CHAPTER XX.

THE EMIGRATION OF EGYPTIAN SOLDIERS AT THE TIME OF PSAMMITICHUS. — EXPEDITION OF CAMBYSES. — MANNERS, CUSTOMS, ETC. OF THE MACROBIANS, ETC. — CURIOUS CUSTOMS OF THE ETHIOPIANS. — ERGAMENES, THE ETHIOPIAN KING’S, CONQUESTS IN LOWER NUBIA. — ATARRAMON AND SILCO, ETHIOPIAN KINGS. — EXPEDITION OF PETRONIUS. — QUEEN CANDACE. — CHRISTIANITY FIRST INTRODUCED INTO ETHIOPIA. — ITS DURATION. — NAPATA, CAPITAL OF CANDACE. — BLEMMYES AND THE NUBIANS.

Under the reign of Psammitichus, whom Africanus states to have reigned twenty-one years, Eusebius thirty-three, and Herodotus fifteen, after the Ethiopian dynasty, the historian of Halicarnassus informs us (and his account is confirmed by Diodorus), that 240,000 Egyptian soldiers were in garrison at Elephantine against the Ethiopians, at Pelusium against the Arabs and Assyrians, and others, in Marea, opposite Africa. These soldiers having been three years thus in garrison, without being relieved, resolved to go over together from Psammitichus into Ethiopia. Regardless of the entreaties of that king, they engaged themselves to the king of that country, who employed them in subduing some of his discontented subjects, whose land he gave them as a reward. It is added, that the Ethiopians became more civilised, imbibing the customs of Egypt.

Herodotus states[70], that part of these soldiers were in garrison at Pelusium, against the Assyrians; probably an attack from that nation was anticipated, in revenge of the defeat of Sennacherib. According to that author, there were forty days of land journey, and sixteen of navigation, between Elephantina and Meroe, besides a space near Taconso. He says, the distance is the same from there to the country of the Automali, otherwise called Ascami, a term which means “Assistants at the left hand of the king;” by which, according to him, the Egyptian warriors are designated. Whether this last fifty-six days’ journey extends along the Bahr el Abiad, in the direction of Axum, or on the Bahr el Azruk, cannot, with certainty, be decided; but I will presently state my reasons for conceiving the former opinion to be not improbable. The inhabitants of a part of Ethiopia, at such an immense distance from the metropolis, would naturally become more civilised by this Egyptian colony. This passage, at all events, communicates the highly important fact, that the kingdom of Meroe reached more than fifty-six days’ journey, both north and south, from the metropolis; or, in other words, that it was altogether about 1500 miles in length at that period. This accounts for the great power of the king of Ethiopia, but for which it is evident, that a body of 240,000 men would not have been satisfied with having assigned to them a distant and uncivilised portion of his kingdom, but would have been easily able to take possession of the whole.

The next important event I shall allude to is the celebrated expedition of the first king of the Persian dynasty in Egypt.

Cambyses determined to make war upon three different powers,—the Carthaginians, the Ammonians, and the Egyptian Macrobians. But, before commencing the expedition into Ethiopia, he resolved to send spies into the country, and, for this purpose, sent to the island of Elephantine for some of the Ichthyophagi, who were acquainted with the Ethiopian language. Cambyses, having instructed these ambassadors what they should say, gave them, as presents for the king, a robe of purple, necklaces and bracelets of gold, an alabaster vase of ointment, and another vase of palm wine. The Ichthyophagi having arrived, and having been introduced to the king, presented their offerings, and addressed him thus:—“Cambyses, King of the Persians, desirous of being your friend and ally, sent us to you with these gifts, in the use of which he takes great delight.”[71]

The Ethiopian king, knowing well that they came as spies, answered,—“It is not that the King of the Persians esteems so much my friendship, that he has sent you to me with gifts; neither do you speak truly, for you have come to spy out my kingdom. Neither is he a just man, for if he were just, he would not covet the country of another, nor wish to make slaves of those who have in no way offended him. Present to him this bow, and tell him that the King of the Ethiopians gives this advice to the King of the Persians. When he is able to manage such large bows with as much facility as I do, then let him conduct an army against the Egyptian Macrobians, but one superior to them in number. In the mean time, thank the gods for not putting it into the mind of the Egyptians to usurp the states of others.”

Having said this, he unbent the bow, and gave it to them, and having taken the vest of purple into his hand, he asked them what it was, and how it was made? The Ichthyophagi having told him the truth of the purple and the colouring, he said that they were deceivers, and their garments deceitful. Having inquired about the necklace and bracelets of gold, and the Ichthyophagi having answered that they were ornaments, he laughed, conceiving them to be chains, and said, that he had much stronger ones. Lastly, inquiring of the ointment, and being shown how it should be worked with the hand, and used, he said of it the same as he had done of the vest. He then learned how the wine was made, and its use; and being much pleased with the trial he made of it, he asked on what things they lived, and what was the longest period of the life of a Persian? They answered, that the King lived on bread, explaining to him the nature of corn, and told him that the space of eighty years was the greatest length of the life of a Persian. The Ethiopian answered, that he was not surprised that, subsisting on mud, they should live so few years; that neither would they live so long, was it not for the wine, and added, “for in this only are the Persians superior to the Ethiopians.”

The Ichthyophagi having, in their turn, inquired of the King about his people’s food, and manner of life, he answered, that they lived on meat and milk; that the greatest part of them lived to the age of 120 years, and some even longer. The ambassadors having expressed their surprise at this, the King conducted them to a fountain, after washing in which they became more vigorous, and shining, as with oil; and it sent forth an odour as of violet. And the Ichthyophagi said that this water was so light, that neither wood, nor even lighter substances, would swim on the surface; but that every thing went to the bottom; and that the constant use of this water was the reason why the Ethiopians lived so long.

Cambyses, enraged at this reception of the Ethiopians, set out without preparing any store of provisions, and without reflecting that it was the extremity of the world to which he was carrying his arms. Before he had marched a fifth part of the route from Thebes, the want of provisions was felt; yet he madly determined to proceed. The soldiers fed on grass as long as any could be found; at length, when they arrived in the deserts, they were obliged to cast lots, to eat one in ten; which finally induced Cambyses to return to Thebes with the remains of his army.—The defeat of this monarch is also mentioned by Diodorus.

If this account be at all correct, the country of the Macrobians must have been at some distance from Meroe, otherwise they could not have been ignorant of the use of necklaces and bracelets, since the figures on the walls of the sepulchres of that metropolis are represented with those ornaments. The fountain mentioned by the Ichthyophagi is almost as wonderful as the lake which Diodorus reports as seen by Semiramis; but, discarding what bears the stamp of fiction in this narrative, we can easily recognise, in this account of the Macrobians, a powerful nomad tribe, in possession of the gold country which was the great attraction to Cambyses. Their degree of strength and longevity, probably exaggerated, might be gained by the habits of frugality and temperance usual among the nomad tribes. Their food (meat and milk) is exactly that of the Bishareen and other tribes of the desert at the present day. Their not understanding the nature of the ointment, may have been from its being very superior to their own; all that is probable in the description of the fountain is, that it consisted of oil. The Arab tribes are now in the habit of anointing their bodies, conceiving this custom to be in the highest degree salubrious, and indeed necessary, to mitigate the parching effects of a vertical sun and the hot winds of the desert. I tried this custom, and found it very beneficial; and am persuaded I should have suffered less from the heat had I used it more frequently; but the smell of the ointment they now use is not like the violet, as the Ichthyophagi describe that of the Macrobians. It is not, therefore, surprising that a powerful tribe, doubtless less barbarous than at the present day, being in connection with states then more civilised, should have a bath of prepared oil, suited to the pressing wants of the country. A nomad tribe might, very probably, be ignorant how the purple colour was produced; for, with the exception of some shawls worn by the chiefs, none of the Arabs of the present day use any thing but white cotton and linen cloths. The Melek Nazr e’ Deen (see Plate III.), is almost the only exception I have met with. Sheakh Sayd, the chief of all the Ababdes, did not know how the indigo plant (which his country produces) was made into a dye, till he went with me through the manufactory at Berber. I suspect that the account of their contempt for gold, is an embellishment of the Greek historian, or an exaggeration of the ambassadors; for they must have learnt its value by exchanging it with their more civilised neighbours. It is not, however, impossible that they may have used it for chains, as they might not have possessed other metals, or if they did, might not have had skill to work them into chains so easily as they could gold; or, from their greater rarity, they might have been equally as valuable.[72]

Herodotus calls them Egyptian Macrobians, and afterwards Egyptians. I am almost inclined to believe that they may have been a nomad race, blended with the 240,000 soldiers, who, according to Herodotus, deserted from Psammitichus, and had a territory assigned to them, among a people about sixty days’ journey distant from Meroe. It is certain that the Egyptians would marry native wives. They might, as Herodotus says, have improved the manners of the people; but, being warriors, and not mechanics or artificers, and accustomed to a rigid distinction of castes, they might not have introduced a knowledge of the arts, and even what they taught might, in a century and a half, be forgotten by a tribe whose habits would give them little taste for such acquirements. I cannot agree with those who consider the country of the Macrobians to be on or near the Arabian Gulf, in the territory of the present Soumalies, or, as Professor Heeren[73] has placed them, beyond Cape Guardefui; for, mad as Cambyses is represented to have been, he surely could not have been so infatuated as to have attempted to penetrate to so vast a distance, across the immense deserts and inhospitable regions of the interior, the whole population of which would be hostile to his progress, particularly when a far shorter and easier way was open to him by the Arabian Gulf and the Straits of Babelmandel. It may be stated that the Persians were, perhaps, unskilled and averse to navigation; but even if not navigators themselves, they might easily have procured transports. I think the Macrobians should be placed more in the interior; probably on the Bahr el Abiad. Pausanias (lib. iv.) says, that Meroe and the Ethiopian plains are inhabited by the Macrobians, the most just people of the earth: but that they have not in the country any sea, nor any other river but the Nile. This statement, which merits attention, being from one so deeply versed in Egyptian subjects, proves what I have stated,—that the Macrobians did not occupy the territory of the present Soumalies, near the sea; but at the same time brings them nearer to Meroe than we can admit from their state of civilisation, or the testimony of Herodotus, who describes them as being on the southern side of Africa.

I have now to mention an historical fact, connected with some curious Ethiopian customs, which might have been rejected as a fable, but for the evidence of a lapidary inscription, which records the name of the king connected with it. This gives to it an authentic character, and affords another proof of the general accuracy of the Sicilian historian’s account of the Ethiopians.

“The Ethiopians,” says Diodorus[74], “have many laws differing from those of other nations, particularly as regards the choice of their kings. The priests choose the most respectable of their order, and form them into a circle; and he who by chance is taken hold of by the priest, who enters into the circle, walking and leaping like a satyr, is declared king upon the spot; and all the people worship him, as a man charged with the government by Divine Providence. The king lives after the manner prescribed to him by the law. In all things he follows the customs of the country, neither punishing nor recompensing but according to the laws established since the origin of the nation. It is not permitted to the king to cause any of his subjects to be executed, even when they shall have been judged worthy of death; but he sends to the guilty person an officer, who carries to him the signal of death; and immediately the criminal shuts himself in his house, and executes justice on himself. It is not permitted to him to fly into a neighbouring kingdom, and change the pain of death into banishment, as they do in Greece. They relate that a certain man, having received an order of death, which had been sent to him by the king, thought of flying out of Ethiopia. His mother, who suspected his design, passed her girdle around his neck, without his attempting to defend himself, and strangled him, lest, as she said, her son should bring increased disgrace upon his family by his flight.”

We perceive, by these passages, that the Ethiopians had regular laws, to which not only the people but the king submitted. The kings, it seems, were chosen from the priests, and therefore it is not extraordinary that they were so completely under their power as we shall shortly see; for probably, like the cardinals at Rome, they did not select always the most talented, but often the most manageable, as their chief. The satyr-like gambols of the priest, which were the cause of his being elected, remind me somewhat of the impositions, or, rather, workings of the spirit, which the Arab fakeers and sheakhs sometimes exhibit.[75]

[Hieroglyphs]

“The death of the kings,” says Diodorus, “is still more extraordinary. The priests at Meroe have acquired great power. When they form the resolution, they send a courier to the king, with an order for him to die. They tell him that the gods (or oracles) had thus decreed, and that he would be guilty of a crime if he violated an order from them. They added many other reasons, which would easily influence a simple man, aware of the ancient custom, and who had not strength of mind sufficient to resist such an unjust command. The first kings submitted to this cruel sentence. Ergamenes, who reigned at the time of the second Ptolemy, and who was instructed in the philosophy of Greece, was the first who dared to throw off this ridiculous yoke. He went with his army to the place difficult to get to, or (εἰς τὸ ἄβατον) fortress, where was formerly the temple of gold of the Ethiopians, and caused all the priests to be massacred, and instituted himself a new religion.” Signor Rosellini found the name of this king on the door of the sanctuary of Dacker. ⲥⲟⲩⲧⲛ̀ (Ⲁⲙⲛⲧⲟⲧ ⲱⲛϩ, Ⲣⲏ-ⲱⲧⲡ) ⲥⲓⲣⲏ (Ⲉⲣⲕⲁⲙⲛ ⲱⲛϩ ϫⲧⲧ, Ⲓⲥⲏⲙⲁⲓ). “King Amentot (hand of Amun), the living, devoted to Phre (Son of the Sun), Erkamon, always living, beloved of Isis.”—Vol. ii. 321.

The discovery of the name is of the greatest importance; as the evidence of this lapidary inscription, that there was a king called Ergamenes, or, to give him his proper name, Erkamenes, is strongly corroborative of the whole narrative of Diodorus. He could not have been an Egyptian king, for there is no mention in any of the lists of a king of that name. We may, therefore, with certainty conclude, that it is the Ethiopian monarch Erkamenes. Philæ was generally considered the boundary of Egypt, but we have the indubitable testimony of a long train of splendid monuments, from that island to Solib, that the rulers of Egypt, from the Pharaohs of the eighteenth dynasty until the time of the Cæsars, possessed at all events, at different intervals, that part of Ethiopia.

From there being there no Ethiopian edifices, but all Egyptian temples, from the first to the second cataract, it is probable that the Egyptians were generally in possession of that part of the valley of the Nile; but the name of this Ethiopian king having been found on this Ptolemaic edifice, can only be accounted for by his having been in possession of the country. The style of the architecture and sculpture of the temple of Dacker is certainly like that of the Ptolemies. I therefore do not conceive that the temple was built by Erkamenes, but perhaps that conqueror celebrated his victories by religious functions, a representation of which he had sculptured on the temple at the limit of his conquests.

[Hieroglyphs]

Besides Erkamenes, we have accounts of another Ethiopian monarch, whose name Signor Rosellini found on the temple of Deboud, in Lower Nubia, and which he conceives (I think very correctly), to be also of an Ethiopian king of about the same period. ⲥⲟⲩⲧⲛ̀ (Ⲣⲏ ⲛ̀ ⲱⲧⲡ, ⲥⲱⲧⲛ̀ ⲛ̀ⲛⲓⲧⲏⲣ) ⲥⲓⲣⲏ (Ⲁⲧⲣⲣⲁⲙⲛ, ⲱⲡϩ ϫⲧⲧ) “King (Son of Perfection, approved by the gods), Son of the Sun (Atarramon, always living.)” This, therefore, is an Ethiopian king, whose conquests extended to within a few miles of Philæ.

A Greek inscription at Kalabshy mentions the victories of Silco, king of all the Ethiopians, over the Blemmyes. No other Ethiopian names are found in Lower Nubia, except some prisoners represented on the walls of the temple of Rameses at Kalabshy.

Strabo[76] gives us a highly important narrative of an event that took place in his time. It is peculiarly interesting, as it accounts for the ruin of the towns and temples which once adorned that part of the valley of the Nile. “The Ethiopians,” says he, “taking advantage of Ælius Gallus having taken away the garrison of Syene, to prosecute his expedition into Arabia, by a sudden and unforeseen attack took possession of Syene, Elephanta, and Philæ; made the inhabitants prisoners, overthrew the statues of Cæsar Augustus; but Petronius, with 10,000 foot and 800 cavalry, attacked their army, composed of 30,000 men, and forced them to fly to Pselchis, an Ethiopian city: he sent ambassadors to them there, to demand what they had taken, and to know what reason they had to complain of the governors. They required three days to consider, and as, after that time, Petronius did not obtain satisfaction, he attacked them, forced them to give battle, and had no difficulty in putting to flight men ill disciplined and ill armed, having only large shields of unmanufactured ox-hide, hatchets, spears, and sabres. Some threw themselves into the town, others fled into the desert. Some gained a neighbouring town by swimming across the river; among the number were the generals of Candace, who reigned over the Ethiopians. This queen, whose courage was beyond her sex, was deprived of one eye.

“Petronius crossed the river upon rafts and boats, and made prisoners all those who were in the island, and sent them immediately to Alexandria; afterwards they attacked Pselchis, and took it by assault. From Pselchis, Petronius, crossing the downs of sand where the army of Cambyses had been swallowed up by the winds, reached Premnis, a town in a strong situation, gained it at the first attack, and advanced afterwards on Napata, the capital of the kingdom of Candace, where her son was then residing. Candace occupied a neighbouring place, whence she sent to demand peace, offering to restore the prisoners who had been brought from Syene, and the statues which they had carried off; but Petronius, regardless of these propositions, attacked Napata, which the queen and her son had abandoned, razed the town, and led away the inhabitants captive.

“He returned with his booty, judging the road beyond to be too difficult. He took, however, the precaution to fortify Premnis better, leaving there a garrison of 400 men, with provisions for two years. Candace advanced, with a considerable force, against Premnis, but Petronius came to its relief, and succeeded in throwing himself into the town before the arrival of the queen, and provided various means of defence for the safety of the place. Candace sent ambassadors to Petronius, who ordered them to go to Cæsar (Augustus); and as they pretended not to know who Cæsar was, and which way they must go, he gave them an escort. These ambassadors arrived at Samos, where Cæsar then was. He granted all that they desired, and even freed them from the tribute which he had imposed upon them.”

We perceive from this account the superiority of the Roman arms. The discipline of those celebrated troops would have made them irresistible, whatever might have been the inferiority of their number, against such wretched soldiers as Strabo represents the Ethiopians: but Petronius, when at Napata, would scarcely have refrained from proceeding to Meroe, nor eventually would he have shut himself up in Premnis, whatever might have been the force of Candace, had it consisted of the undisciplined, ill-armed people he describes. Augustus does not seem to have despised them, since he concluded a peace on their own terms. In my account of the arts of Meroe, I will mention the probable effects of this destructive invasion of Petronius. Pliny also mentions this expedition[77], and states that, after Pselchis and Premnis, he took also the cities of Aboccis, Phthuris, Cambusis, Attenan, and Stadisis, and afterwards Napata; but he adds, it was not only the Roman arms which made a wilderness of this part of Ethiopia, but the wars with Egypt, alternately ruling over, and subject to, that country.

The year of the expedition of Petronius has never been exactly ascertained[78], but according to Dion Cassius (lxiv. s. 7.), Augustus went into the East in the year of Rome 734. Therefore, as the ambassadors of the Ethiopians found him at Samos, on his way into Syria, the expedition of Petronius can only have taken place a very short time before that period, that is, about twenty years before Christ.

An event of the greatest importance is recorded in the Gospel, as having taken place A.D. 33. An eunuch, a man of great authority under Candace, who had the charge of all her treasure, was converted by Philip.[79] The time at which Philip met the eunuch was subsequent to that of Ergamenes, when, as we have seen, a taste for Greek literature was spread in Ethiopia; therefore, the Greek language was, without doubt, sufficiently known to enable them to read the Old Testament, which was then translated into that language. It is not extraordinary, that a man who may be supposed to have raised himself to his high station of chief eunuch, by superior talent, should have perceived the superiority of the Jewish religion to that of Amun, nor is it unreasonable to presume that many of the Jews visited Ethiopia, and contributed to his conversion. We find him, therefore, as a believer in the Jewish religion, undertaking a journey of nearly 2000 miles to worship at the holy temple of Jerusalem, and engaged, when Philip met him, in studying the promises held out to the chosen people. We have no reason, I think, to assume that, because the sacred writings have only recorded this solitary instance, there were not other Ethiopians who had embraced the Jewish religion. It is well known that, in the East, through every age, the chief eunuch has always been one of the most powerful officers at the court; and it is not unreasonable, I think, to presume that his influence, joined to the persuasive truth of the doctrines of Christianity, may have induced many to forsake the ancient worship of the country, which had then, perhaps, degenerated, as in Egypt, into gross polytheism. Unless we assign a reign of more than fifty years to the Candace of the Gospel, she cannot be the sovereign who reigned at the time of the expedition of Petronius; but Pliny informs us that several queens who reigned in Ethiopia assumed this appellation. Philip met the eunuch, riding in his chariot, on the road from Jerusalem to Gaza, which is a desert tract. Those deserts, which the traveller is now obliged to cross on the fatiguing camel, exposed to the hot sun and parching winds, the eunuch, it seems, rode over comfortably in his chariot. About the year 330, when Athanasius was Patriarch of Alexandria, according to Ludolf[80], Christianity was introduced into Abyssinia, by two youths, Frumentius and Ædisius, who were shipwrecked on the coast of the Red Sea; but it was not until the time of Theodosius that the Nubians were converted; and, according to the Arab writer, Sheref el Edrese, A.D. 1153, they were still Christians.

I shall not attempt the laborious, and almost useless, task, of endeavouring to trace the history of this country from the time of the Romans until the present day. My object has been to lay before the reader the most important fragments of history connected with the kingdom of Meroe. The capital of Candace was Napata, and not Meroe. The latter celebrated metropolis seems to have existed until the age of Ptolemy Philadelphus; and at the time of Nero, Pliny describes Napata as of no importance. _Oppidum id parvum inter prædicta solum_. After this sad decline of the glory of the Ethiopians, we find the wild tribes, whose power was formerly absorbed in the superior greatness of Meroe, now acting the principal part. The wars of the Blemmyes and the Nubians with each other, and against the Roman power, are the most important events afterwards transmitted to us; but, as these tribes have left no monuments of their civilisation, their names, victories, and defeats, have little connection with the history of Meroe. It might be interesting to trace the wasting away of that lamp of civilisation which had shone once so bright; but such an inquiry would exceed my limits, as well as the object prescribed to myself, which was, to show the once great political importance of the Ethiopians of Meroe. I have said, in my topographical description, that my examination of the existing monuments led me to adopt the opinion of those who believe the statement of Diodorus, that Meroe was the cradle of the arts. I shall, in the following chapters, bring forward additional arguments to prove that statement. The establishment of this fact will give an additional interest to that classical land, which we have seen to be the country of Memnon, Zerah, Tirhaka, Ergamenes, &c., and against which the efforts of Semiramis, Cambyses, and the Egyptian Pharaohs[81], were vainly directed.