The History of Antiquity, Vol. 1 (of 6). Duncker Max

---

Скачать книгу

---

language is contracted into Sôs. Schasu means shepherds. Moreover, in old Egyptian, the head of a family, a tribe, and a province is called hak, and Hyksos thus can be explained by Haku-schasu, chiefs of the shepherds, shepherd kings, as Josephus, Eusebius, and Africanus render it.181 What Manetho tells us of the destruction of the cities and shrines, the slaughter and enslaving of the Egyptians may be correct for the time of the war and conquest. But this hostility and destruction cannot, as he intimates, have gone on for centuries, for, on the restoration of the Pharaohs, we find ancient Egypt unimpaired in population, unchanged in language, customs, and manners, in civilisation and art. If the national development was interrupted and repressed by the Hyksos, it still remained uninjured at the core, so far as we have the means of judging.

      When at a subsequent period the kings of Ethiopia subjugated Egypt, the warrior caste, the soldiers settled in the country by the Pharaohs, were deprived of their lands. The same thing may have taken place on the irruption of the shepherds. The warriors of the Pharaohs fell in battle, were carried away as prisoners, or deprived of their weapons; and in their place came the victorious army of the shepherds. Of these many would soon return home laden with the booty of Egypt, others pitched their tents in the conquered land, and settled in the greenest meadows, more especially in the eastern provinces of the Delta, nearest their own home, on the Tanitic and Pelusiac arms of the Nile, and Lake Menzaleh. The chief of the immigrants became the head of the conquerors and the conquered. The latter would render the same abject homage to their new masters as they rendered before and after to their native kings; and the power which the conquered willingly acknowledged in the chief would exalt his position even among the conquerors. As time went on, the culture and civilisation of Egypt had their natural effect on the barbarous invaders, and when the storm of conquest was over, we may assume that Egypt was no worse off under the rule of the shepherd kings than at later periods under the rule of the Persians, the Ptolemies, and the Romans.

      That the new princes, soon after the conquest, attempted to approximate their position as much as possible to that of the ancient Pharaohs may be concluded from the mere fact that Manetho was in a position to give a catalogue of their reigns by years and months. But this is proved more definitely still by certain monuments. In the neighbourhood of Lake Menzaleh, among the ruins of the ancient Tanis, the modern San, two old statues have been discovered, the forms and lineaments of which exhibit a physique different from the Egyptian. In the heads of four sphinxes, discovered in the same place, it is thought that we may recognise the portraits of four shepherd kings, and a colossus discovered at Tel Mokdam is said to bear the following inscription: – "The good god, the star of both worlds, the child of the sun, Sel Salati, beloved by Sutech, the lord of Hauar.182"

      The six shepherd kings enumerated by Josephus from the Egyptian History of Manetho reigned, according to the dates given by the latter, for 260 years, i. e. from the year 2101 B.C., in which, on Lepsius's arrangement, the irruption of the shepherds took place, till the year 1842 B.C. Their successors must therefore have ruled over Egypt for 251 years more, i. e., down to the year 1591 B.C. But in the time of the later shepherd kings, native princes again arose in Upper Egypt, although subject to tribute. A papyrus of the British Museum tells us: "It so happened that the land of Egypt became the possession of her enemies, and when this took place there was no king. And behold Raskenen became king of the country in the south. The enemy were in possession of the fortress of Aamu (p. 120), and their chief, Ra Apepi was at Hauar. The whole land paid tribute to him, and rendered service of all kinds, and brought to him the produce of Lower Egypt. King Apepi chose Sutech as his lord, and served no other god, and built him a temple of firm and lasting structure."183

      The power of the native princes at Thebes must have been gradually strengthened till the successors of Raskenen were in a position to press forward towards Lower Egypt, and place limits on the sway of the shepherd kings, and finally to drive them entirely out of Egypt. Josephus has already told us from Manetho that the princes of Thebes and the rest of Egypt rose up against the shepherds, and in consequence a long and severe struggle took place between them. In Manetho's list the series of shepherd kings is followed by Amosis of Thebes (1684-1659 B.C.). Hence we may assume that it was under this prince that the kingdom of Thebes got the upper hand, and the power of the shepherd kings was restricted to the Eastern Delta.

      This conclusion is established by the evidence of monuments. There Amosis is again mentioned as king of Upper and Lower Egypt, and two inscriptions of the twenty-second year of Amosis (1662 B.C.), in the quarries of Massara, inform us that these quarries were opened to restore the temples at Memphis and the temple of Ammon at Thebes.184 Hence by this time Amosis had again rescued the old capital, Memphis, from the shepherds; that he also forced his way beyond Memphis, and attacked the shepherds at Avaris, is proved by the inscription of a tomb at El Kab, in Upper Egypt. It is the tomb of Aahmes, the son of Abuna, the chief of the steersmen. The inscription tells us that, at the time of Amosis, Aahmes, with his father on the boat, had ministered to "the calf." He had not yet seen any woman, and wore the clothing of the young men, when Hauar was attacked. When he had won a hand, he received the king's commendation, and the golden necklace in token of his bravery. In a second and third battle at Hauar he had again won a hand, and made a prisoner, and he received the chain for the second and third time.185

      From the accounts given in Josephus and the excerpts of Africanus and Eusebius, Avaris lay eastward of the Tanitic arm of the Nile, in the province of Sethroe. Consequently we must look for this fortified camp of the shepherds on the eastern shore of the Lake Menzaleh, perhaps on the site of the later Pelusium. In the lists of kings Amosis is followed by Amenophis I., then follows Tuthmosis I., then Tuthmosis II. and III., under the regency of Misphra (1625-1591 B.C.). From this connection has arisen the king Misphragmuthosis, who, in Josephus, defeats the shepherds, drives them out of the rest of Egypt, and shuts them up in Avaris. Hence it must have been Tuthmosis III., after the rise of the independent monarchy (1591-1565), who led the great host of 480,000 men against the shepherds in Avaris, and failing to enter the place by storm, allowed them to depart unharmed, whereupon the strangers, to the number of 240,000, retired into the Syrian desert (1591 B.C.). Yet the inscriptions do not agree with this account. From the inscription of Aahmes already quoted, it seems more probable that Amosis had already taken Avaris, and that Tuthmosis I. had marched through Syria to Naharina, i. e. to Mesopotamia, a fact which is confirmed by the inscriptions of Tuthmosis III., though here also there are accounts of battles fought by Tuthmosis II. against the Schasu, or shepherds.186

      However this may be, after a long subjection to foreign rulers, and weary struggles against them, the whole land of Egypt was again governed by native kings. These battles must have invigorated the military strength of the Egyptians; and the happy result could not but increase the self-confidence of the new dynasty to which Egypt owed her liberation. The mighty impulse thus given carried the kingdom quickly to the height of its power and greatness. Tuthmosis III. caused an enumeration to be made of the conquests which he won from the twenty-second to the forty-second year of his reign, and the tribute which he received in this period. In this enumeration sixteen or seventeen campaigns are mentioned. In the twenty-third year the king marched against the Retennu (Syrians). From Kazatu (Gaza) beyond Taanaka (Taanach) he reached Maketi (Megiddo). Here, on the twenty-ninth of the month Pachor he defeated his enemies. The conflict was not sanguinary. Only eighty-three of the enemy were slain. The king made 340 prisoners, but took at the same time 924 chariots and 2,132 horses. Megiddo surrendered, and Tuthmosis was able to lead back 2,500 prisoners into Egypt. After this 117 cities and places in Syria surrendered, Kadeschu (Kades), Tevekhu (Tibshath on the Orontes), Maram (Merom), Tamesku (Damascus), Atara (Ataroth), Hamtu (perhaps Hamath), Kaanu (Kanah), Masaar (Misheal), Astartu (Astaroth Karnaim), Hutar (Hazor), Kennarut (Kinneroth), Aksap (Achshaph), Bar Semas (Beth Shemesh), Atuma (Adamah), Ranama (Rimmon), Japu (Joppa), Harar (Har El), Rabbau (Rabbah), Baratu (Berothai, Berytus), Sarta, &c.187 Thus the coast of Syria and the mountain district as far as Damascus and Hamath on the Orontes would have become subject to the

---

Скачать книгу