Page:Encyclopædia Britannica, Ninth Edition, v. 7.djvu/768

744 44 EGYPT [lIISTCKY. felt at these reverses, changed his policy, and vented his rage upon the monuments and objects of worship in Egypt. The Saite priest, in general terms, describes this as a time of calamity such as had never before befallen his country. Cambyses left Egypt, which was so completely crushed that the subsequent usurpation of the Magian was marked by no revolt. One of the first cares of Darius I. was to charge Uta- har-sun with the restoration of the disordered country. In a visit to Egypt at the moment when a revolt had broken out, he pacified the people by supporting their religion, in the most marked contrast to Cambyses. For the rest of his reign he endeavoured to promote the commercial welfare of Egypt, in particular opening the canal from the Nile to the Red Sea. In the Great Oasis he built a temple to Ainmon. It was not until tha very close of his reign that the Egyptians rose against his rule, and expelled the Persians, choosing as king Khabbash, whose name has been discovered in the Sarapeum. The revolt lasted but three years, and Xerxes I. suppressed it with severity. Achcemenes, the brother of Xerxes, was made satrap. Egypt did not again rise until the troubles which marked the accession of Artaxerxes I. The insurrection was led by Inaros, prince of Marea, who immediately concluded an alliance with the Athenians. Supported by 200 Athenian triremes, he defeated and slew the satrap Achoemenes, and besieged in the citadel of Memphis the remnant of the Persian army, which, though it included Egyptian soldiers, held out until the attacking force was drawn off by a fresh Persian army. The Egyptians and their allies were now driven to the island of Prosopitis, and there besieged for eighteen months. At last Inaros was taken and put to death; Amyrtseus, an Egyptian who reigned with him, fled to the marshes, where he long maintained himself. Artaxerxes, after this serious revolt of six years, modified the adminis tration of Egypt, recognizing Thanuyras, son of Inaros, and Pausiris, of Arnyrtams, as vassal kings. The govern ment was, however, held by a Persian satrap; these were merely local princes. An Amyrtseus, probably son of Pausiris (Maspero, Hist. Atw.y 562), revolted, and on the death of Darius it, B.C. 404, made Egypt virtually independent. He is the one king of Dynasty XXVIII., Saite, His successor, Naifaau- rut I., founded Dynasty XXIX. of Mendesians, B.C. 399. &quot;With him the monuments, silent since the rising of Khab bash, again give us information, and under the next dynasty show that the Sa ite art still lived in spite of the misfor tunes the country had undergone. The Mendesians Nai- faaurut and Hakor are chiefly known for the part they took in aiding the enemies of Persia. Hakor was followed by Naifaaurut II., and then the sovereignty passed to Dynasty XXX. of Mendesians, the last native Egyptian line. The first of these kings, Nekht-har-heb, or Nectanebes I., came to the throne when a Persian invasion was immi nent, B.C. 378. Hakor had already formed a powerful army, largely composed of Greek mercenaries. This army Nekht- har-heb intrusted to the Athenian Chabrias. The Persians, however, succeeded in causing his recall and in gaining the services of his fellow-countryman Iphicrates. The invading army consisted of 200,000 barbarians under Pharnabazus and 20,000 Greeks under Iphicrates. After the Egyptians had experienced a reverse, Iphicrates counselled an imme diate advance on Memphis. His advice was not followed by Pharnabazus ; the Egyptian king collected his forces and won a pitched battle near Mendes. Pharnabazus retreated, and Egypt was free. Nekht-har-heb was succeeded by Tachos or Teos, whose short reign was occupied by a war with Persia, in which the king of Egypt secured the services of a body of Greek mercenaries under the Spartan king Agesilaus and a fleet under the Athenian general Chabrias. He entered Phoenicia with every prospect of success but having offended Agesilaus, he was dethroned in a military revolt which gave the crown to Nekht-nebf, or Nectanebes II., the last native king of Egypt. At this moment a revolt broke out. The prince of Mendes almost succeeded in overthrowing the new king. Agesilaus defeated the rival pretender, and left Nekht-nebf established on the throne. P&amp;gt;ut the opportunity of a decisive blow against Persia was lost. The new king, Artaxerxes III. Ochus, determined to reduce Egypt. A first expedition was defeated by the Greek mercenaries of Nekht-nebf, but a second, commanded by Ochus himself, subdued Egypt with no further resistance than that of the Greek garrison of Pelusium. Nekht-nebf, instead of endeavouring to relieve them, retreated to Memphis and fled thence to Ethiopia, B.C. 340] Thus miserably fell the monarchy of the Pharaohs after an unex ampled duration of nearly 3000 years, or as some think far longer. More than 2000 yeans have since passed, and though Egypt has from time to time been independent, not one native prince has sat on the throne of the Pharaohs. &quot; There shall be no more a prince of the land of Egypt&quot; (Ezek. xxx. 13) was prophesied in the days of Apries as the final state of the land. The causes of the downfall of Egypt are sufficiently evident in the previous history. The weakness of the later Thebans fostered divisions. The Bubastites aided the natural tendency of the country to break up into small principalities. The Ethiopians, while they brought a new force to resist the Assyrians, increased the divisions of Egypt, which had to choose to which of two foreign empires it would submit. The Saites restored nationality, but they maintained it at the cost of alienating the native troops, and thus could not effectually resist Persia. Although their gallant struggles brought out the fighting qualities of the Egyptians, these Pharaohs could never venture on a great war without G reek mercenaries. Hence constant discontent and an inharmonious military system. At length the native energy was worn out. The barbarian Ochus used his success mercilessly, rivalling the worst acts of Cambyses. Under him and his successors Egypt made no movement, and when Alexander entered the country as the conqueror of Persia he was welcomed as a deliverer. The Persian governor had not forces enough to oppose him, and he experienced nowhere even the show of resistance. He visited Memphis, founded Alexandria, and went on pilgrimage to the oracle of Jupiter Ammon. He then organized the government under two officers, who from their names appear to have been a Greek and an Egyptian. He left the Egyptians satisfied with his reverence for their religion, and for the rest of his reign the country remained a peaceful province of his great empire. With Alexander, the Macedonian dominion began. It lasted for 302 years, after the Empire the brightest period of Egyptian history, during the whole of which no general native revolt broke out. From this time the Egyptian local princes, who for five centuries, except only during the rule of Psametik and his house, had caused all the divisions of Egypt, disappear from the scene. This final settlement was probably due to the policy of Alexander, under whose successors we see the real govern ment of the country, with its centre in the Greek city he had founded, and the control of the army and navy, intrusted to Greeks; whereas the native religion was protected, but wholly left to the Egyptian priests, except so far as the king himself acted as one of the priesthood. Thus the foreigners had all the true power, while the natives were satisfied with a semblance of it, and the local importance this semblance gave to their functionaries. Routes of trade were actively pushed, and works of public benefit carried out, aud the Egyptians grew more and more