Names of Kings not known.

CHAPTER XX.

CONTEMPORARY HISTORY.

To form a truer estimate of the state of the Israelites, and the superiority of their government, it is desirable to take a short view of the condition of other ancient nations at this period. The earliest people who attained civilization and the benefit of a fixed government, were the Egyptian; the history of Joseph, and the subsequent bondage of the Israelites, will have given some idea of the state of Egypt at that time, of which little is known with certainty, until a much later period. The nation had been under subjection to a foreign race, called by their historians, Shepherd-Kings, who established a cruel, and formidable tyranny, long remembered with dread and detestation. After the departure of the Israelites, came the reign of Sesostris, whose conquests from the Ganges to the Danube occupied a space of nine years; during which time the Israelites were in the Desert, probably in that part of the peninsular situated near Mount Sinai, which is sheltered on the north by a chain of mountains: this would secure them from the attack of Sesostris, or rather prevent their existence being known to him. After Sesostris, a succession of kings reigned in Egypt, whose history is involved in obscurity and fable. Some names are preserved; but the

authority on which these rest is not yet satisfactorily ascertained, and waits for farther investigation.* When the annals of a nation are thus obscure, we can form but an imperfect idea of their state of civilization, and the condition of the people and it would be unjust to consider the absence of records intelligible to us as always a proof of barbarism; but in the case of the Egyptians we know that at a much later period, though the priests were famed for their knowledge, and though the Pyramids and Temples now standing attest their extraordinary skill in mechanics and the arts, yet the ignorance and debased superstition of the people were the wonder and scorn even of their contemporaries. When Apis the Bull, when crocodiles and cats, and even in some parts the leeks and onions upon which they fed, were regarded as fit representations of the divinity, and received their worship, can we suppose the people to be enlightened; or far removed from the first state of society, when men unite for the sole purpose of self-preservation, and when the multitude are occupied by no

* The Chronology of the early Egyptian kings was, till lately, involved in almost inextricable difficulties. Modern discoveries in reading hieroglyphical inscriptions are now throwing light on the subject, and many former errors are being corrected. The reign of Sesostris is placed during the wanderings of the Israelites in the Desert, as that date is received by able chronologists and commentators, and agrees remarkably with the history of the Israelites; but as it is a date which has been differently fixed by different writers, a note of interrogation is put before the name in the chart, to mark the uncertainty which rests upon it.

thought, no pursuit higher than what is required by their daily routine of toil or pleasure? Another peculiarity of the Egyptian laws and customs, would tend to keep the mass of the people stationary in regard to intellectual vigor and capacity: they were divided into castes, something in the manner of the modern Hindoos; one order were priests, another soldiers, another artizans, and so on; and even in the trades, no deviation from the one followed by the head of the family was allowed, whatever might be the talents and inclination of the children. If the father were a physician, so must be the sons: if the father followed some mechanical art, so must the sons::-from generation to generation the same rank was held, the same occupations were followed. The idea was, that as perfection cannot be attained in any art without long practice, so by binding every man to his profession for life, the state secured the greatest skill in each department. But experience shows that this opinion is erroneous; and that as certain talents and character do not descend in the same families, or in fact follow any fixed rule, so the way of life should (within certain limits, and as far as is compatible with order and subordination) be open to the choice of all; as it is then to be supposed each will select that for which his talents are best fitted. Now this was impossible in Egypt: the law of castes was rigid, and thus, though early standing high in civilization as compared with the nations

round, the Egyptians appear to have remained nearly stationary until the time of the Ptolemies, more than six centuries later than the reign of David. This is quite compatible with the famed "learning of the Egyptians;" this learning being confined to the priests, who were doubtless the wisest, as well as the most artful men of their age. Few were initiated into their mysteries, and none were permitted to impart the secrets of their knowledge to the multitude. They had two sorts of philosophy; one for their common teachings, another for themselves and the few they admitted to partake their real sentiments; nay, their language had its mysteries, and none but the initiated could read that in which they conveyed their most sacred truths. Let us compare this state of things with the superior polity of the Israelites. Instead of the strict, undeviating law of caste, all the people enjoyed equal privileges, had equal rights, and, excepting the priesthood and order of Levites, were free to choose whatever occupation suited their habits and character. Being an agricultural people, and each family having its allotment of land, which no improvidence could alienate for more than fifty years, the cultivation of the soil was the favorite occupation of the Israelites: but this varied, according to individual inclination. One tribe devoted itself to the feeding of cattle, another to trading in ships; while vineyards, and olive grounds, diversified the peaceful scene. The only beneficial object to be attained by the