Archæology and the Bible

by George A. Barton

Within the last twenty years a series of tombs of a previously unknown type has been discovered. The bodies buried in these tombs did not lie on the back as the ordinary Egyptian mummy does, but on the side, with the knees drawn up to the chin. It was at first thought that these tombs were the work of a new race of men who had invaded Egypt at some time in the historical period, but further study indicates that they are the tombs of the early Egyptians from whom the Egyptians known to history were descended.

4. Decipherment.—One of the objects found by the French at the time of Napoleon’s expedition was the “Rosetta Stone,” so called because found at Rosetta (Ar-Rashid), a town near the mouth of the westernmost of the large branches of the Nile. This stone was set up about 200 B. C. by some priests, who expressed, through the inscription which it bore, their thanks to the young king, Ptolemy V, because certain taxes formerly imposed on them had been remitted. The inscription was written in three kinds of writing—hieroglyphic Egyptian (picture-writing), demotic Egyptian (developed from picture-writing), and Greek; (see [Fig. 14]). It was among the objects which the English took in 1802, and had been placed in the British Museum. Although the Greek portion of the inscription could be easily read, the attempts of various scholars, through a period of twenty years, had succeeded in establishing the values of only a few characters of the Egyptian. In 1818 Jean François Champollion, a French scholar, who before this had busied himself with the study of Coptic and Egyptian geography, began the study of the Rosetta Stone. He assumed that the language of the upper registers must be an older form of the Coptic tongue. By a most painstaking comparison of the characters in the upper registers with the Coptic equivalents of the words in the lower or Greek register, he succeeded in deciphering the long-forgotten writing of ancient Egypt. He published his discovery in 1822. Thus the door to the historical and literary treasures of ancient Egypt was unlocked, and from that time to this the study of Egyptian inscriptions and documents has gone steadily forward. Many universities now maintain chairs of Egyptology. The ability to read Egyptian has opened up vistas of history of which men had hitherto no conception.

5. Chronology.—We are dependent for our main outline of Egyptian chronology upon the work of Manetho, an Egyptian priest, who lived about 250 B. C., and wrote a chronicle of his native land in the Greek language. He grouped the kings of Egypt from the time of Menes (or Mena) to the conquest of Alexander the Great (332 B. C.) into thirty-one dynasties. Manetho’s dynasties enable scholars to determine the relative order of the kings, and thus form the backbone of our chronology. Around his statements the discoveries of the excavators and explorers are grouped. Manetho’s work has not, however, come down to us. We know it only through quotations in the Chronographiai of Julius Africanus (221 A. D.) and the Chronicon of Eusebius of Cesarea (265-340 A. D.). The number of years assigned to each king, and consequently the length of time covered by the dynasties, differ in these two copies, so that, while the work of Manetho forms the backbone of our chronology, it gives us no absolutely reliable chronology. It is for this reason that the chronological schemes of modern scholars have differed so widely.

Another source of chronological information is the so-called “Palermo Stone,” which is preserved in the Museum of Palermo, Sicily. This stone is a hard diorite, and is but a fragment of the original. It was inscribed about the middle of the fifth dynasty, and originally contained a list of the kings of Egypt from a time long before Mena to the middle of the fifth dynasty. Though now but a fragment, it is still of great value for the period which it covers. In addition to this, we also have the King List of Karnak, set up by Thothmes III, of the eighteenth dynasty, the King List of Abydos, inscribed by Seti I and Ramses II, of the nineteenth dynasty, and the King List of Sakkarah, inscribed by Ramses II. As these are all simply selections from the list of the predecessors of their authors, they are of secondary importance. The “Turin Papyrus” would be of value chronologically, but for its unfortunate history. This papyrus originally contained the most complete list of Egyptian kings that has come down to us, with the exception of Manetho’s chronology. It formed part of the collection of M. Drovetti, the French Consul-General in Egypt. The collection was offered to the French government in 1818, but was finally purchased by the king of Sardinia. When the collection arrived in Turin, it was found that this papyrus was broken into small fragments in the bottom of the box in which it had been shipped. The fragments were afterward (1824) examined by Champollion the younger, who discovered their true character. In 1826 another Egyptologist went to Turin and joined the fragments; but the science of Egyptology was then in its infancy, and he in his ignorance joined pieces which did not naturally belong together. For this reason it is only occasionally that the document yields us any chronological data.

The greatest aid in fixing Egyptian chronology is the “Sothic Cycle.” At an early date the Egyptians adopted a calendar which made up a year of 365 days. Their year originally began when the rapid rising of the Nile coincided with the rising of the star Sirius, called by them Sothis. These events coincided on July 19th. As their calendar made no allowance for leap year, in four years their new year began a day too soon, in eight years two days too soon, and so on. In 1,460 years (i. e., 365 × 4) their New Year’s Day would make a complete circuit of the year. These periods of 1,460 years are called Sothic Cycles. Censorinus, in Chapters XVIII and XXI of his De Die Natali, written in 238 A. D., tells us that a new Sothic cycle began at some time between 140 and 144 A. D. If a new cycle began in 140 A. D., the previous one began in 1320 B. C.; the one before that, in 2780 B. C.; and the one before that,—if they had their calendar so early,—in 4240 B. C. Reisner holds that the Egyptians adopted their calendar in 2780 B. C., but Meyer and Breasted hold that it is unthinkable that they should have been without a calendar until that time, as by that date the civilization of the pyramid builders was at its height; they accordingly maintain that the Egyptian calendar was adopted in 4240 B. C.

An illustration will show how the Sothic cycle helps in determining dates. A priest in the 120th year of the twelfth dynasty wrote a letter to his subordinates, to inform them that the rising of Sothis would occur on the fifteenth day of the eighth month. As there were thirty days in each month, the year diverged at this time 225 days. This date, then, was just 900 years after the beginning of the cycle in 2780 B. C.; i. e., the letter was written in the year 1880 B. C. It proves that the twelfth dynasty began in 2000 B. C., and fixes for us all the dates of that dynasty. The calendar in the so-called Papyrus Ebers shows that in the tenth year of Amenophis I, of the eighteenth dynasty, the divergence had increased to 308 days. This must have been 1,232 years after the beginning of the cycle, which was the year 1548 B. C. Data gained from these sources are supplemented by what is called dead reckoning; i. e., by adding together all the specific dates of the length of reigns which are given in the inscriptions, and testing them by collateral references. Meyer and Breasted have worked out the chronology from these data in this way. Meyer places the accession of Mena at 3200 B. C., while Breasted places it at 3400 B. C. This difference is slight when compared with the differences in the chronologies of the older Egyptologists.

6. Outline of History.[3]—The history of Egypt, as it concerns our subject, extends over a period of five thousand years. It falls into twelve periods:

(1) The Pre-Dynastic Period, which we suppose extended from about 5000 B. C., or earlier, until about 3400 B. C., is the period before that covered by Manetho’s dynasties. At the beginning of this period Egypt was divided into 42 districts, which the Egyptians called spt or ḥsp, and which the Greeks afterwards called nomes. Each nome was occupied by a different tribe, which at the first lived in isolation from the other tribes. Each tribe had its god, to which an animal was sacred. This condition prevailed for so many centuries that the customs of this time became permanently fixed. The sacredness of these animals continued right down to Roman times. During this period the dead were buried on their sides with the knees drawn up to the chin; (see [Fig. 8]). The Egyptians of this period lived partly by hunting, partly by fishing, and partly by agriculture. From objects found in their tombs we infer that they used stone implements, wore a great many beads, made implements and combs of bone, made decorated pottery, constructed boats for use on the Nile and fitted sails to them, and each tribe had its own standard or emblem. Of course, during the centuries when Egypt was so politically divided there were many wars between nome and nome.

After some centuries, through the conquest of one nome by another, these 42 nomes were consolidated into two kingdoms. The 20 nomes of the Delta formed the kingdom of Lower Egypt; the 22 nomes, which were ranged along the Nile from Cairo to the First Cataract, formed the kingdom of Upper Egypt. The symbol of Upper Egypt was a papyrus plant; that of Lower Egypt, the bee. The crown of Upper Egypt was a kind of tall helmet; that of Lower Egypt, a diadem of openwork; (see Figs. [2], [3], and [4]).

At what period this union of the nomes into two kingdoms occurred, we can only conjecture. Probably it was as early as 4200 or 4300 B. C. At all events, the two kingdoms existed separately for so long a time that their memory was ever afterward preserved. To the end of Egyptian history the kings bore the title, “king of Upper Egypt and Lower Egypt.” Even in the Hebrew of the Old Testament the name for Egypt is literally “The two Egypts.” In this long pre-dynastic period the people were gradually emerging from savagery toward civilization. They were solving the initial problems of civilized life. According to Meyer and Breasted the people of Lower Egypt had progressed far enough before 4200 B. C. to invent a calendar which approximately coincided with the solar year.