way 

 from the East by the old trade routes into Egypt through 

 Syria ; in fact, this would be their only way if they set out 

 from countries on about the same parallel of latitude as 

 Babylon, for the want of water in the desert between the 

 Euphrates and Egypt has from time immemorial made 

 the route impossible even for the armies of mighty 

 kings, and every invasion of Egypt by peoples from 

 this region has been made by the way of northern 

 Syria. The second theory makes it necessary for the 

 emigrants from Asia to have crossed the waterless desert 

 in the Arabian Peninsula, and to have built boats suffi- 

 ciently large to cross the Red Sea ; this appears to be 

 the most improbable of all the theories yet put forth. 

 The third theory has much in its favour, for the passage 

 across the Straits of Bab el-Mandeb would be easy, and 

 the distance from shore to shore was probably less in 

 NO. I 3 10, VOL. 51] 



those days than now. There exists yet another theory^ 

 however, as to the Asiatic origin of the Egyptians. In a_ 

 paper read at the Oriental Congress in 1892, Dr. Hommel 

 boldly asserted that the Egyptian civilisation was 

 derived from that of Babylon, and he attempted to prove 

 that the names of the gods of the one country were but 

 slightly modified forms of those of the others. Egypto- 

 logists have not, up to the present, accepted this theory. 

 A still more remarkable theory is that of Reinisch, who 

 believes that Asiatics, Europeans and Africans spring 

 from one family, whose original home was in the heart 

 of Africa, near the great equatorial lakes. M. Maspero 

 does not accept the theory of an Asiatic origin, but rather 

 believes that the Egyptian 



"population presents the characteristics of those white 

 races which have been found established from all anti- 

 quity on the Mediterranean slope of the Libyan continent ; 

 this population is of African origin, and came to Egypt 

 from the west or south-west. In the valley, perhaps, it 

 may have met with a black race which it drove back or 

 destroyed ; and there, perhaps, too, it afterwards received 

 an accretion of Asiatic elements, introduced by way of 

 the isthmus and marshes of the Delta." 



The caution with which M. Maspero puts forth this 

 theory shows that he has some doubts about it, and, 

 indeed, leaves the question exactly where it was. As to 

 the relationship between the Semitic languages and the 

 language of the hieroglyphics, he has no doubt that at one 

 time they all belonged to the same group ; the latter, how- 

 ever, separated from the former very early, "at a time when- 

 the vocabulary and the grammatical system of the group 

 had not as yet taken definite shape." This is an important 

 pronouncement for an Egyptologist to make, and although 

 it was said long ago by Semitic scholars, it is none the 

 less welcome since it comes from one of the first Egypt- 

 ologists of our times. Passing from the origin of the 

 people to their religion and manners and customs, M. 

 Maspero concisely and graphically describes their gods 

 and mythology, and the beliefs which swayed the minds 

 of the Egyptians for several thousands of years. The 

 size of M. Maspero's work and the limits of a brief article 

 absolutely preclude the possibility of noticing many rew 

 points in these subjects, which are admirably described, 

 and we rapidly pass from the account of the political 

 constitution of Egypt to the historical section of this 

 division of the book, which treats of the first fourteen. 

 dynasties. 



The second part of the volume follows the plan of the 

 first, and sets out by describing the country, people, 

 gods, &c., of the ancient Chaldasans, or more properly 

 Babylonians, and the chapter which treats of their ideas 

 concerning the Creation is of considerable interest. In 

 this M. Maspero has rightly relied upon Jensen's epoch- 

 marking book, " Die Kosmologie der Babylonier," for 

 information, but it is to be regretted that Zimmern's 

 translations of the "Creation" and other tablets were not 

 published in time to be used by him. M. Maspero is, 

 however, the first to describe popularly the excellent 

 results achieved by Jensen in a subject which before he 

 treated it was truly chaos. Passing to historical times, 

 M. Maspero describes the foundation of the Babylonian 

 empire, basing all his statements upon a series of works 

 by Assyriological authorities, and cleverly harmonising 



