period is that of Rosellini; but the longer one is perhaps most consistent with facts, arid
at least makes room for those various dominations which, in> the lists of Manetho, precede
the eighteenth dynasty; which last, headèdby Amutid|h the First, drbvg* ohf'ihe irfllru-
Sive kings. During thislong period the legitimate sovereigns'Wére exiled’lnto'Ethió'pik;
and it is evident, 'tfilit'had Meroë'beéii any other than a^pibVince or dependency öf
Egypt, it is hardly probable that the Egyptians;-^-kings, priests, and peoplë/i^ould ha-vfe.
found a safe asylum in that-country d dring1'the- long period of their exile. It is dxpressly
stated ’by1' Josephus that the1 shepherd kingsdrved at Memphis/ “ and1 madd’ both the
upper and lower country pay tribute.” It- wduld'-appekr, howeVef, that" dlifing-* the
greater part of 'thé * Hykshoirdy nasty, the Egyptians retained possession of the ThëhUd:
nevertheless the bfeoupa’tion of Lower Egypt |by®their enemies; must have-effectually pre-
' eluded all communication with other countries excepting E thiépiav’.sbuthern Arabia' and:
India; which fact will account for a vast influx of population from those counM^fe/(and
consequently from the slave-regions tof Africa) into the Upper N ifdti^prövmces.
It is moreoverj^asonatble^suppose that even after the expulsion ofttfe -Hykstfepmu^
titudes of Egyptians would remain in Ethiopia,^—that country whereiridwh’otegenërations
of their ancestors had lived and died; at the same time that great nhmfersoof' Meröites,
influenced by a variety o f motives and especially by social ailiances, wotfld descend;;thé
Nile into Egypt.
It is moreover evident that while the Egyptians -became thusL’ftóteKnized fwith thfenar
tions of southern Asia, and the motley races of the Upper Nile, the provinces,'of- I^tow^jf
E gypt'Wbuld be overrun with the Caucasian tribes of Europe and_ western- Aéia'pfor
these, dither as cognate with the Hykshos or as allies in their shrvice; must havefegir.in
imihehse number to have conquered so populous a country, and especially to have «kept
possession during so long a period. It- is to these events, then, that we attribute -that
blending of nations which appears to have been coeval with the early ages of the-N>d®Jie
Family, and which amply accounts for the ethnographic diversities every where; manifest
on thé monuments.
T h e se c o n d e po c h is comprised in the Ethiopian Dynasty of three kings, which lasted
forty-four years, beginning B. O, 719.
TheSë Meröite bri AustrahEgyptian kings, during theiriiitrusive occupation of iEgypt,
would naturally, and indeed necessarily engage the neighbouring tribes, and-espeeialty
s l id dé were hostile to Egypt, as mercenary soldiers; and there are morethan conjectural
g ro u n d for believing that7 the Negroes themselves were thus eaaployed. We are; told in
the Sacred Writings (2 Chron. Chap, xii.) that when Shishak king of Egypt; whoïsdêenf
iical with Sheshonk of the monuments,^—went up against Jerusalem, he took with I® m
“ chariots, and three-score thousand horsemen : and the people, werewitbout number
that came with him out of Egypt; the Lubims, the Sukkiims and the Ethiopians.”- Of
this multitudewe may presume that the horsemen, and peöple iiPGhariotS weré part of
the Egyptian army; the Lubirns and Sukkiims are by most commentators regarded as
Bibyans and Meiwfês, while, as the Ethiopians are placed last on the list, and are designated
in the Hebrew original by the name of Ciish, it is 'not unreasonable to suppose that
they were Negroes. This view is sustained by a passage in Herodotus,* who states that
* In my Crania Americana, Note p. 29,1 have employed this passage to show,-that those Colchiana whom Herodotus
mentions as forming “ part o f the troops o f Sesostfis,” might have been Negroes acting as mercenary or auxiliary solindtit&
Jarmy of Xerxes: whiicbyinvaded Greece was a legion of Western Ethiopians, “ who
had hair more crisp andfc^Tng than any other: jhen.”%; Now if the army of Xerxes
embraced a/legion;of Africans; Negroes; it would not be remarkable if. the Egyptian troops
shquldi have^beere.ecanposed in partsofi the same people; which, indeed, with respect to
$V. Ethiopian dynasty, may be assumed as a thing of-course: for the Merdites would
naturally avail themselves ofievery expedient to' establish their power by augmenting the
number of'their exotic- cenfod'er-ates, and1 by'extending'to them those privileges which
had;on:ce| been sacred to'particular castes. ./For these and other oppressive acts,, the
JylerQ'ite kings were /bated the^. Egyptians; and no-sooner’were they expelled than
thhiEhamesjwemhrased foomstfe l^ ,k
T he third epoch, dates from the conq-uest/iby.Cambyses, B. C. 525, and continues
tjirdugh'thesfwholefof the Persian dynasty, or, brother word^ountil.the’ Ptolemaic era, B.
Cis 332;-—^t.peui6ds;ofinearlylltsvai hundftediyears..
' E v h fe ^ ^ k n ow s that the Persian dominion'in Egypt was, marked by an utter disrer
gard ofi alif thfe»established institutions. kjJNo, occasion was omitted which could humble the
pride*d|fd'qbasejthejohaE^ctorsdfi the p.eqplesaqffihe varied inhabitants of Europe, Asia and
Nigritia poured into the valley of the Nile, abdlishing^hsiegree.the exclusiveness of caste;
and involving^ am,endless; oopfusiomtoft races.
T ho ffrelude/to these, changes and< misfortunes can' be traced to the reign of Psamme-
ticus-ithe First, whq-ipermibteg^ to foreigners,, and especially to the Greeks, a freedom of
ingress whj.ch thet.la;Wi| and*usagesnof the oountfEyhad previously denied them; The same
poufy, appears. toyhaye.beenefosfteejilihySA'fg subsequent kings of tbe-same dynasty, until
its consummation! by Amasis,;>( 9j) When, :intthe »language of EftampollionFigeac,
E g y ll became atrbnce Egyptian, Greek, ?and Asiatic; her national character: was lost for
ever^wtefrawnies Jwarei’fiM'e'd ,wiitl^|foreign? mercenaries;; ’the: throne w'as guarded by' Eu-
ropean soldiers, and continual v^ars< complqfed the.destruction of a. tottering kingdom.^
aft
I!> nSne’valley!of the§Mifo, bothdn.Eg.ypt and dy Nubia, was originally peopled by a
branch'ofthe^^^^iafi^raJch.'1^/1
2^ Tshe^priineyahmgpp^, .since, oal^dvEgvntians. werie.jtHe^Mizraimites of Scripture,
the^posterafryiofftEI'am^ and? duseobly.-affiliatedjwith the Libyan family of nations..
'’S^^*H'^^^^Ky,^i6aFcl53^!Gt'Sf^'the 'Eg^tiSp^vfbre intermediate- between the- Indo-
European ,and Se^ilic^rajce^.
diers. r am now satisfied that such explanation is at least unnecessary, and I, therefore, take this oceasion to with-
dra'^itedjfSj
1^ 1^11^^1111111 III nu -i
f Among the meager facts which history has' preserved^in1relatioi}!.to these intrusive kings, the following is the most
remarkable. “ Sabakon (the first ikuu&ef the Ethiopian dynasty) having taken Boccona (the legitimate sovereign) captive,
burnt him! alive.” Manetho a/pud Cory, Frag. p. 126. Could any circumstance have rendered the Ethiopians .more detestable
in the eyes of the Egyptiaus*tharietni1^s first stQtvof. barbanaii-poliW:';
hEgypte,Ancra^^p, 207. ,t
f m