Page:Encyclopædia Britannica, Ninth Edition, v. 7.djvu/761

737 THE EMPIRE.] EGYPT 737 Egyptians were civilized conquerors, and the sculptures of their battles do not represent any scenes of extreme cruelty. They do not, however, seem to have known the art of effectually holding their acquisitions, which had to be reconquered over and over again, until the inevitable tide of conquest on the other side set in, and the Empire fell. On examining the earliest monuments of Dynasty XVIII. we are startled by their astonishing resemblance to those of Dynasty XL, a resemblance which would, had we no historical evidence on the other side, justify the leap of the Tablet of Abydos from Dynasty XII. to XVIII. This may be partly explained as a renaissance of art due to a royal descent traced rather to Dynasty XL than Dynasty XII. Similarly under Dynasty XXVI. there was a renaissance of the art of the age of the early Memphite Dynasties. We must also not lose sight of the local character of Egyptian art and its intense conservatism, which may have preserved an ancient type through many centuries. The early art of Dynasty XVIII. has this char acter of a survival ; that of Dynasty XXVI. is clearly a modem imitation. The art of this age is in some respects the finest Egypt produced ; it is, perhaps, best about the time of Thothmes III. and Amenophis II., the middle of Dynasty XVIII. It is inferior in naturalism to the art of Dynasty IV., and in delicacy to that of Dynasty XII., but it has a certain splendour before wanting. After it had attained its highest point it slowly declined, partly from a decay in the vigour of the national character, perhaps more from the vast size of the later monuments, which must have led io a neglect of finish in the details, though this neglect can only be seen by one who is thoroughly acquainted with the Egyptian styles. At all times there is an invincible patience in the mastery of material and the execution of detail. The temples, not the kings tombs, are now the largest and most costly edifices ; though a compromise with the old idea is effected by making grand temples as sepulchral chapels in religious connection with the royal tombs, comme morating in their sculptures the events of the reigns. The tombs of subjects do not maintain the proportion the earlier ones hold to the royal sepulchres. Their paintings have less of daily life, and religion takes a greater and growing place on the walls. We have, however, a multi tude of interesting scenes, which show us a life more luxurious in the many than that of earlier times, but not as splendid in the few. There is more of feasting, of music, and the dance, less of country life and the welfare of the retainers. The royal tumbs are now grottoes deeply cut in the rock, and the pictures of their walls are religious, the historical part being left to the funereal temples. Amenhotep or Amenophis I., son of Aahmes and his Ethiopian queen, carried on the Ethiopian wars. It is of his son, the next king, Thothmes L, that the great eastern campaigns are first recorded. He advanced as far as the Euphrates, and must therefore have subdued, or at least marched through, the greatest part of Phoenicia and Syria. The prosperity of Egypt at this time is shown by the splendid works he executed in the great temple of Amen-ra at Thebes, the earliest of their kind that we can trace, and apparently the beginning of the series which was only to cease with the fall of the Empire. The employment of captives in public works was the main means by which they could be carried out. Probably after a time all that Egypt could do was to furnish men for the army, and in even this she failed when the dynasty came to an end. Before his death Thothmes I. had associated with him on the throne his daughter Hatshepu, or Hatasu (Maspero, Hist. Anc., 201), who succeeded him with her elder brother and husband Thoth mes II. Her power is an evidence of the importance the Egyptians attached to the female line. At the same time their dislike to be governed by a queen is evident in the attempt she subsequently made to assume the character of a king, being represented in male attire, a circumstance to which the monuments present no parallel. After the seemingly uneventful reign of Thothmes II., Hatshepu was associated, apparently as regent, with her younger brother Thothmes III., and usurped the sole power. It is in this time that she appears as a king. She continued the works of the temple of Amen-ra, where the great obelisk and its fallen fellow bear her name. Her most interesting achievement was an expedition to Punt, either the Somalee country or Arabia Felix. She collected a fleet on the Red Sea, and herself commanded it. The people accepted her rule, and she brought back great tribute, including small spice-trees, which she planted at Thebes. The glimpse we thus gain into the state of the civilization of the spice-growing countries at this remote age is most valuable, and explains the facility with which the southern dominions of Egypt were held. The nations in this direction were not masses of barbarous tribes, but their civilization did not take the direction of the pursuits of war. Hatshepu had reigned about twenty -one years when Thothmes III. succeeded her. He carefully effaced her name on the monuments, substituting that of his brother and his own, and reckoned his reign from her accession. Whether he thus included his brother s reign or not we do not know. With the sole reign of Thothmes III. a series of great expeditions begins, from the records of which we have great insight into the condition of Syria and Palestine about the 15th century B.C. It will be well here to glance for a moment at the Egyptian geography of this territory. There is great difficulty in explaining it, probably due to the different names apparently given to the same countries and peoples at one and the same time or at different times. We may, however, gain somewhat in clearness by observ ing that more than one important geographical name can only be an Egyptian appellative. Thus the Shasu, who were wander-, ing Arabs of the desert, who moved up as now into Palestine for pasturage or on predatory excursions, are nothing but &quot;rob bers.&quot; Most other names may be probably identified with Semitic equivalents. Syria is called Khal : this word is connected with Syria by the late equivalent Asher (cf. Maspero, Hist. Anc., 181, note 1), which shows that the Egyptians then identified Syria and Assyria. The great nation of Syria in the time of Thothmes III. was the Ruten. These may be the Shemites of the stock of Lud, and may be also the Lydians in a primitive seat. Under Ramses II. the Kheta, a northern division of the Hittites, held the political position of the Ruten, as though the Ruten had migrated. As the Ruten probably represent the Aramaeans, so the Hittites represent the Canaanites. The Phoenicians appear to be the Kefa ; in the time of Thothmes III. they held an insular position in the Mediterranean, probably Cyprus; under Ptolemy III., they give their name to rhosnicia. They are clearly the Biblical Caphtorim. The Philistines do not appear until the time of Ramses III. None of the primitive nations whom the Bible men tions as supplanted in the period before Joshua have been traced on the monuments, nor is there any clear notice before the time of Sheshonk I. (Shishak) of the Terahites. The period of Thothmes III. is one of Aramcean supremacy, that of Ramses II. of Ca- naanite ; together they well correspond to the age before the Israelite conquest, while the condition of the time of Ramses III. suits the latest age of the Judges. The names of towns present less difficulty. Many are traceable in Biblical geography, and hero but one indication occurs which may point to Israelite occupation. The Egyptian conquests on the east being tributary, there were constant revolts on the accession of new sove reigns. It was thus that Thothmes III., on becoming sole ruler, had immediately to reduce the Ruten and their neighbours. This caused the series of eastern campaigns, which began in the twenty-second year, very early in his sole reign, and certainly extended to the forty-second, during which whole time there was seldom a year of repose. The history of these wars is told in the Annals of Thothmes III., which contrast favourably with those of the Assyrian kings. VII. 93