Page:Catholic Encyclopedia, volume 5.djvu/392

 EGYPT

342

EGYPT

coalition to which one of Sheshonk's successors — probably Takelot II — had contributed one thousand men (854 b. c). Under such circumstances Egypt's influence in Palestine must have dwindled to nothing.

One of the Delta lords, Pedibast, at the death of Sheshonk IV, the last king of the Twenty-second Dynasty, succeeded in establishing a new dynasty, which Manetho places at Tanis, although Pedibast was of Bubastite origin. But neither he himself nor his successors could control the situation. Under his successor, Osorkon III, a dynast of Sais, Tefnakhte undertook to supplant him and the many other dy- nasts, several of whom were claiming the title and prerogatives of royalty. He had partly succeeded when Piankhi, ruler of the independent kingdom of Napata (see above), overran Egypt as far as the Med- iterranean, obliging all the pretenders, Osorkon and Tefnakhte included, to recognize his suzerainty. But as soon as the invaders had withdrawn, Tefnaklite re- sinned his designs and was eventually successful in sub- duing Osorkon, who acknowledged himself his vassal. (We must refer to this period the King of Egypt mentioned in IV Kings, xvii, 4, as inciting Osee of Sa- maria to rebel against Shalmanaser IV.) Tefnakhte's son Bochoris, however, was regarded as the founder of a new dynasty, his father, probably, having died be- fore Osorkon. Scarcely had he reigned six years when Shabaka, Pianklii's brother, invaded Egypt in his turn, and so firmly did he intrench himself there that he became the founder of the Twenty-fifth, or Ethiopian, Dynasty. Unfortimately for him and his successors, Assyria, having absorbed all the principal states of Syria and Palestine, and holding the others well under control, was now threatening to invade the territory of Egypt. Shabaka, alive to the danger, formed an alliance with Philistia, Juda, Moab, Edom, and Tyre, against Sennacherib, and sent to Syria an .imiy \inder the command of his nephew Taharka (cf. I\ Kings, xix, 9, where Taharka is called King of 1 Jliiii|>ia). The allies were completely defeated, and Sennacherib was beleaguering Jerusalem, which alone, so far, with Tyre, had resisted him, when, to use the words of the Bible, "an angel of the Lord came, and slew in the camp of the Assyrians a hundred and eighty-five thousand. And when he arose early in the morning, he saw all the bodies of the dead. And Sennacherib king of the Assyrians departing went away, and he returned and abode in Ninive" (IV Kings, xix, 35, 36). But the power of Assyria was not broken for all that, although Taharka, who was now reigning, might have believed it when, twenty-seven years later, he succeeded in repelling Esar-haddon, of which repulse he made great display on the pedestal of a statue of his, drawing on the lists left by Ramses II of Asiatic captured cities to swell his own victory. In 670 the Assyrians appeared again, more formidable than ever, defeated Taharka, captured Memphis, and withdrew after having organized at least Lower Egypt into an Assyrian dependency. Among the princes who hastened to do homage to the King of Assyria the first place is given to Necho of Sais, a descendant of Tefnakhte through Bochoris. Taharka had fled to the south, where he raised fresh troops, and marched on Lower Egjrpt hoping to recover the lost provinces, but with no other result than to bring back the Assy- rians, who routed him again and pursued him almost as far as Thebes (668 b. c). The reigning family of the Delta, who had sided with him, were sent to Nine- veh in chains. Necho was one of them, but he knew how to ingratiate himself with Assurbanipal, who re- stored him to his Kingdom of Sais. Tanutamon, having succeeded his father Taharka (663 B. c), imdertook in his turn the recovery of Lower Egypt, but with no better success. This time Assurbanipal 's army pursued the enemy to Thebes, which was sacked and plundered.

Psamtik, son of Necho, took advantage of the

struggle in which his protector, Assurbanipal, had now become involved with Babylonia to free himself from the Assyrian allegiance. He succeeded in sup- pressing practically all of the mercenary lords and local dynasties, repaired the long-neglected irrigation system, and gave a strong impulse to commerce. The Twenty-sixth Dynasty, which he introduces, was. as a whole, a period of restoration and great internal pros- perity. It was also a period of renascence in art, re- ligion, and literature, marked by a return to archaic traditions. Industrial art flourished as never before. The army was reorganized and strengthened with large contingents of Greek mercenaries, the Libyans having lost their efficiency in becoming Egyptianized. Psamtik does not seem to have made much use of the army, but Necho and his successors could not refrain from interfering with the affairs of Asia. The tempta- tion was great. During the long reign of Psamtik I Assyria had been constantly declining. In 609 he was succeeded by his son Necho, and three years later Nineveh was finally captured, and Assyria had come to an end forever. Necho thought this a favourable chance to recover the old Asiatic possessions of Egypt, and marched on Carchemish (cf. II Paralip., xxxv, 20; Jerem., xlvi, 7-9). At Magiddo the King of Juda, Josias, who foolishly persisted in disputing his passage, w'as routed and mortally wounded (II Para- lip., xxxv, 22). This incident brought Necho to Jeru- salem, where he deposed Joahaz, the successor of Josias, and put in his place his brother Eliakim, changing his name to Jehoiakira. As for Joahaz, he took him to Egypt (II Paralip., xxxvi, 1—1; cf. IV Kings, xxiii, 29-34). Hearing of Necho's conquest, Nabopolassar, to whom that country had fallen in the division of Assyria's possessions, sent his son Nebuchadnezzar (Nabuchodonosor) to check his advance. Necho was so completely defeated at Carchemish (605 b. c.) that he did not dare to make another stand, and retreated to Egypt ; " And the king of Egypt came not again any more out of his own country: for the king of Babylon had taken all that had belonged to the king of Egypt, from the river of Egypt, unto the river Euphrates" (IV Kings, xxiv, 7). Apries (5S8-569 b. c), Necho's second successor, was not more fortunate in a similar attempt. Zedekiah had sent to him for assistance against Nebuchadnezzar (Ezech., xvii, 15), but Apries either retired without fighting (Jerem., xxxvii, 6) or was defeated (Josephus, Antiq. Jud., X, vii, §3), and Jerusalem was captured, and her temple destroyed (587 B. c). When, however, the remnant of the Jews fled to Egypt, taking Jeremiah with them, Apries re- ceived them and allowed them to settle in different cities of the Delta, at Memphis, and in LTpper Egypt (Jer., xli, 17-18; xliv, 1). — Such, very likely, was the origin of the Jewish colony established in the island of Elephantine "before Cambyses", as related in the Judseo-Aramaic papyri recently discovered there (see below, under Twenty-seventh Dj'nasty). Later, probably after Tyre had finally surrendered to the Chaldeans (574), Apries successfully carried out a naval expedition against Phcenicia (Masp., Hist, anc, 639; Breasted, Hist, of the Anc. Egypt., 409, places that expedition in 587 B. c).

The reverses of Necho and Apries in Asia did not affect the prosperity of Egypt during the reign of these two pharaohs, any more than did the rivalry of one of his officials, Amasis, whom Apries had sent to repn"'ss a mutiny of the Egj-ptian native troops, and who was proclaimed king by them. Apries and Amasis reigned together for some time, and when, a conflict having arisen between the two, Apries was defeated and slain, Amasis gave him an honourable burial. Strange to say, Amasis, who had been the champion of the native element as against the Greeks, now favoured the latter far more than any of his predecessors. He fotmded for them the city of Naucratis, in the Delta, as a home and market, and they soon made it the most impoi*-