« السابقةمتابعة »
tions speaking cognate dialects of the Semitic or SyroArabian language. According to a custom existing from time immemorial in the East, the name of the supreme deity was introduced into the names of men. This custom prevailed from the banks of the Tigris to the Phoenician colonies beyond the pillars of Hercules; and we recognise in the Sardanapalus of the Assyrians, and the Hannibal of the Carthaginians, the identity of the origin of the religious system of two nations, as widely distinct in the time of their existence, as in their geographical position. To the Jews the same name was familiar, and was applied very generally to the gods of the surrounding nations. Even under its various orthographical modifi cations, there can be no difficulty in detecting it.
"From this Baal came the Belus of the Greeks, who was confounded with their own Zeus, or Jupiter. But whether he was really the father of the founder of the empire, or was himself its founder, as some have asserted, and then came to be considered, after the fashion of the Greek theology, its principal deity, there may be good reason to doubt."
Returning, however, from this digression, Major Rawlinson further remarked, that he thought there were two distinct divisions of Egypt, commonly mentioned at Khorsabad, one Misr, (or, perhaps, Mitsur,) which seemed to be lower Egypt, and which was ruled over by Bi-arhu, possibly the Pe-hur of the hieroglyphs: and the other Misck, or higher Egypt, governed by a king whose name was written Me-ta, which he thought might possibly, though hardly probably, be a contraction of Menophtha. He suggested that these two divisions may represent the upper and lower country of the hieroglyphs, and that it was in consequence of the great similarity of the names that the Hebrews employed a single dual form, Misraim. At any rate, the country of Misek, which plays so very conspicuous a part in the annals of Khorsabad, must
have been contiguous to Misr, or lower Egypt, for the king Me-ta appears sometimes to have resided in Rabek, or Heliopolis; and the two geographical names, moreover, are always associated. It should also be remembered, in connexion with this, that the names Menophtha and Pehur follow each other in the hieroglyphic lists of the 21st dynasty.
The remarkably interesting ivory relics discovered by Dr. Layard at Nineveh, had already furnished evidences of the early intercourse of Assyria with Egypt, and of their familiarity with the phonetic hieroglyphics of Egypt. Dr. Layard remarks, in reference to the ivory inscribed with a royal cartouch, "Important facts in our inquiry may be connected with the assertion of Diodorus, that on the taking of Nineveh by the Medes, under Arbaces, the city was destroyed; or with the usual historical account of the death of Sardanapalus, about 876 or 868 years before Christ.
"The north-west palace, if already in ruins or buried, must have been partly uncovered, perhaps excavated for materials, in the time of the Khorsabad king; because there was in one of the chambers, as I have already mentioned, an inscription commencing with his name, cut above the usual standard inscription. It has every appearance of having been placed there to commemorate the re-opening, discovery, or re-occupation of the building. Moreover, the vases bearing the name of this king, and found in the rubbish above the chambers, must be of the same period. The ivory ornaments I conjecture to be contemporaneous with the vases, and so also most of the small objects found in the edifice. And if this fact be established, we may obtain important chronological data; for if the name in the cartouche could be satisfactorily deciphered, and identified with that of any Egyptian king, or with that of any Assyrian king whose place in history can be determined, we should be able at once to decide
the period of the reign of the Khorsabad king and his
"As the name cannot yet be determined, Mr. Birch, in a memoir read before the Royal Society of Literature, has endeavoured to fix the age of the ivories by 'their artistic style, by philological peculiarities, and by the political relations between Egypt and Assyria.' He well observes, that the style is not purely Egyptian, although it shows very close imitation of Egyptian workmanship, and this must strike any one who examines these fragments. The solar disc and plumes surmounting the cartouche, appear to have been first used in the time of the eighteenth dynasty, in the reign of Thothmes III., and are found above the names of kings as late as the Persian occupation of Egypt. The head attire of the king bears some resemblance to that of Amenophis III. at Karnak, and the kheppr, or helmet, also appears at the commencement of the eighteenth dynasty; the absence of peaked sandals, and the masses of locks of side hair, may possibly have been the fashion of the twenty-second dynasty.
"As to the evidence afforded by the philological construction, and the employment of certain letters, all the symbols, except one, appear to have been in use from the earliest period in Egypt; the exceptional symbol, the u, was introduced generally in the time of the eighteenth dynasty. Mr. Birch concludes, that the time of the twenty-second dynasty would well suit the cartouche, if stress may be laid upon certain philological peculiarities.
"We have next the evidence of political intercourse between the two countries, as showing at what period it is likely that by trade or otherwise, articles of Egyptian manufacture may have been carried into Assyria, or Egyptian workmen may have sought employment in the Assyrian cities. It has already been shown that from the commencement of the eighteenth dynasty a close intercourse had already commenced,-chiefly, it would ap
pear, by conquest: as the monuments of that period frequently allude to the subjugation of the countries on the borders of the Euphrates. But it is about the time of the twenty-first dynasty of Tanite kings, that the relations between the two countries seem to have been most fully established, and that more than a common connexion had sprung up between them. Mr. Birch has discovered, and pointed out, the remarkable evidence afforded by the names of male and female members of this and the following dynasty, which are evidently of Semitic, and even of Assyrian, origin. Those of many of the kings of the twenty-second or Bubastite dynasty, are the most remarkable instances. We have Sheshank, his sons Shapud and Osorchon, Nimrot, the son of Osorchon II., Takilutha or Takellothis, Nimrot, the son of Takellothis II., and the names of queens, Lekamat or Rekamat, Karmam or Kalmim, daughter of the Prince Nimroud and Tatepor. The two first, Sheshank and Shapud, and the names of the queens, Mr. Birch shows, are not referable to Egyptian roots, but follow the analogy of Assyrian names. Osorchon he identifies with the Assyrian Sargon, Nimrot with Nimrod, and Takilutha with Tiglath; a word which enters into the composition of the name of the Assyrian monarch, Tiglath Pileser.
"It is highly probable, therefore, that at this period, the reign of the twenty-second dynasty, very intimate relations existed between Egypt and the countries to the north-east of it. Solomon had married a daughter of an Egyptian monarch, and Jeroboam fled to the court of king Shishak. The same alliances, therefore, may have been formed between the most powerful monarchs of the time -those of Assyria and Egypt. The two countries appear then to have been at peace, and in friendly communication; for we have no notice in the Bible of wars between the Assyrians and Egyptians at this period, nor does Naharaina appear amongst the numerous conquests of
Shishak. As their battle-ground would probably have been some part of Syria, and the troops of one of the two nations would have marched through the Jewish territories, some record of the event would have been preserved by the sacred writers. The monuments of this dynasty do not contain any notice of triumphs and conquest to the east of the Euphrates. During this period of intimate alliance, the Assyrian monarchs may have adopted Egyptian names or prenomens, or may have employed Egyptian artists to record their names and titles in the sacred characters of Egypt. It is even possible that this connexion may account for the appearance of Egyptian names in the lists of Assyrian kings.
"Thus the evidence afforded by the artistic style of the cartouches, and by their philological peculiarities, as well as by the principal period of political and commercial intercourse between the two people, appears to coincide, and points to the twenty-second dynasty, or 980 B. C., as the most probable period of the ivories. At the same time it must be observed that there is no argument against their being attributed to the eighteenth dynasty." At best, these speculations must still partake much of conjecture; but we see in them many indications of approximation to the truth, and may confidently anticipate the most valuable results when sufficient time has been allowed to mature these recondite studies, and bring into one consistent whole the results of diverse speculations such as those of Major Rawlinson, Dr. Layard, and Mr. Birch.
Leaving then the consideration of relations of Assyria with Egypt, Major Rawlinson next proceeded to investi gate the traces of intercourse with other nations.
In noticing the campaign against Senacte, a city of Phoenicia contiguous to Ashdod, or Azotus, he observed that, after the place was taken, the Assyrian king gave it to Metheti of Athenni; and suggested that, as the city of Senacte was stated in another passage to be in the