The Ramakrishna Mission
Institute of Culture Library
Presented by
Dr. Baridbaran Mukerji
RMIOL—8
15598
EGYPT’S PLACE IN UNIVERSAL HISTORY:
CHRISTIAN ὁ, 4. BUNSEN, D.Pa. & D.C.
TRANSLATED FROM THE CERMAN,
BY CHARLES H. COTTRELL, ESQ., M.A.
VOL, I.
LONDON: LONGMAN, BROWN, GREEN, AND LONGMANS,
PATERNOSTER- ROW.
1848.
᾿ \ I [ |
ry
{
- 9
4 , nn a joo | ere ae ae ~| a i i ice 1 Neer
{pom
jm κω.’
ἐμω- | : he temps
=
te ree wens Dn.
+
»- . ν» ed Ls . ΓΝ -- -“ -? a - ? ne
-
-. “' 4 ”
ae
{
HGYPT’S PLACE IN UNIVERSAL HISTORY.
VoL. lL CONTAINING THE FIRST BOOK, (RCES AND PRIMEVAL FACTS OF EGYPTIAN HISTORY ;
EGYPTIAN GRAMMAR AND DICTIONARY, AND A COMPLETE LIST OF HIEROGLYPHICAL SIGNS ς
AN APPENDIX OF AUTHORITIES, ees ING THE COMPLETE TEXT OF MANETHQ AND ERATOSTHENES, ASGYPTIACA EROM © oe - «- . fave its PLINY, STRABO, BTC. ;
AND VLATES REPRESENTING THE EGYPTIAN DIVINITIES,
JLoxnon:
Sprortiswoone and Snaw, New-street-Square.
ΓΟ
FREDERIC WILLIAM THE FOURTH KING OF PRUSSIA
THE ENLIGHTENED FRIEND OF ANTIQUITY AND LOVER OF RESEARCH
ὃ THE FIRST GERMAN PRINCE WHO SENT A SCIENTIFIC COMMISSION TO EGYPT A:THIOPIA AND SINAL FOR THE PURPOSE OF EXAMINING
THEIR MOST ANCIENT HISTORICAL MONUMENTS
THE SOVEREIGN WHO
SECURED LEISURE AND INSPIRED COURAGE TO UNDERTAKE THIS WORK
HIS MOST GRACIOUS MASTER AND PATRON
THESE FIRST FRUITS OF HIS RESEARCHES IN ANCIENT HISTORY ARE
WITH GRATITUDE AND RESPECT
Wevdicated HY
THE AUTHOR
PREFACK.
Twenry ycars have now elapsed since I became con- vinced by Champollion’s lectures and writings, as well as by my own examination of the Egyptian monu- ments at Rome, and particularly the obelisks, that the great discovery of the Hieroglyphical System would prove to be of the highest importance for the ancient history of Mankind. In analysing its bearing upon the course of historical research pursued in Germany and upon my own studies, three questions presented themselves. Is the Chronology of Egypt, as embodied in the Dynasties of Manetho, capable of restoration, wholly or in part, by means of the monuments and the names of its Kings? Will the Egyptian language enable us to establish the position of the Egyptians, as a nation, in primeval history, and especially their connexion with the tribes of the Aramaic and Indo- Germanic stock ? Lastly, may we hope, by persevering in a course of Hgyptian research based, in the strictest sense of the word, on historical principles, to obtain for the History of Mankind a more sure and unfailing toun- dation than we at present possess ?
The scientific assumptions and views with which I set out in the solution of these three questions were, in the main, as follows.
The Roman researches of Niebuhr had proved to me the uncertainty of the chronological system of the
A 4
Vill PREFACE.
Greeks, beyond the Olympiads; and that even, Euse- bius’s chronicle, as preserved in the Armenian transla- tion, furnishes merely isolated, although important, data for the Assyrian and Babylonian chronology beyond the era of Nabonassar. Again, as regards the Jewish com- putation of time, the study of Scripture had long convinced me, that there is in the Old Testament no connected chronology prior to Solomon. All that now passes for a system of ancient chronology beyond that fixed point, is the melancholy legacy of the 17th and 18th centuries; a compound of intentional deceit and utter misconception of the principles of historical research. [Egyptian history is the only one which possesses contemporary monuments of those primeval ages, and at the same time offers points of contact with the primitive tribes of Asia, especially the Jewish, from the latest up to the earliest times. [0 is here, if anywhere, that materials are to be gathered for the foundation of a chronology of the pldest history of nations. Thus much for the first question.
German philology, to any one who has cultivated it since Irederic Schlegel, must necessarily present the great truth, that a method has been found of restoring the genealogy of mankind, through the me- dium of language; not by means of forced, isolated etymologies, but by taking a large and comprehensive view of the organic and indestructible fabric of indi- vidual tongues, according to the family to which they belong. Viewing the question upon the princi iples esta- blished by those eieacareliog: I found a comparison of the Coptic language with such roots and forms of the Old Egyptian as were then discovered, sufficient to remove from my mind all doubt as to the Asiatic origin of the Kyyptians, and their affinity with the Semitic οὐ Aramaic stock. But 1 had, moreover, long arrived
PREFACE. ΙΧ
at the conclusion, from a more general study of lan- guage, that the civilisation of the human race is principally due to two great families of nations, whose connexion is a fact as much beyond the possibility of mistake, as is their early separation. What we call ‘Wniversal history necessarily therefore appeared to me, from this point of view, as the history of two races, who, under a variety of names, represent the develop- ment of the human mind. Of these, the Indo-Germanic seemed to me the one which carried on the main stream of history; the Aramaic, that which crossed it, and formed the episodes in the divine drama. It had struck me, therefore, as a convenient course, and in our time in particular a most appropriate one, to make the structure of the language of these two parent stocks the basis of all research into the origin of the human race, and the laws of its development.
Proceeding upon these views, I had endeavoured, be- tween the years 1812 and 1815, to strike out a plan for discovering the strictly historical principle in philology, that is to say, the principle which explains the gradual development of the phenomena. The result was a full conviction that this principle was discoverable. In order to test my views on the subject in a field where the facts are incontrovertible, I first undertook to analyse the formation of the Romanic languages. Here the main point was to discover the general law by which new languages are formed out of a declining one, through «a change in the ideas of the people, and usually also by the introduction of new materials. I then turned my attention to the history of the Scandinavian languayes. There my principal object was to find a universal formula for the relation which a colonial lan- guage (like the Icelandic) bears, on the one side, to the old tongue of the mother-country, and on the other to
X PREFACE.
the modern idioms which there may have entirely su- perseded it. The old form of the language may thus be preserved in the colony, owing to the interrup- tion of its progressive natural development,. whilst in the mother-country, in the course of national vicis- situdes, new formations took place, by a gradual wear- ing out of flexions, and generalisation of the meaning of the old roots, according to the ordinary rules of the development of language. Now the Icelandic appeared to ine to possess Immense importance for the solution of the general problem, as being identical with the Old Norse, and as forming the point of departure for the Swedish and Danish, which in Scandinavia have succceded that old idiom. In order to make a practical use of this method and the formulas discovered by means of it, I had likewise sought at an early stage of my inquiries for a lever applicable to universal history; for what is truce in a small circle must also be so in a larger and the largest. In consequence of the unexpected light thrown on history by the discoverics in hieroglyphics, the Egyptian language at last appeared to me to offer such a lever. It clearly stands between the Semitic and Indo-Germanic; for its forms and roots cannot be explained by either of them singly, but are evidently a combination of the two. If, then, it be of Asiatic origin, and consequently introduced by colonisation into the valley of the Nile, where it became naturalised, it will enable us to pronounce upon the state of the Asiatic language from which it sprang, and consequently upon an unknown period of mental development in primeval Asia. Thus much as to the assumptions from which I started upon the second of the three questions.
It is manifestly useless to attempt a satisfactory restoration of the oldest national histories, or to esta- blish thc true philosophy of primeval history on a solid
PREFACE. Ἢ X1
basis, before the chronology of the historic ages is settled, and the laws of language in the ante-historical are defined. Will not Egyptian Chronology and Philo- logy, hqwever, impart a new element of vitality to both these departments, and do they not offer very im- portant points of contact with the ancient and most ancient national history of Asia ?
Again, do not the Egyptian Monuments possess this paramount superiority over all others, that their inserip- tions and dates remove all doubt as to the course of the development of art; the epochs of which it is so impor- tant to determine, and which nevertheless, as regards individual monuments, are everywhere else mere mat- ters of conjecture, not excepting even those of Greece ? Egyptian art is clearly as old as the history of the nation, and a highly important phenomenon in ge- neral history. The chronology being settled, will not vestiges of the Egyptian Mythology enable us to draw new and valuable conclusions as to the history of religious traditions and speculations, not only in Egypt, but in the world in general ?
Lastly, and above all, can it not be demonstrated, mainly through the instrumentality of Egypt, that Language, the immediate type and organ of the mind, ranks as the oldest authentic record of mental develop- ment in the primordial epochs of the human race ? At the very outset of my historical aspirations, I had as strong a conviction of the existence of laws by which the development of the human mind is governed in all its branches, as of the impossibility of discovering them by research without theory, or by theory without research. Winckelmann assumed the existence of such laws in the history of art, and he discovered them. Herder, in like manner, had a forecast of their existence in the universal history of mankind. Since the days of
Xil PREFACE.
those philosophers and Kant, German science, consciously and unconsciously, has had a manifest tendency to en- large the sphere of observation as regards the objects both of religious and natural knowledae: This it has done by the joint aid of philology, history, and philo- sophy; from the want of which combination endless misunderstandings and confusion occurred in the last two centuries. We may hope, therefore, to attain at least to an approximate solution of the problem we propose, now that the sphere of history has been so considerably extended beyond the limits assigned to it in those early days of Egyptian research.
Starting with these views and assumptions, | resolved to pursue the Egyptian inquiry independently. My attention was necessarily directed, in the first place, to the Chronology, the key to all further advancement. Here, however, 1 could not but be aware that success must depend in a great measure upon the method adopted. The point at issue was, the application of the principles of criticism, by which a scicntific study of history is guided, to the philological sources of Egyp- tian chronology. This, for reasons not difficult to explain, had never been hitherto attempted; as indeed it never has been, thoroughly, to the present hour. I very soon saw that the systems of chronology in- vented, or adopted, at the moment of the discovery of the great historical names of Psammetichus, Sesak, and Ramesses, were utterly untenable. The tablet of Aby- dos stimulated and encouraged me to attempt a solution of the contradictions between the monuments and Mane- tho. It was in December, 1832, that I first succeeded im finding the key to the restoration of the 18th and 19th Dynasties, which produced such immediate satisfactory results as increased iny ardour in pursuing the same course. The following years completed the restoration
PREFACE. ΧΕ
of the chronology of the New Iimpire from the 18th to the 30th Dynasty. In 1834 I discovered in the list of Eratosthenes the key to the restoration of the first 12 Dynasties of Manetho, and was thereby enabled to fix the length of the Old Empire. These two points being settled, the next step obviously was, to fill up the chasm between the Old and New Empires, which 1s commonly called the Hyksos Period ; and, aftcr the preliminary steps had been taken by a critical examination of the dif- ferent authorities, [ commenced in the year 1835 the chronological portion of my inquiry, proceeding from the earlicr down to later times, whereas the inquiry itself was necessarily conducted in the reverse direction. In all main points the chronological result of my labours was the same as is now presented to the public in the first three books of this work, after it has been tested nearly twelve years.
During this process, however, I found so many chasms in the monuments, that I should never have had the resolution to enter systematically into all the details, had not my acquaintance with Lepsius, in the spring of 1836, been the means of introducing me to a variety of hither- to unknown treasures. These consisted of HKgyptian monuments hidden in various European collections, numerically very considerable, and of the highest im- portance as furnishing corrcctions of, as well as additions to, our previous knowledge. The most invaluable of all was the friendly and zealous assistance I received from himself. My connexion with him I consider as the most fortunate of the many favourable circumstances which have attended me during the course of my Egyp- tian studies. From that time forward, 1 thought seri- ously of investigating thoroughly all the three questions above alluded to; and determined to run the risk of having my discoveries anticipated by others, rather
X1V ies PREFACE.
than publish’ them precipitately and in an incomplete state. With this view, I collected voluminous materials for the historical synchronisms in the years 1836 and 1837, and commenced the preliminary rescarches rela- tive to the language and mythology.
At the very beginning of January, 1838, when a crisis in the diplomatic relations between Prussia and the Court of Rome produced a temporary cessation of my official duties, and created in me the want of an absorb- ing mental occupation, 1 commenced writing the work which I now present to the public. It advanced so rapidly that the chronological researches requisite for the second, third, and fourth books, the greater part of them at least, were prepared in the first ‘three months, and communicated to some of my friends, substantially in the shape in which they have been published after an interval of seven years. The greater part of the my- thological portion also, which forms the sixth section of this volume, was composed at that time, although completed subsequently at Munich.
An examination, during this and the following year, of the treasures of the British Museum, and cspe- cially of the inscriptions and works of art found in and near the great Pyramids, furnished me with the means and desire of making many additions to, and of re-writing a portion of, the work. It still bore in many parts too evident traces of the preliminary researches and investigations made during its composition. At Berne, in January, 1841, I set about remodelling it, owing to the discoveries made by Lepsius in the Royal Papyrus at Turin, and his examination of other monuments. With the exception of some slight alterations, the first two chapters of the third book were then written, in the shape in which they are now published. The chrono- logieal tables of Egyptian history, and its points of
PREFACE. | XV
synchronism in the Jewish, Babylonian, Assyrian, and Persian histories, which I had arranged for my own ‘use, were likewise completed at that time, in the form in which they will appear in a subsequent volume.
The finishing stroke was put to the second book in December, 1842, when Perring’s important work, a continuation of General Vyse’s description of the Pyra- mids of Gizeh, appeared. The results which it contained of the opening and examination of the other groups of Pyramids furnished me, quite unexpectedly, with much new and valuable matter in proof of my assertion, that they are the tombs of the Kings of the Old Empire, and the most important monuments of its grandeur. The printing of the second book, which commenced in the beginning of 1843, was concluded towards the close of that year.
Lepsius’s mission to Egypt, in September, 1842, warned me, on the one hand, against offering a precipi- tate judgment upon those points about which doubts existed, owing to the want of monuments; and, on the other, held out an inducement to publish all that was known for certain upon sufficient monumental evidence. The discovery of new monuments was not likely to furnish additional materials for completing or correct- ing the chronological system | had laid down, except, in the case of the Old Empire; and that, indeed, merely with respect to the Pyramids of Gizech, Sakkarah, and the Fayum.
This was the very reason, however, whyit seemed desir- able to make known in what state the inquiry was when he went to Egypt, and to insert in its proper place any new discovery which had an important bearing on chro- nology or history, while the work was in the press. All the rest I left to Lepsius, to digest and publish. On the other hand, it seemed a matter of some consequence, to
XV1 PREFACE.
lose no time in showing the general nature of the system of Egyptian chronology which I worked ‘out as long ago as 1888, and which, upon the whole, is the same as that adopted by Lepsius.
Another argument in favour of this course was, to create a stimulus to the study of lgyptian science. Nothing is to be expected for this portion of philology, until the sympathy of all the students of history 15 enlisted in it. This, however, implies two things: first, the arrangement and exposition of every thing which has been, or can be, obtained by means of the hieroglyphics, for Egyptian and general chronology and national history; secondly, an analysis of the language and writing, as well as mythology, of the Egyptians, carried out in an historical sense. There is a want of both, not only in Germany, but everywhere else. Ac- cording to my views, and the plan of this work, such an exposition ought to be given immediately after the general criticism of the authorities, inasmuch as 1t com- prises facts anterior to chronology, and connected with the primeval ages of the world.
In working out the first volume, I was necessarily obliged, not only to go deeper into the details of the hiero- glyphic grammar and character than I had hitherto been able to do, or than was requisite indeed when Lepsius was with me, but also to a certain extent to come to & definite conclusion on the main points of the inquiry which were reserved for the second volume. The conse- quence was, that the first book was printed after the second. Owing to various interruptions, its comple- tion was delayed till the present moment. 3
It seemed to me indispensable, in spite of its savour- ing of a want of modesty, to present my readers with this detailed account of the chronology of the work; not only for the sake of anticipating criticism, either as
PREFACE. XVI1
to its premature or tardy publication ; but more espe- cially in order to show the train of thought to which it owes its present shape, and which I wish to be taken into consideration when it is judged. There was yet another reason; that I might thus briefly explain the unity of the different parts, and their reference to scientific questions now under discussion. It is hardly necessary, perhaps, to state that the gencral assumptions here made will be substantiated and proved in the work itself, to the best of my ability; as far as is requisite, at least, in order to give it a basis of its own, and enable the reader to form an independent opinion for himself.
Upon the execution of the work I wish to offer only one remark. My aim has been to give it the stamp of an historical composition; and in every branch of the subject I have endeavoured to exclude all that did not appear to bear that character. Much, therefore, of the learned substructure, to which, in order to excite further investigation, and in the hope of eliciting useful information from others, 1 should have been glad to
have given a more prominent place, has been in a great measure kept out of sight. Language, writing, my- thology, chronology, and monumental lore, have all of them some phase which is out of place in an historical exposition, however impossible it is for the historian to pass them over when making his own researches. But, on the other hand, there is in all of them an historical element, and this the historian must bring forward; the more so as these points are often over- looked, or at least thrown into the background, in the technical treatises on those particular sciences. It is my firm conviction that every one of those phenomena, however dry or insignificant it appears, may find its place in an historical treatise; and that it is only
VOL, I. a
XVil1 PREFACE.
when taken as a part of history that it acquires its real importance, and is thoroughly understood. I am fully conscious how far I am from coming up to this ideal standard ; but that is no reason why I should not have placed it before me. I am convinced, indeed, that, the further we advance in our Egyptian studies, our labours, instead of increasing, will be diminished. It appeared requisite nevertheless, at the present moment, to discuss many things in detail, which, ten years hence, may perhaps be so self-evident, that we shall forget it was once necessary to prove them.
I am very far, however, from thinking it in character with an historical treatise to omit the mention of the authorities for simple and naked facts. It is, on the contrary, in my opinion, an essential failing in the style of writing history, so much in vogue in modern days, that these authorities are kept out of sight, and that historians are either too proud or too superficial to inform their readers on what foundation their re- searches are based.
For my own part, I have considered it a duty, in every branch of the inquiry, to notice the sources of my information, and fully to detail without any additions, the facts that have been transmitted. 1 have more- over given at the end of this volume an “ Appendix of Authorities” for the benefit of my philological readers. It. contains the whole amended text of the authors quoted in these volumes, whose writings do not form complete historical works like those of Herodotus and Diodorus. With a view to facilitate the studies of Egypto- logers, a complete Hieroglyphical Alphabet, succinctly explained as far as the state of Egyptian research will allow, is likewise subjoined. In elucidation of” the language, again, not only are all the Old Egyptian well-ascertained grammatical forms arranged in a syn-
PREFACE. X1X
optical shape, according to their internal connexion, but an Alphabetical List is likewise given of those roots and words about which no doubt exists. Finally, the Representations of the Divinities, combined with the exposition in the sixth and last section, exhibit the Egyptian Gods as they occur on the monuments, now deciphered, thanks to the discoveries of Champollion, for the first time since the sun of Egypt set.
To those who feel called upon to expose the omis- sions, defects, and errors in this work, I tender my thanks beforehand, begging them, at the same time, not to forget the condition in which I found Egyptian science.
In conclusion, I have only to offer the expression of heartfelt gratitude to all those who have held out their hand to me on the long and solitary road, in a benevo- lent and friendly spirit. To the memory of my friends in Italy, now no more, Sir William Gell and Ippolito Rosellini, I pay this tribute of mournful affection. To those still surviving — Alexander von Humboldt at Berlin; Letronne at Paris; William Hamilton, Dv. Prichard, Sir Gardner Wilkinson, and Mr. Per- ring, in England ; but, above all, to my three valu- able coadjutors, Lepsius and Abeken, the former of whom has lately returned from Egypt, and Mr. Birch of the British Museum (in which a great part of the last three sections of the first volume was written) — I offer my thanks and hearty good wishes. It is unne- cessary and superfluous to make express mention of the great kindness of the curators of the Royal Library at Paris and the British Museum, which is known to, and appreciated by, all the educated world. I must, in conclusion, especially allude to the good offices of M. Maurice Schwartze, the author of the learned work on Egypt, and..Professor of the Coptic language and
. a 2
XX PREFACE.
literature at Berlin, who has kindly revised the Coptic part of my grammar, and been a valuable contributor to the Coptic portion of the Egyptian vocabulary.
POSTSCRIPT.
Highwood, Sept. 27. 1847.
I caynor allow this English translation of my work to appear before the public, without acknowledging the merits of Mr. Cottrell, already known to the English public as the translator of Schiller’s Don Carlos, and Lepsius’s Tour from Thebes to the Peninsula of Sinai, and as the author of Recollections of Siberia in 1840 and 1841. He has bestowed upon the task he undertook a scrupulous diligence and unremitting zeal to make the book English, without destroying what may be idiomatic in the German diction, and characteristic in the style of the author. After the whole of the German text had been translated, that of the first volume, which now appears, has been most carefully revised, and 1 have myself spared no trouble to give him my assistance in this ‘revisfon.
This English edition owes many valuable remarks and additions to my learned friend Mr. Samuel Birch, particularly in the grammatical, lexicographic, and my- thological part. That I have been able to make out of the collection of Egyptian roots, printed in the German edition, a complete hieroglyphical dictionary, is owing to him. To him also belong the references to the ionu- mental evidence for the signification of an Egyptian word, wherever the proof exhibited in Champollion’s
PREFACE. Xxi
dictionary or grammar is not clear or satisfactory. Without any addition to the bulk of the volume, and without any incumbrance to the text, the work may now be said to contain the only complete Egyptian grammar and dictionary, as well as the only existing collection and interpretation of all the hieroglyphical signs; in short, all that a general scholar wants, to make himself master of the hieroglyphic system by studying the monuments.
The hieroglyphical signs, instead of being given in separate plates, have been printed by the side of their respective interpretations. These signs have been drawn by Mr. Bonomi, and cut by Mr. Martin, under the superintendence of Mr. Birch. The text and analysis of the last line of the hieroglyphical inscrip- tion on the Rosetta stone have been appended for the use of the Egyptian scholar.
I am further happy to mention that this English edition, as well as the original, owes much, as to the completeness and correctness of the Coptic explanations in the dictionary, to the care of Prof. Moritz Schwarze, who is now in London, having received the honourable commission from the Royal Academy of Berlin, with the generous support of the King, to prepare the pub- lication of important Coptic MSS. in the British Museum and other libraries of Great Britain.
The elegant translations of the distichs prefixed to each of tlie five books are due to the kindness of J. G. Lockhart, Esq.
As to the critical reviews of the first two volumes of the German edition, I shall reserve it for the con- tinuation, to notice such of them as scem to me to call for an answer. Still, having availed myself already in:this English volume of some valuable remarks con-
tained in these reviews, I feel bound to thank the a 3
XXI11 PREFACE.
learned writers, on this occasion, for the attention they have bestowed upon my researches. I wish, in. par- ticular, to express these my thanks to M. Raoul Rochette (review in the Journal des Savans), to Colonel Mure of Caldwell (in the Ldinburgh Review), and to Dr. Kenrick (in the Prospective Review).
The continuation of this English translation will appear as soon as the German edition is completed. The second volume will contain the whole of the second and third books. The two concluding books will be comprised in the last volume.
BUNSEN.
INTRODUCTION.
In accomplishing the task we have undertaken, that of establishing the exact position of Egypt in relation to general history, there are many and serious difficulties to encounter before our goal is reached. In the first of these volumes, we shall endeavour to point out wherein these difficulties consist, the means and con- ditions requisite for overcoming them, as well as the paramount importance of the object proposed, which can only be attained by the laborious process adopted in its pursuit.
To this end the whole question will first be examined in its widest extent, both for the sake of encouraging our readers to study the subject for themselves, and of conciliating their sympathy and indulgence. For, if they find that we have aimed at a point beyond our powers, they will also concede in fairness, that, in the present state of Egyptian science, the desired result can only be attained by a combination of researches of dif- ferent kinds.
If the place of Egypt can be fixed at all, it must, first, be done according to time, by settling the chro- nology; and, secondly, according to its own intrinsic importance to general history. These two points, each of which is dependent on the other, will form the main divisions of the whole work, as well as of this
introductory volume. The proof of the latter rests a 4
XX1V INTRODUCTION.
upon the adjustment of the former, although itself the prize, for the sake of which the preliminary researches have been made.
Our first efforts, therefore, will be directed towards the elucidation of the Chronology of the oldest monu- mental nation in the world, from Menes to Alexander, during a period of at least 3000 years. It is the first time, since the days of Manctho and Kratosthenes, that this has been attempted by the aid of the monuments, and, in part even, of the very records which were placed at the disposal of those chronologers. It must, likewise, not be forgotten, that, in the re-adjustment of Egyptian chronology, we work upon the authority of monuments the characters of which have not been deciphered till the present day, and not without differ- ences of opinion having existed, and still existing upon several points. Weare guided in our researches, more- over, by the ancient lists of Kings, and by traditions, the confusion in which, despite the labours of those two great antiquarians, the Greeks and Romans soon after, consequently more than 2000 years ago, found cause to lament. Nor are we prepared to deny that the attempts of modern critics to clear up those ob- scurities do not fully justify such a regret.
We are convinced, nevertheless, that it may and will be the lot of our age to disentangle the clue of Egyptian chronology by the light of hieroglyphical science and the aid of modern historical research, even after the loss of so many invaluable records of the old world; and thus to fasten the thread of universal chronology round the apex of those indestructible pyramids, which are no longer closed and mysterious. Admitting, however, that we do succeed in this, one portion only of our task, though cer- tainly the most difficult and toilsome, is accomplished ; the #riginal problem, the definition of the position of
INTRODUCTION. XXV
Egypt in general history, still remains to be solved. We cannot*claim the introduction of a period of more than thirty centuries, the chronology of Egypt, into the gene- ral chronology of the world, without submitting it to the test of that general chronology. We shall commence, therefore, with the lowest point in general history, the foundation of the Macedonian empire, and proceed upwards in an unbroken line, along the turning points in the history of those nations with which that of Egypt is connected. The epochs of the Persian and Babylonian dominion, both of which are fixed by astronomical and historical records, will first be no- ticed ; and then we shall pass on beyond the Olympiads, the limits of Grecian chronology, and the threshold of the Jewish, the dedication of Solomon’s temple. Prior to the latter event, there is no systematic computation by years; nothing save mere scattered dates, in which frequent contradictions occur, and requiring consequently to be verified and adjusted themselves, instead of furnish- ing us any guarantee in the prosecution of our chronolo- gical researches. Even this, however, should not deter us from making further investigation. We must still go onward, beyond the commencement of the Assyrian empire and the days of the great legislator of Israel, in order to arrive at last, through seemingly barren ages, the supposed nonage of human civilisation, at the starting-point of all Egyptian chronology, the foundation ‘of an empire of Upper and Lower Egypt by Menes.
In the second portion of our chronological researches, therefore, we shall verify and elucidate Egyptian history by data deduced from the general history of the world. In doing this we shall not be satisfied merely with showing that the other ‘fragmentary remains of the most ancient chronology and historical tradition are not at variance
XXV1 INTRODUCTION.
with the Egyptian computation. If the latter be correct, not only must the apparent contradictions occurring in the hitherto existing systems be explained away ; but, with the discovery of the true state of facts, it must be self-evident that those hypotheses were based upon no real and tenable foundation. The gaps and flaws which have been dexterously glossed over will re-appear; and many portions of history which have been dissected and artfully torn asunder will, on the re-establishment of the natural connexion, fall back, like dislocated members of an organic body, at once into their places, and mutually co-operate to restore to the ancient history of the world the vital energy of which it has been so long deprived.
We have thus offered a sketch of the two divisions of our chronological researches: the strictly Egyptian chronology in the Old, Middle, and New Empires, and the synchronisms in the most ancient general history, which must be made to harmonise with the Egyptian series. The former comes down from Menes to Alex- ander; the latter goes back from Alexander to Menes. One is the calculation, the other the proof.
Our researches, however, do not end here. We may hope by this method to establish the position of Egypt, as regards general history, in point of time; and certainly the adjustment of the chronology is indispensably re- quisite to an historical development. Its importance, indeed, in the most ancient histories cannot well be rated too highly. The nearer we approach to the pri- mordial epochs of the history of our race, and the vaster those epochs become which it is our business to com- pute, the more important it is to establish that external relatiou, and the closer becomes the connexion between time and history. In those silent primeval recesses, in those ages the-deeds and exploits of which have long
INTRODUCTION. XXVi1
been buried in oblivion, and in which some prominent individuals even (the bright point of tradition, and humanly speaking, the lever of all history) manifest themselves at most only by the magic of their names and their influence upon their contemporaries and posterity -——in those ages, we say, the adjustment of the chronology is decisive of the last questions which we have to ask in the history of the ancient world, and excludes at once many erroneous suppositions and conjectures. This is the case pre-eminently in the history of Egypt. We in- quire whether she exercised material influence on the ceremonial of Jewish worship, on Jewish laws and customs; whether she did so upon Greece, and at what period ; whether that influence was direct, or through the medium of other nations ; whether the Egyptians can have derived the germs of their wisdom and civilisation from India; whether they are an Ethiopian or Asiatic race, from Meroe or Chaldea. These and other similar questions have been asked in the infancy of research, and still oftener in our own times, and have received very different answers. The restoration of Egyptian chronology may, perhaps, set some of them at rest, such as that of their Indian origin, by negativing them at once; and influence materially the solution of them all. Finally, if in the primeval times, of Egypt Wwe approach the infancy of our race, and examine the traditions and theories propounded with respect to it—which consciously or unconsciously, voluntarily or involuntarily, all Christian writers have done — the exact definition of Egypt’s place in history will acquire a vastly higher and more universal importance. [ἢ after having ascertained the date of the foundation of the Egyptian empire, we inquire whether it tallies with Scripture tradition as to the creation of mankind, and whether it corroborates the chronological systems
Χ ΧΟ : INTRODUCTION.
based upon it; what bearing it has upon the assump- tions of the Greek and Latin churches; or (which will be the most sensible course) if we agree not to dispute about a few thousand years where objects so infinitely higher are concerned, how the result of our computations affects the question of creation; must we blink the point altogether, instead of answering it? Again, we inquire whether the study of Egyptian history would lead us to the conclusion that there was one universal, or several partial and local floods; and whether the most ancient traditions, those of Egypt especially, exhibit any indications of violent inter- ruptions in the early stages of human advancement ; and lastly, what light is thrown by our researches, on the great question of the unity of the human race and its primordial epochs.
No historian in these days, who deals honestly and conscientiously with Egyptian chronology, can evade these questions. We have no hesitation in asserting at once, without entering into any further investigation, that there exist Egyptian monuments, the date of which can be accurately fixed, of a higher antiquity than those of any other nation known in history, viz. above 5000 years. This fact must be explained; to deny it would be a proof of little skill, and still less candour, on the part of any critic who has once undertaken to pro- secute the inquiry.
The immediate result, then, of our Egyptian re- searches is to carry us far beyond the limits of strict chronology, and to plunge us into the sea of universal history. Should, however, its shores seem to vanish from our sight at the very moment when we hoped to be nearing the land, this must not deter us from con- tinuing our researches. The Lgyptians, as regards their chronology even, belong to general history. It
INTRODUCTION. XX1X
were impossible to sail up the stream of ancient history without inquiring for the site of Egypt, and saluting it with veneration and respect. It is equally impossible to determine its position without ascending the pin- nacle of time, and investigating the primitive epochs of the human race.
This must be done, indeed, for higher purposes than merely that of establishing a system of universal chro- nology, and solving the questions immediately connected with that subject. If history teach any lesson, and convey to us any instruction, we must suppose progress and development. Man, in his toilsome passage through the dark periods of history, must follow out some eternal Jaw, and that, indeed, not an external one, but one peculiar to itself, of an internal and intelligible character. If history be not merely an endless un- meaning repetition of the same phenomena, and its unity a dream and empty sound, its epochs, when rightly understood, will represent the different stages of one grand and general development. It is only upon such an assumption that man can be said to have an in- ternal life out of time and independent of time, by virtue of the powers of his mind, and his efforts to realise its brightest conceptions. This is true, not of individuals merely, but in a still more remarkable degree of the masses also. Various attempts have been’ made by philosophers and historians to ascertain the laws of this development. It were foreign to the character of an historical work to inquire whether these can be under- stood by the highest effort of speculation, as the neces- sary consequences of the nature of the Divine Essence. We cannot, however, entirely pass by such questions as these: