EGYPT
83
EGYPT
Ancient Profiles (from the Jlonument?) : 1. Kgypto-Etliiopian (the Tirhake of Scripture) ; 2, 4. Ethiopian ; 3. Egyptian.
■was dark brown, chiefly from exposure ; that of the women was olive-colored or even lighter. Tiie women were very fruitful (Strabo, xv, p. 695 ; Heeren, Ideen, xi, 2, 10). The ancient dress was far more scanty than the modern, and in this matter, as in manners and character, the influence of the Arab race is also very apparent. The ancient Egyptians, in character were very religious and contemplative, but given to base superstition, patriotic, respectful to women, hos- pitable, generally frugal, but at times luxurious, very sensual, lying, thieving, treacherous, and cringing, and intensel}' prejudiced, through pride of race, against strangers, although kind to them. This is very much the character of the modern inhabitants, except that Mohammedanism has taken away the respect for wom- en. The ancient Egyptians are indeed the only early Eastei'n nation that we know to have resembled the modern Westerns in this particular; but we find the same virtue markedly to characterize the Nigritians of our day. That the Egyptians in general treated the Israelites with kindness while they were in their country, even during the oppression, seems almost cer- tain from the privilege of admission into the congre- gation in the third generation, granted to them in the Law, with the Edomites, Avhile the Ammonites and Moabites wei'e absolutely excluded, the reference in three out of the four cases being to the stay in Egypt, and the entrance into Palestine (Dcut. xxiii, 3-8). This supposition is important in its bearing on the his- tory of the oppression.
XI. Lwujuage. — The ancient Egj'ptian language, from the earliest period at which it is known to us, is an agglutinate monos3dlabic form of speech. It is ex- pressed bj' the signs which we call hierogl3'phics. The cliaracter of the language is compound : it consists of elements resembling those of the Nigritian languages and the Chinese language on the one hand, and those of the Shemitic languages on the other. All those who have studied the African languages make a distinct family of several of those languages, spoken in the north-east quarter of the continent, in which family the}^ include the ancient Egj-ptian ; while every She- mitic scholar easily recognises in Egyptian, Shemitic pronouns and other elements, and a predominantly Shemitic grammar. As in person, character, and re- ligion, so in language we find two distinct elements, mixed but not fused, and here the Nigritian element seems unquestionably the earlier. Bunsen asserts that this language is " ante-historical Shemitism :" we think it enough to say that no Shemitic scholar has ac- cepted his theory. For a full discussion of the ques- tion, see Poole, The Genesis of the Earth and of Man,
chap. vi. As early as the age of the 26th d)'nasty, a vulgar dialect was expressed in the demotic or encho- rial writing. This dialect forms the link connecting the old language with the Coptic or Chi-istian Egyp- tian, the latest phase. The Coptic does not very great- ly differ from the monumental language, distinguished in the time of tiie demotic as the sacred dialect, except in the presence of many Greek Avords. See Coptic Language.
The language of the ancient Egyptians was entirely unknown until the discoveries made by Dr. Young from the celebrated Rosetta stone, now preserved in the British ]\Iuseuni. This stone is a slab of black marble, which was found by the French in August, 1799, among the ruins of Fort St. Julien, on the west- ern bank, and near the mouth of the Rosetta branch of the Nile. It contains a decree in three different kinds of writing, referring to the coronation of Ptole- my V (Epiphanes), and is supposed to have been sculp- tured 13. C. cir. 195. As part of the inscription is in Greek, it was easily deciphered, and was found to state that the decree was ordered to be written in sacred, enchorial, and Greek characters. Thence, by careful- ly comparing the three inscriptions, a key was obtain- ed to the interpretation of the mysterious hieroglj'ph- ics. The language which they express closely resem- bles that which was afterwards called Coptic when the people had become Christians. It is monosyllabic in its roots, and abounds in vowels. There were at least two dialects of it, spoken respectively in Upper and Lower Egypt. See Rosetta Stone.
" The wisdom of Egypt" was a phrase which, at an early period, passed into a proverb, so high was the opinion entertained by antiquitj' of the knowledge and skill of the ancient Egyptians (1 Kings iv, 30 ; Herod, ii, 160; Josephus, Jw<. viii, 25; Acts vii, 22). Nor, as the sequel of this article will show, were there want- ing substantial reasons for the current estimate. If, however, antiquity did not on this point exceed the bounds of moderation, verj' certain is it that men of later ages are chargeable with the utmost extrava- gance in the terms which they employed when speak- ing on the subject. It was long thought that the hie- roglyphical inscriptions on the monumental remains of Egypt contained treasures of wisdom no less bound- less than hidden ; and, indeed, hieroglyphics were, in the opinion of some, invented by the priests of the land, if not expressly to conceal their knowledge from the pi'ofane vulgar, j-et as a safe receptacle and con- venient storehouse for their mj'sterious but invaluable doctrines. Great, consequently, was the expectation of the puldic when it was announced that a key had been discovered which opened the portal to these long- concealed treasures. The result has not been altogeth- er correspondent, especially with regard to the pre- sumed secrets of ancient lore. Men of profound learn- ing, great acuteness of mind, and distinguished repu- tation have engaged and persevered in the inquirj' : it is impossible to stud}' without advantage the writings of such persons as Zoega, Akerblad, Young, Champol- lion, Spohn, Seyffarth, Kosegarten, Eiihle ; and equal- \y ungrateful would it be to affirm that no progress has been made in the undertaking ; but, after all, the novel conclusions and positions which have been drawn and set forth are only in a few cases (comparatively) definite and unimpeachable (Heeren, 7t/(»(«.ii,2, 4; Qua- tremhre, .lierherrheg stn- la hinriue (t la littlrature de VEgypte). Sec Hieroglyphics. The results in point of historj' and archeology, as detailed by Lepsius, Brugsch, and other late Egjqjtologists, are far more important than in a purely scientific view. See bslow. XII. Relif/ion. — The basis of the religion was Nigri- tian fetichism, the lowest kind of nature-worship, dif- fering in different parts of the countrj', and hence ob- viouslv indigenous. Upon this were engrafted, first, cosmic worship, mixed up with traces of primeval rev- elation, as in Babylonia ; and then a system of per*