CHAPTER XIII.

Shishak I. and the Twenty-second (Bubastite) Dynasty—The Ethiopian Kings—The Assyrians in Egypt—Sack of Thebes. (_Circa_ 970-666 B.C.)

It might seem as though the name of Rameses had power sufficient to hold together the fabric of the state so long as the twentieth dynasty was on the throne. With the dethronement and exile of the Ramessid kings, all unity was at an end. Her-hor had claimed the sovereignty of all Egypt, but his successors ruled over a diminishing territory, and the dominion of the last of the priest-kings did not probably extend much, if at all, beyond the Thebaid. Whilst they had been reigning at Thebes, an independent dynasty (regarded indeed by Manetho as the twenty-first), ruled in the Delta, having its seat at Tanis, _i.e._ Zoan. But the Delta had long been the home of naturalised foreigners of different nationalities, and amongst them were settlers bearing Assyrian names—warlike and ambitious men, apparently of distinguished birth, who intermarried with princesses of the Ramessid family, and succeeded in founding the twenty-second dynasty. The names of the family who thus came to the front are clearly not Egyptian,—Nimruth, Usarkon, Takelath are the Assyrian Nimrod, Sargon, and Tiglath; but whilst their names point to an Assyrian origin, their religion and customs had become purely Egyptian, even before they set up their throne at Bubastis.[79] The first sovereign of this dynasty was Sheshenk (the Shishak of the Old Testament), who gained the ascendency over the whole land, and drove the last of the priest-kings to take refuge in Nubia. The city of Napata, standing on the bank of the Nile, and near a lofty hill known as the Holy Mountain, became the seat of the sacerdotal kings. It was a fertile, prosperous, and peaceful region, and its people, long ago completely Egyptianised, were devoted to the worship of Amen-Ra. Here the priest-kings disappeared from sight, but not for ever.

It has been conjectured that the founders of the twenty-second or Bubastite dynasty may have been fugitives of high birth from Assyria, who had been hospitably received and honourably entertained in Egypt. The fortunes of Assyria were indeed at this time at a very low ebb, after having risen very high. The long-continued struggle between Assyria and Babylon already alluded to (p. 215) had ended in the complete ascendency of the former state. About the middle of the twelfth century, the first Assyrian empire rose, and lasted for about seventy years. It was an empire based on mere military ascendency, was maintained by force and cruelty, and rested on no enduring foundation. The Kings of Assyria subdued Babylon, and conquered the Hittites (the Kheta of Rameses II.) and other neighbouring nations. But in process of time the Hittites rose in arms, and were joined by the Babylonians (ever restless under the Assyrian supremacy), and the Assyrian empire fell before their combined attack. For some time, it would seem, there was not even an independent sovereign reigning at Nineveh.

The time was propitious for the growth and development of new states. Assyria was prostrate, Babylon unaggressive, Egypt inert, the Hittites content with their newly recovered independence.

The cities of Phœnicia, on the coast of Palestine, were engaged, as of old, in busy commerce throughout the known world, coming even so far as to the British Isles in quest of tin. They colonised, but did not conquer other lands. Their religion, with its cruel and licentious rites, was the same as that of the neighbouring Canaanitish tribes, but the latter were probably greatly inferior in civilisation; they still maintained their ground in certain parts of Palestine.

During the times of the Judges there had been no national unity amongst the Israelites—no central controlling power; they were still in the tribal state. The Philistines, a small but strong and warlike nationality, settled in the southern towns of the sea-coast, almost expelled them from the land. Disarmed and helpless, they were furtively hiding in the caves of the limestone hills, when, under the energetic leadership of Saul, they arose to repel the foe. The Philistines were defeated, but the strife continued, and in the end the monarchy of Saul was overthrown. It was reserved for David to subdue these inveterate foes, to capture Jerusalem from the Canaanites, and make it the centre of a kingdom which he enlarged by continual wars with the neighbouring states, until he bequeathed to Solomon an Israelitish empire—peaceful, wealthy, and magnificent whilst it lasted, but destined scarcely to outlast the generation that had seen its foundation. Between the sovereign of this new empire and the ancient monarchy of Egypt there was close friendship and alliance, and a ‘daughter of Pharaoh’[80] became Queen of Israel. Close commercial intercourse was also kept up. Hitherto, the Israelites had been content to employ asses and mules, and their troops had consisted of infantry only, but Solomon introduced horses and chariots in great numbers from the land of Egypt, both for domestic use and for military service. It may be possible to trace Egyptian influence in the Israelitish court. It may have kindled the love of Solomon for natural history, or have suggested his first expedition to the land of spices; it may have moulded certain parts of the architecture of temple and of palace, or have left its traces on the literature of the time. All this is possible, though little more than guesswork. Nor did the alliance last long; it was sundered even before luxury and despotism had undermined and overthrown the empire of Solomon. Sheshenk I., the founder of the twenty-second dynasty, was on the Egyptian throne when the fugitive Jeroboam arrived in Egypt—his heart full of his ambitious schemes, and on the death of Solomon it was not with his son, but with his rebellious servant Jeroboam that the Egyptian monarchy was in alliance. Shishak marched into Judah, entered Jerusalem, and carried off thence the treasures both of the temple and palace of King Solomon. The Levites, throughout the land, had remained faithful to the house of David and the service of the temple, and Shishak, it appears, captured and despoiled many of their cities, even those that lay in the kingdom of Israel. The names of all the towns subdued by him in this campaign are recorded on the walls of the temple at Karnak.

The hostility of the Levites to the rule of Jeroboam is easy to understand, as he set up a rival worship of his own at Dan and Bethel, and appointed priests of his own selection. The form assumed by the objects of this worship might very possibly have been adopted by Jeroboam in remembrance of what he had seen in Egypt, and even as a pledge of his alliance with its king. Never, indeed, had the worship of Apis reached so extravagant a pitch as under this dynasty. In the Serapeum, the burial-place of the sacred bulls, are still preserved the tablets which tell of their installation, death, and interment. ‘On such a day of the month and year,’ say the records, ‘this great god was carried to his rest in the beautiful region of the west—at rest with the great gods—with Osiris, and with the gods and goddesses of the west. His glory was sought for in all places of Pi-tomih (Lower Egypt). He was found after some months in the city of Hashed-abtu, after they had searched through all the lakes and islands. He was solemnly introduced into the temple of Ptah, beside his father Ptah.’ The date is carefully given, and the full lifetime of the ‘god.’ The burial of the Apis was on a scale of regal magnificence, and a national mourning of seventy days was observed. The finding of a successor[81] and his installation was celebrated with the wildest exultation, and with national rejoicing. Little room is left for the idea of symbol or sign; the sacred creature is an emanation of the Divine, is a ‘god,’ and as such the object of the grossest and most grotesque idolatry. An indescribable national enthusiasm gathered around the Apis—he was lodged with sumptuous magnificence, the centre of a crowd of devotees and of those who came to learn the secrets of the future.[82] The successive deaths and interments of the Apis bulls, form, in fact, very nearly all the events recorded during the reigns of the eight kings who succeeded the warlike Shishak. Takelath II., the sixth in succession of this dynasty, sent his son Usarkon, who had been appointed high priest of Amen, to Thebes, to examine and to regulate the temple endowments there. The same inscription tells of some celestial portent which excited general attention, and was considered to portend trouble at hand.

Celestial omens were hardly needed to tell that dark days were near. The last kings of the twenty-second dynasty had to contend with rival princes who founded dynasties in the Delta, and, in the hopeless confusion arising from the mutual jealousies and struggles for supremacy amongst these contending families, the descendants of the priest-kings, closely watching the course of events from their Nubian retreat,[83] beheld the long looked-for opportunity arrived. About the middle of the eighth century B.C., they had already established their dominion at Thebes, where they had been warmly welcomed, and they were putting forth claims to a supremacy over the whole land. One of the warring princes in the north, Tafnekht, ruler of Sais, had at the same time formed a scheme for reducing the country to his allegiance. He was commander of the mercenary troops, who, in such unsettled times, might well avail to turn the balance in favour of any warlike and ambitious leader. Of the conflict that ensued we possess a full and interesting account, recorded in an inscription at Napata by Piankhi-meramen, the ruler of the south. Disquieting intelligence reached the king in his Nubian stronghold. Tafnekht ‘was advancing up the river; multitudes of soldiers followed him, and the chiefs and governors were like dogs at his feet. No fortress was closed to him; the cities had opened their gates at his approach.’ Thebes was in consternation, and appealed to Piankhi against the invader: ‘Art thou silent and forgetful of the southern land as well as of the middle country?’

Piankhi despatched troops without delay; at their setting forth the priest-king solemnly enjoined them to perform all due ceremonial rites and purifications on entering the city of Thebes. ‘Lay down your arms before the Divine Leader; there is no victory gained over men without his knowledge. Glorious deeds hath he wrought by his mighty arm; many shall be turned back by a few, one man shall put a thousand to flight. Prostrate yourselves before him, and say: “Cover for us the path of war with the shadow of thy scimitar, grant strength unto the young men whom thou hast appointed, that they may cast down many ten thousands.”‘ The army of Piankhi encountered the enemy, and defeated them. King Nimrod,[84] ruler of Hermopolis, one of the confederated princes, hearing of their victorious advance, hastened to shut himself up in his city, and prepared to stand a siege. Piankhi‘s troops continued to be successful in repeated encounters with the foe, but their king was not content, for Hermopolis was untaken. Priests had been accustomed to appear on the battle-field from the days of old, so that there was nothing anomalous in Piankhi’s now girding on the sword and appearing in person on the scene. ‘Behold, they have made a stand!’ he cried reproachfully to his forces; ‘you have fought them without courage; will you not complete the pursuit, spreading the fear of my name even unto the north of the land of Egypt?’

Animated by the presence of the king, the troops now pressed the siege with redoubled energy, and the town surrendered ‘prostrate in supplication before the face of the sovereign.’ Nimrod first sent his wife and the princesses to intercede with the conqueror, and afterwards offered his own humble submission with many gifts, which Piankhi graciously accepted. He entered Hermopolis, and, on examining the state of things in general, was roused to anger by discovering that certain horses there had been left without sufficient food. He expressed the bitterest displeasure,—‘Vile are they to my heart that have starved my horses; more is this than any other abomination that thou, O Nimrod, hast wrought altogether!’

After this decisive victory, other princes and governors came in and offered their submission; and various towns surrendered to the promised clemency of the conqueror. Mertum, indeed, had closed its gates; but ‘his majesty sent to them, saying, “Two ways are before you; choose as you will—open and live; shut the gates and die. His majesty does not pass by any closed fort.” And lo! they opened forthwith.’

Meantime Tafnekht had thrown himself into Memphis with 8000 men, both soldiers and marines; he had provisioned it carefully and strengthened the fortifications. King Piankhi, says the story, ‘found the lofty walls strengthened with new works, and the bulwarks fitted up with great strength. There was no way found to assault it.’ But Tafnekht himself slipped away as soon as the siege began; his troops (probably the mercenaries), deprived of the encouragement of their leader’s presence, were disheartened, and Memphis yielded to a combined assault by land and water. ‘The city was taken as by a storm of rain; multitudes were slain within it, or brought as captives to his majesty.’ Next day, Piankhi entered, as was his custom in every captured town, the temples; there he offered sacrifices to Ptah and to the other gods.

Piankhi afterwards visited the ancient and far-famed City of the Sun, not far from Memphis. There he ‘offered oblations on the waters of the lake of Horns; he purified himself in the heart of the cool lake, bathing his face in the stream of the sacred waters, wherein Ra bathes his countenance daily.’ Then on the sandy heights of On he made ‘a great sacrifice before the face of Ra at his rising.’ The priest-king then demanded admission into the innermost sanctuary and to the sacred shrine of the god.

The chief priest, possibly somewhat dismayed, offered intercession for the king, duly purified him with incense and sprinkling, and brought him garlands from the temple of the obelisks. He girded on the sacred vestments, and, passing through the outer halls, advanced within the most holy place. ‘The king stood himself, the great one alone; he drew the bolt, he threw back the doors, he saw the face of his father Ra in the temple, and on the sacred bark. Then he closed the doors, and set thereon seals of clay marked with the royal signet, and he commanded the priests, saying: “I have set my seal; let no other king whatever enter therein.”’[85]

During his stay at Memphis the king received the submission and the tributary offerings of all the petty governors and kings, but of those who sought to enter the royal presence none were admitted but Nimrod, because ‘he was not an eater of fish,[86] a thing forbidden in the royal palace.’

Tafnekht did not appear in person from his distant retreat; he sent his submission by an embassy—‘Hail to thee! I could not look upon thy face nor stand before thy terror. I have reached the islands of the Mediterranean. Behold! thy servant is cleansed from his pride. I beseech thee to take my goods into thy treasury, the gold and all the precious stones. O send a messenger unto me as a reconciler.’ Piankhi, after having received the submission of the confederated opponents, returned to Thebes with great rejoicing and triumph.

It is very doubtful, however, whether the supremacy, thus triumphantly acquired, was maintained even so long as during Piankhi’s own lifetime. His successor, Nutmeramen, was moved by a dream to reconquer it. ‘His majesty beheld two snakes, one to his right, the other to his left, and when he awoke he found them no more. He said: “Explain these things to me in a moment,” and lo! they explained it to him, saying: “Thou wilt have the southern lands, and thou shalt seize upon the northern, and both crowns shall be set upon thy head.”’

The king, collecting a numerous army, advanced down the stream, and met with no opposition until he reached Memphis. Here he gained a victory, whereupon the ‘chiefs of the north’ entered their walled towns, so that there was no reaching their retreats. A pause ensued, neither party seeming willing to take further steps. However, the suspense ended by a voluntary surrender of the northern princes, who came to Memphis to offer their homage, and were gladly received and hospitably entertained. Being dismissed from the royal presence, they returned to their respective governments, and the ‘men of the north’ sailed up to the place where his majesty was, to offer gifts and tribute in token of fealty.

The power of the twenty-fifth or ‘Ethiopian’ dynasty was gradually increasing and consolidating itself; its supremacy was in the end recognised in some sort throughout the land, although in Lower Egypt it was always uncertain and precarious. The descendants of the ‘chiefs of the north’ never rendered more than a reluctant and sullen obedience to the rulers from the south. The successors of Piankhi, however, were not content to rule, as he had done, from their distant seat in Napata, but they set up their throne in the heart of Egypt itself, claiming and, as far as possible, exercising the rights of an over-lord.

Stormy times were close at hand, and a strong hand and a resolute will would be wanted at the helm. The Assyrian power, reviving from its deep depression, had gradually gained strength. Tiglath-Pileser II. (744-726 B.C.) was the founder of the second Assyrian empire, destined to be for more than a century the scourge of every neighbouring nation, and the dread of those that were far off. The lesser states that had risen to power on the fall of the first Assyrian empire, instead of friendly alliance against a common foe, continued the policy of mutual rivalry and bitter antagonism—thus preparing the way for the conqueror’s feet. The two kingdoms into which the empire of Solomon had been split were at enmity with each other, and both were constantly at feud with the king of Syria. On the accession of the feeble Ahaz to the throne of Judah he was sore pressed by the assaults of the Edomites and Philistines, and panic-stricken by the news of a coalition formed by the kings of Syria and Israel to dethrone him and set up a creature of their own in his place. ‘At that time did Ahaz send to the kings of Assyria to help him.’ In an evil hour he declared himself the vassal of Tiglath-Pileser, and confiscated the treasures of the temple, as an offering to his new master. In swift response the Assyrian king advanced, took Damascus, carried its people away captive, and destroyed the power of Syria with a blow. With another fell swoop he desolated the Israelitish territory east of the Jordan, and carried into captivity the tribes who dwelt there. His successor, Shalmaneser, crossed the Jordan, and marching upon Samaria, reduced Hoshea, king of Israel, to vassalage. It was not long, however, before Hoshea threw off the Assyrian yoke, ceased to pay tribute, and sought the aid of Shebek (or Sabaco, the So of 2 Kings xvii. 4), who had succeeded Piankhi on the throne. But the forces sent by Shebek, or by some of the other princes of the north, were routed, and Hoshea carried prisoner to Assyria—‘cut off like foam upon the water.’ The siege of Samaria was begun, but Shalmaneser died soon after. It was his successor Sargon, who not only captured Ashdod, after defeating the Egypto-Ethiopian forces, who aided in its defence, but brought the siege of Samaria to a close 721 B.C., and carried the people of the land into captivity. Egypt, unable to afford any efficient help, seems to have become an asylum of some of the ‘outcasts of Israel.’[87]

Ahaz of Judah appears to have continued submissive and tributary to the end of his days, but his son Hezekiah inaugurated a nobler policy. He cast off the Assyrian yoke, and sought the alliance of Taharak (Tirhakah), king of Ethiopia and Egypt. Tirhakah, at the early age of twenty, began his troubled and eventful reign. Many years had to be spent in assuring his own sovereignty over the land he claimed to rule. That land was, as he must have known, the prize on which the Assyrian kings had ‘cast their eyes,’ but, whilst his grasp of the central power was so uncertain, inaction and delay appeared the safest policy—‘their strength was to sit still’ (Isa. xxx. 7.) The Delta being always in a state of disaffection and disunion, it was no easy task to undertake military enterprises beyond the borders—‘city’ being ever ready to ‘fight against city, and kingdom against kingdom’ (see Isa. xix. 2).

Meantime the rush of Assyrian invasion had swept over Palestine. Sargon had attacked Ashdod; Sennacherib directed his march upon Lachish; both lay on the road that led to Egypt, towards which country the Assyrians had been gradually creeping nearer and nearer across the ruins of conquered states.

Forty-six fenced cities of Judah, besides many smaller towns, were taken and plundered by the invaders, and Hezekiah was ‘shut up in Jerusalem like a bird in his cage.’ The king of Judah delayed no longer to send his humble submission, and the arrears of his unpaid tribute, to Sennacherib encamped before Lachish. But the submission was hollow and the tribute extorted, for Hezekiah was in treaty with Egypt all the while. His messengers made the weary journey through the burning desert, their camels and asses laden with gifts and offerings,[88] to implore the aid of the king, who seems then to have been at Zoan in the Delta—preparing at last to march against the foe. Nor was the haughty Assyrian monarch unaware of the secret hopes of the king of Judah. He had captured Lachish, with the cruel massacre and torture of the captives that usually accompanied Assyrian conquests. His attack upon Libnah was postponed, for tidings came that Tirhakah, at the head of the Egypto-Ethiopian army, had crossed the frontiers. Aware of the secret understanding between that sovereign and the king of Judah, Sennacherib vented his bitter indignation and scorn in menaces and insult. He now demanded from Hezekiah nothing less than unconditional and absolute surrender, and taunted him with his vain reliance upon that ‘broken reed,’ the king of Egypt. At this crisis silence falls upon the scene, a silence broken only by the exulting cry of the great Hebrew prophet, as the mighty Assyrian host perishes before an unseen foe.

Judah breathed freely again, and a respite was accorded to Egypt, though not of long duration. Sennacherib, though engaged in many warlike enterprises during the remainder of his reign, left it to his successor Esar-haddon (680-668 B.C.), to renew the attempt upon Egypt. Judah was unmolested this time, and took no part in the terrible and desolating struggle that ensued.

Tirhakah had entered into an alliance with the king of Tyre, against the common foe. Esar-haddon laid siege to Tyre, and then, advancing along the old military road, trodden of old by the armies of Thothmes and of Rameses in the opposite direction, he entered Egypt. Tirhakah was defeated, and retreated to the south; the Assyrian king annexed the whole country, portioning it out into twenty districts, over which he placed governors to rule, as vassals in his name. Then, concluding a treaty with Tirhakah, he returned to Nineveh. Soon after he fell sick, and associated his son Assur-bani-pal in the government. It is from the records left by the latter that we learn the proceedings both of his father and of himself in Egypt. Tirhakah, probably on hearing of the illness of Esar-haddon, emerged from his retreat, and advancing north, regardless of his treaty, occupied Memphis, and expelled the Assyrian garrisons and governors. They fled to Nineveh, and told what had happened; Assur-bani-pal immediately assembled a large army, and entered Egypt. ‘When Tirhakah had heard in the city of Memphis of the approach of my army,’ says the king, ‘he numbered his hosts, and drew them up in battle array. In a fierce battle he was put to flight. Fear seized upon him, and he escaped from Memphis, the city of his honour, and fled away in ships to save himself alive. He came to Nia, to the great city. I sent my servants after him; a journey of one month and ten days. Then he left Thebes, the city of his empire, and went up the river. My soldiers made a slaughter in that city.’ Assur-ban-ipal then reinstated the governors in their respective districts, and returned to Nineveh with great spoil. But Tirhakah, undaunted by defeat, came forth once more from the Nubian hills, and the vassal governors entered into a league with him. Many of them were Egyptian by birth, and unwilling subjects of the Assyrian king, and all were for the moment more afraid of Tirhakah, who was so near at hand, than of the distant power of Assyria. News, however, soon reached Nineveh of what was going on. Letters had been intercepted by ‘judges,’ and the insurgent vassals were sent to Nineveh bound hand and foot in chains. Assur-bani-pal once more took the field, breathing vengeance and slaughter. He found it politic, however, to restore Necho,[89] prince of Memphis, chief of the rebellious vassals, and to uphold him against Tirhakah. But the hand of the Assyrian was heavy on the land. ‘Memphis, Sais, Mendes, and Zoan,’ he says, ‘and all the cities they had led away with them, I took by storm, putting to death both small and great.’ Soon after this the gallant Tirhakah died, after a reign of twenty-six years, and his successor, Urdamaneh, following in his steps, occupied Thebes, and once more attempted to wrest Egypt from the invader. Assur-bani-pal took the field in person, and again compelled his foe to retire to the far south. On Thebes he took dire vengeance. ‘My warriors attacked the city, and razed it to the ground like a thunderbolt.’ Thebes certainly was not ‘razed to the ground,’ as the proud conqueror boasts, but the destruction was terrible, and the city never recovered the blow. ‘Gold and silver, the treasures of the land, precious stones, horses, men and women, huge apes from the mountains—my soldiers took out of the midst of the city as spoil. They brought it to Nineveh, the city of my dominion, and they kissed my feet.’ Not far from Nineveh there was living at this time an exile from Israel, who may himself have seen the Egyptian prisoners and the spoil of Thebes. In his indignant denunciation of Nineveh and her king, he thus addresses the magnificent and cruel city: ‘Art thou better than No-Amon “(the city of Amen = Thebes),” that was enthroned among the streams, and the floods were round about her; her rampart was upon the river, and the waters her defence. Ethiopia and Egypt were her strength, and it was infinite; Put and Lubim were her helpers. Yet was she carried away and went into captivity; her young children were dashed in pieces at the top of all the streets: they cast lots for her honourable men, and her great men were bound with chains’ (Nahum iii. 8-10).[90]

It was little more than half a century later that Nineveh herself fell with a mightier and more overwhelming destruction.

FOOTNOTES:

[79] The Egyptian Pa-Bast, or the city of Bast. It was situated in the eastern portion of the Delta, and was of immemorial antiquity. Under the kings of the twenty-second dynasty, it attained great splendour, and the worship of Bast became wide-spread and popular. Herodotus saw her magnificent temple, and the festival celebrated in her honour with such splendour and revelry. Bast was almost identical with Sechet—the lioness and the cat were sacred to her. Her worship was exceedingly popular under the later dynasties, and this led to the wide-spread reverence with which the cat was regarded in those days.

[80] Probably a princess of the dynasty ruling at Tanis; the priest-kings, whose seat of power was in the far south, are less likely to have connected themselves with the kingdom of Israel.

[81] The Apis must be black, with certain white marks of mystical import.

[82] One mode of consulting the sacred bull was by offering him food. Germanicus is said to have thus consulted him; the Apis refused to eat, and this unfavourable reception was considered to have foreboded his untimely fate.

[83] The country known as Nubia then formed part of the land of Kush, _i.e._ Ethiopia.

[84] A descendant, doubtless, of the twenty-second dynasty kings, of Assyrian origin.

[85] This would be meant to apply only to all the rival claimants to sovereignty in the north, not to his own successors.

[86] The priests were prohibited from eating fish, which was considered as unclean food—at any rate sea fish, of which the more devout and scrupulous Egyptians would not partake.

[87] Compare Isa. xi. 11, xxvii. 13; Hosea ix. 6.

[88] Isa. xxx. 4-7.

[89] He was an Egyptian, and son of Tafnekht, who headed the league of northern chiefs against Piankhi (p. 246).

[90] In this and in other quotations from the Old Testament the renderings of Ewald and Stanley have sometimes been adopted.