Chapter II: Letter XXXIX: Smyrna, 7th December, 1845 336

Carmel—Libanon—Berut—Departure to Damascus—Zachleh—Tomb of
Noah—Bárada—Tomb of Abel—Inscriptions at Bárada—Tomb of
Seth—Bâlbeck—Ibrahim—Cedars of Libanon—Egyptian and
Assyrian Rock-Inscriptions at Nahr el Kelb.

PRELIMINARY ACCOUNT OF THE EXPEDITION AND ITS RESULTS.

In the year 1842, in accordance with the proposal of Eichhorn, at that time Minister of Instruction, and at the recommendation of MM. Alexander v. Humboldt and Bunsen, his Majesty King Frederic William IV. of Prussia determined to send a scientific expedition to investigate the remains of ancient Egyptian and Ethiopian civilisation still in preservation in the Nile valley and the adjacent countries. The direction of the undertaking was entrusted to me, after the detailed plans of the proposed expedition had been minutely examined by the _Royal Academy of Sciences_, and in all points graciously approved by the King.

The land-surveyor, G. Erbkam, from Berlin, and the draughtsmen and painters, Ernest and Max Weidenbach, from Naumburg, and J. Frey, from Basle, were appointed to make the drawings and coloured representations, as well as those architectonic plans, which had to be executed on the spot. When J. Frey was obliged to return to Europe from Lower Egypt, on account of the injurious climate, he was replaced by the painter O. Georgi, from Leipzig. Two English artists, also, J. Bonomi, who, from the interest he took in the journey, became attached to our party while we were in London, and the architect J. Wild, who joined us of his own accord, took an active part in the expedition as long as it remained in Lower Egypt. Lastly, during nearly the whole of the journey, we enjoyed the society of the present Counsellor of Legation, H. Abeken, who accompanied us voluntarily and on an independent footing, and who in various ways promoted the antiquarian objects of the journey. We were also provided with the means of obtaining plaster casts of those representations that were best qualified for the purpose, by the addition of Franke the moulder.

The different members of the expedition arriving by various roads, met in _Alexandria_, on the 18th September, 1842. On the 9th November we encamped near the great Pyramids of _Gizeh_. What we obtained on that spot, as well as from the adjoining Pyramid fields of _Abusir_, _Saqâra_, and _Daschûr_, which are situated to the south, occupied us exclusively and uninterruptedly for more than six months. The inexhaustible number of important and instructive monuments and representations, which we met with in these Necropoli, the most ancient that have existed in any country, surpassed every expectation we had been entitled to hold concerning them, and accounts for our long abode in this part of the country, which is the first approached and visited, but has, notwithstanding, been very little investigated. If we except the celebrated and well-known examination of the Pyramids in the year 1837, by Colonel Howard Vyse, assisted by the accomplished architect Perring, little had been done to promote a more minute investigation of this remarkable spot; the French-Tuscan expedition, in particular, did little more than pass through it. Nevertheless, the innumerable tombs of private individuals grouped about those royal Pyramids, partly constructed of massive square blocks, partly hewn into the living rock, contain, almost exclusively, representations belonging to the old Egyptian Monarchy, which terminated between two and three thousand years before Christ; indeed, most of them belong to the fourth and fifth Manethonic Dynasties, therefore between three and four thousand years before Christ. The wonderful age of those Pyramids, and of the surrounding tombs, is no longer generally denied by intelligent inquirers, and in the first volume of my “Egyptian Chronology,”[1] which has lately appeared, I have endeavoured to furnish a critical proof of the certain foundations we possess for a more special determination of time as far back as that period. But were any one only to believe in the lowest acceptation of modern scholars concerning the age of the first Egyptian Dynasties, he would still be compelled to yield priority to those monuments before any other Egyptian remains of art, and generally before all artistic remains belonging to the whole race of man, to which we can historically refer. It is only to this that we can attribute the wonderful growth in the interest which we attach, partly to the monuments themselves, as proofs of the earliest activity shown in art, partly to the various representations of the manner of living in those primitive times.

On the western border of the Desert, which stretches from the most northerly groups of Pyramids at Abu Roasch, past the ruins of the old capital of Memphis, to the Oasis-peninsula of the “Faiûm,” we discovered the remains of sixty-seven Pyramids, which, with a few exceptions, were only destined for kings, and in the neighbourhood of the principal groups we investigated, still more minutely, 130 tombs of private individuals, which deserved to be more particularly recorded. A great many of these sepulchral chambers, richly adorned with representations and inscriptions, could only be reached by excavations. Most of them belonged to the highest functionaries of those flourishing Dynasties, among whom there were also thirteen royal princes and seven princesses.

After we had taken the most careful topographical plans of all the fields of Pyramids, and had noted down the architectonic ground plans, and sections of the most important tombs, and after we had, in the most complete manner, drawn or taken paper impressions of their pictures and inscriptions, as far as they were accessible to us, we had accomplished more completely than we ever hoped to do, the first and most important task of our journey, since we had acquired a basis for our knowledge concerning the monuments of the oldest Egyptian monarchy.

On the 19th May, 1843, we proceeded still farther, and encamped on the 23rd in the Faiûm, upon the ruins of the LABYRINTH. Its true position was long ago conjectured; and our first view dissipated all our doubts concerning it. The interesting discovery of the actual site of the ancient Lake Mœris was made about the same time, by the distinguished French architect Linant, which we had the opportunity of confirming on the spot. This greatly facilitated the means of comprehending the topographical and historical conditions of this province, so remarkable in all its features. The magnificent schemes which converted this originally desolate Oasis into one of the most productive parts of Egypt, were intimately connected with each other, and must have belonged, if not to a single king, still to one epoch of time. The most important result we obtained by our investigations of the Labyrinth and of the adjoining Pyramids, was the determination of the historical position of the original founder; this we obtained by excavations, which occupied a considerable time. We discovered that the king, who was erroneously called Mœris by the Greeks, from Lake Mere—_i. e._ from the Lake of the Nile inundation—lived at the end of the 12th Manethonic Dynasty, shortly before the invasion of the Hyksos, and was called _Amenemhe_ by Manetho Ἀμενέμης, the third of his name. His predecessors in the same Dynasty had already founded the town of Crocodilopolis, in the centre of the Faiûm, which is proved by some ruins that still exist belonging to that period; and they probably conducted the Nile Canal, Bahr-Jusef, which branches off from Derut-Scherif, into the basin of the Desert. That part of the basin which is most advanced, and situated highest, terminated in a lake formed by means of gigantic dams, many of which still exist; and the connection of the canal was regulated by sluices in such a manner, that in the dry season the reserved water could flow back again into the valley of the Nile, and irrigate the country round the capital long after the Nile had retreated within its banks. Amenemhe built his Pyramid on the shore of the lake, and a splendid temple in front of it. It afterwards formed the centre of the Labyrinth, whose many hundred chambers, forming three regular masses of buildings, surrounded the oldest portion, and, according to Herodotus, were destined by the Dodecarchs for the general Diets. The ruins of the Labyrinth had never yet been correctly represented, not even in their general arrangement. An Arabian canal, which was carried through it at a later period, had drawn away the attention of passing travellers from that portion of the chambers which was in best preservation. We have made the most exact ground plan, accompanied by sections and views. A journey round the province, as far as Birqet-el-Qorn, and beyond it, to the ruins of _Diméh_ and _Qasr Qerûn_, induced us to remain several months in this neighbourhood.

On the 23rd August we embarked at _Beni-suef_, visited a small rock-temple of King _Sethôs I._ at _Surarieh_, on the eastern shore, and farther on, the remains of later monuments in the neighbourhood of _Tehneh_. At _Kûm-Ahmar_, a little to the south of Zauiet-el-meitîn, we examined a series of nineteen rock-tombs belonging to the 6th Manethonic Dynasty. The groups of tombs which are scattered about a few days’ journey to the south, at _Schech-Said_, _El-Harib_, _Wadi-Selin_, and still farther on, at _Qasr-e’-Saiât_, also belonged to this period, which, in point of age, was immediately connected with the flourishing time of the great builder of the Pyramids. If we judge by the remains now extant, it appears that there were, at that early period especially, in this portion of Central Egypt, a number of flourishing cities. Royal kindred are frequently met with among the ancient possessors of the tombs, but no sons or daughters of the king, because there was no royal residence in that neighbourhood. But we found the last flourishing period of the Old Monarchy—the 12th Manethonic Dynasty—represented in this part of Egypt by the most beautiful and most considerable remains. The rock-tombs of Beni Hassan, so remarkable for their architecture, as well as for the various paintings on their walls, peculiarly belong to this period. The town to which they appertained, the residence of a governor of the eastern province of the country, has entirely disappeared, all except the name, which is preserved in the inscriptions. It appears that it only flourished a short time during this dynasty, and again declined at the invasion of the Hyksos. In the neighbouring _Berscheh_ also, and farther on, among the Lybian rocks, behind the town of _Siut_, which was as important 4000 years ago as it is at present, we again found the same plans of tombs on as magnificent a scale, whose period of erection might be recognised even at a distance.

It is a singular fact, that in point of age the greater proportion of the remains of the Egyptian monuments become more modern the higher we ascend the Nile valley, the reverse of what might have been expected from a large view of the subject; according to which the Egyptian civilisation of the Nile valley extended from south to north. While the Pyramids of Lower Egypt, with the monuments around them, had displayed the oldest civilisation of the 3rd, 4th, and 5th Dynasties in such wonderful abundance, we found the 6th Dynasty, and the most flourishing period of the 12th, the last of the Old Monarchy, especially represented in Central Egypt. Thebes was the brilliant capital of the New Monarchy, especially of their first Dynasties, surpassing all other places in the number of its wonderful monuments; and even now it offers us a reflection of the splendour of Egypt in her greatest times. Art, which still created magnificent things even in its decline, under the Ptolemies and the Roman emperors, has left considerable monuments behind it, consisting of a series of stately temples in _Dendera_, _Erment_, _Esneh_, _Edfu_, _Kûm-Ombo_, _Debôd_, _Kalabscheh_, _Dendûr_, _Dakkeh_, which are all, with the exception of Dendera, in the southern part of the Thebaid, or in Lower Nubia. Lastly, those monuments of the Nile valley which are situated most to the south, especially those of the “Island” of _Meröe_, are the latest of all, and most of them belong to the centuries after the Christian era.

We hastened immediately from the monuments of the Old Monarchy in Central Egypt to Thebes, and deferred till our return the examination of the well-preserved, but modern temple of Dendera, the ruins of Abydos, and several other places. But of Thebes, also, we took but a preliminary survey, for we only remained there twelve days, from the 6th to the 18th of October.

We were impatient to commence immediately our second fresh task, which consisted in the investigation of the Ethiopian countries, situated higher up the river. The French-Tuscan expedition did not go beyond Wadi Halfa; Wilkinson’s careful description of the Nile land and its monuments, which contains so much information, only extends a little higher up, as far as Semneh. The most various conjectures were still entertained concerning the monuments of Gebel Barkal and Meröe, with reference to their age and their signification. It was necessary to obtain a general view of the true relation between the History and Civilisation of Egypt and Ethiopia, founded upon a complete examination of the remains which are still extant.

Therefore, after a cursory visit to the temple ruins, as far up as Wadi Halfa, we returned to Korusko, from which place we started on the 8th of January, 1844, through the Great Desert to Abu-Hammed, and the Upper Nile countries. On the 16th of January we arrived at Abu-Hammed, on the other side of the desert; on the 28th, at _Beg´erauîeh_, near to which the Pyramids of Meröe are situated. From _Schendi_, which lies more to the south, we visited the temple ruins of _Naga_ and _Wadi e’ Sofra_, far on in the interior of the eastern desert. On the 5th of February we reached _Chartûm_, at the confluence of the White and the Blue Nile. From this place, accompanied by Abeken, I descended the Blue River, passed the ruins of _Soba_ and _Sennâr_, as far as the 13° of N. lat.; whilst the other members of the expedition returned from Chartûm to the Pyramids of Meröe. The tropical countries of the Nile, when contrasted with those northern ones, devoid of rain, extending south as far as the 17°; and the plants and animals now almost exclusively confined to South Ethiopia, when compared with individual representations of the ancient Egyptian monuments, were rendered still more interesting by the discovery of some monuments, with inscriptions upon them, near Soba, by which we obtained traces of the ancient vernacular language of those districts in a written character resembling the Coptic.

I also made use of our residence in these districts to be instructed by the natives of the adjacent countries in the grammar and vocabulary of their languages.

On the 5th of April I returned with Abeken to the other members of the expedition at _Beg´erauîeh_. After drawings had been made of all that still existed which peculiarly represented the state of civilisation in Ethiopia, and after we had taken the most exact plans of the localities, we proceeded in six days, by the desert Gilif, to _Gebel Barkal_, where we arrived on the 6th of May. Here was the more northern, the more ancient, and, to judge by the remains, also the more important capital of the State of Meröe. At the foot of this single mass of rock, which rises in an imposing manner, and is called there, in the hieroglyphical inscriptions, “The Sacred Mountains,” is situated _Napata_. The history of this place, which we may still derive from its ruins, gives us at once a key to the relations which subsisted in general between Ethiopia and Egypt, as regards the history of their civilisation. We find that the most ancient epoch of art in Ethiopia was purely Egyptian. It is as early as the period of the great Ramses, who, of all the Pharaohs, extended his power farthest, not only towards the north, but also towards the south, and testified this by monuments. At an early period he built a great temple here. The second epoch begins with King _Tahraka_, also known as the ruler of Egypt, the _Thirhaka_ of the Bible. This spot was adorned with several magnificent monuments by him and his immediate successors, and though they were built in a style now employed by native kings, it is, nevertheless, only a faithful copy of the Egyptian style. Lastly, the third epoch is that of the kings of _Meröe_, whose dominion extended as far as Philæ, and was manifested also at Gebel Barkal by numerous monuments. On an intermediate journey into the Cataract country, situated farther up the river, which we had cut off by the Desert journey, I found only Middle-Age, but no ancient, Ethiopian remains of buildings.

The fertile and extensive province of _Dongola_, on the northern frontier, which we traversed on the 4th of June, after our departure from Barkal, afforded us but few remarkable ancient remains; we may, however, mention among these the island of _Argo_, with its monuments, from the 13th Manethonic Dynasty. They became still more numerous in the northern borders of Dongola, from which a nearly continuous Cataract country extends as far as Wadi Halfa. Near _Tombos_ we found traces of the Egyptian dominion under the Pharaohs of the 17th and 18th Dynasties, rock-tablets with the shields of the two first Thutmosis and of the third Amenophis. Farther on, at _Sesebi_, there were the remains of temples of the first SETHÔS of the 19th Dynasty. The great Temple of _Soleb_, built by Amenophis III. and IV., detained us five days. The ruins of the Temple of _Sedeïnga_, and those upon the island of _Sai_, belonged to the 18th and 19th Dynasties. Opposite this island stood the remarkable Temple of _Amara_, which was built by the Kings of Meröe and Naga, and is still an important proof of the extent of their dominion.

_Semneh_ was the next point we reached. The Nile is here compressed within a breadth of only about 1150 feet between high rocky shores. On both sides there are ruins of old temples of the 18th Dynasty. But these were not the earliest buildings which were erected here. We found a considerable number of inscriptions from the 12th and 13th Manethonic Dynasties, especially on the large foundations of the Temple of _Kummeh_, situated lower down, opposite Semneh on the eastern bank, as well as on the scattered rocks on both banks in the neighbourhood of that temple. Many of them were intended to indicate the highest risings of the Nile during a series of years, especially in the reigns of the Kings Amenemhe III. and Sebekhotep I., and by comparing them, we obtained the remarkable result, that about 4000 years ago the Nile used to rise at that point, on an average, twenty-two feet higher than it does at present. This, therefore, which we saw before us was the most ancient Nilometer; and the earliest statements of the heights, and their greatest number, were recorded during the reign of the same king, the Mœris of the Greeks, with whom we had already become acquainted in the Faiûm, as the great hydraulic architect. The strong fortifications on both banks of that narrow part of the river convinced us at once that, during the early times of the 12th Dynasty, this remarkable point served as the boundary of the Egyptian dominion, against the Ethiopian nations who dwelt more to the south.

At _Wadi Halfa_, on the 30th of July, we again left the Cataract country, remained from the 2nd to the 11th of August in _Abu Simbel_, examined until the end of the month the ruins of _Ibrîm_, _Anîbe_, _Derr_, _Amada_, _Sebûa_, _Dakkeh_, _Kubán_, _Gerf-Hussên_, _Sabagûra_, _Dendûr_, _Kalabscheh_, _Debôt_, and spent the whole of the following month in examining the monuments of the Island of _Philæ_, and the islands of _Bigeh_, _Konosso_, _Sehêl_, and _Elephantine_, surrounding it, and of the stone quarries between _Philæ_ and _Assuan_. October was spent visiting _Ombos_, the two _Silsilis_, _Edfu_, the desert Temple of _Redesíeh_, _El-Kâb_, _Esneh_, _Tôd_, and _Erment_.

On the 2nd of November we again arrived on Theban ground, and first visited the rock-tombs of _Qurnah_, on the west side, where we remained nearly four months, till the 20th of February, 1845, when we encamped for three more months at _Karnak_. The number of monuments of all kinds, both above and below ground, at Thebes, is so great that they may be truly called inexhaustible, even for a combined power like ours, and for the limited portion of time which we were able to devote to their investigation. But the age of the monuments at Thebes is almost exclusively limited to the _New Monarchy_; and the most ancient we discovered, such as one might generally expect to find, are not earlier than the 11th Manethonic Dynasty, the last but one of the Old Monarchy; for this simple reason, because it was in this Dynasty that Thebes first became a royal residence, and hence the focus of Egyptian splendour. The great break in the succession at the end of the 12th Dynasty, caused by the invasion of the Hyksos, and their dominion, which lasted many centuries, first drove the Egyptian power back into Ethiopia, and at length entirely destroyed it, till the powerful Pharaohs of the 17th, 18th, and 19th Dynasties again advanced from the south, drove back the Semitic intruders, and raised the power of the Egyptian empire to its summit. The greater proportion of Theban monuments date also from this period. As we may suppose they have been the principal object of investigation to all travellers, therefore our work here had been for the most part anticipated.

Nevertheless it was necessary to re-examine the whole ground most carefully, partly to complete the deficiencies left by our predecessors, partly to make a proper selection of those monuments which were of most importance for our particular purpose, and which we were anxious to insert among our collections, either in the shape of a drawing, or an impression upon paper, or even in the original itself. We directed our principal attention during the whole journey, and especially here, to taking the most exact architectonic plans of all the buildings and other localities which appeared to us to be of any consequence; and for this purpose we did not hesitate to make extensive excavations. By this means we succeeded, amongst other things, in discovering, and recording for the first time, a perfect plan of the most beautiful of all the temple buildings, namely, the Ammon Temple, built by Ramses II., which is described by Diodorus under the name of the sepulchre of Osymandyas. We made several excavations also in the valleys of the royal tombs, and opened, for instance, the rock-tomb of the same Ramses II., one of the largest of those which have hitherto been accessible. Unfortunately, the interior chambers were so much destroyed by the dirt and rubbish that had fallen in, that we could make out little more from the representation upon the walls than the proprietor of the tomb.

Accompanied by the artist Max Weidenbach, I made an intermediate journey from Karnak to the peninsula of Sinai. We went thither by the old road from _Koptos_ to _Aennum_ (_Philotera_), now leading from _Qeneh_ to _Kossêr_, which conducted us first to the remarkable stone quarries of _Hammamât_, already worked out during the Old Monarchy. The numerous rock-inscriptions, which date as far back as the 6th Dynasty, occupied us here for five whole days. From this place we passed through the Arabian chain of mountains to the north, as far as _Gebel Zeït_, where we embarked for _Tôr_, situated opposite. We ascended through _Wadi Hebrân_ to the convent, and from thence through _Wadi e’ Scheikh_, _Wadi Firân_, _W. Mokatteb_, _W. Maghâra_, by _Sarbut el Châdem_, down again to _Abu Zelîmeh_, where we got into our vessel, to return to _Kossêr_ and _Thebes._

As early as the 4th Manethonic Dynasty, between three and four thousand years before Christ, this Desert Peninsula was subject to Egypt, and was principally colonised by the Egyptians on account of the Copper mines, which are there met with on the limits of the primitive mountain range, and the surrounding sandstone mountains. Upon several rock-tablets of _Wadi Maghâra_, the kings of those oldest Dynasties were represented fighting with the Semitic aborigines, and the inscriptions of _Sarbut el Châdem_ were at least as early as the 12th Dynasty. We did not, also, lose sight of the great interest which is attached to these localities of the peninsula in connection with the Old Testament. More especially, I believe, that I have succeeded for the first time (not excepting Burckhardt) in determining the correct position of _Sinai_, since, contrary to the tradition of the convent, hitherto accepted, I did not recognise it in one of the southern mountains, but in _Serbâl_, which is situated several days’ journey more to the north, at whose base lies the only fertile oasis of the whole peninsula. This opinion which has been already published in a preliminary account of the journey, addressed to the King of Prussia, has met with frequent oppositions, but has also latterly received much approbation, I believe, in a special treatise upon the question, by W. Hogg, printed in the last half of the “Transactions for the Royal Society of Literature” (1848). I have not hitherto been able to discover any material counter-arguments in the discussions which have been held upon the subject, but, on the other hand, much stronger evidence that, contrary to the later Byzantine tradition, the more ancient Christian, and probably the Egyptian tradition itself, considered Serbâl, at whose foot the oldest convent was situated, to be the true Sinai.

On the 14th of April we returned to Thebes, and finally left it on the 16th of May. On our way back to Lower Egypt, we re-examined more minutely the monuments of _Schenhur_, _Dendera_, _Hou_, _Abydos_, _Echmim_, _El Bosra_, _Tel el Amarna_, and _El Hibe_, and on the 27th of June, our party, which had been increased at the last stage by the addition of Dr. Bethmann, again entered Cairo.

I was detained there myself some months longer than the other members of the expedition, in order to direct the transportation of several sepulchral chambers in the neighbourhood of the Great Pyramids, and to superintend the embarkation of the valuable blocks of stone, together with the other monuments, which we brought with us from Upper Egypt and Ethiopia, and which the Viceroy Mohammed Ali sent as a present to his Majesty the King of Prussia. In this troublesome as well as important affair, for the practical performance of which four experienced workmen had been expressly sent from Berlin to Egypt, I had only the kind assistance of Dr. Bethmann, who accompanied me on an independent footing during the remainder of the journey back.

After a final visit to Alexandria, we embarked on the 25th of September at _Cairo_ for _Damietta_, but on the way visited the ruins of _Samanúd_, _Behbét_, and the Ramses-Temple of _San_ (Tanis), and left Egypt on the 1st of October, in a vessel which took us to Jaffa. After we had traversed the whole length of Palestine, and from Jerusalem had visited the Dead Sea, and from Beyrout, Damascus, and Baalbec, at the mouth of the _Nahr el Kelb_, the ancient _Lykos_, we came upon the last Egyptian monuments in the north, namely, those celebrated memorial-tablets, which the great Ramses II. engraved beside the old military road, as a recollection of his warlike and victorious Asiatic campaigns in the fourteenth century before Christ. After a period of more than 3000 years, neither the form, nor even the Name-Shield of the powerful Pharaoh, at whose court Moses was educated, had been destroyed by the destructive sea-air. On one tablet, indeed, I was able to distinguish the date of the fourth, on another that of the second year of his reign.

According to the testimony of Herodotus, similar monuments of Sesostris are also found in Ionia, and some time ago, one which he describes as being there, was re-discovered. But an excursion from Smyrna to that spot soon convinced us that the rock-picture of _Karabel_ was produced by an Asiatic and not by an Egyptian chisel.

Lastly, we saw in the Hippodrome, at Constantinople, the obelisk of the third Tuthmosis, but, like others, sought in vain for the second, which earlier travellers would have us believe that they had seen. On the 24th December, I left Constantinople, and landed on the 5th January, 1846, in Trieste.

* * * * *

The whole journey, of which this is a very hasty sketch, was one of the most fortunate expeditions which has ever been undertaken for a similar purpose. None who participated in it suffered from the climate or the accidental casualties of a journey. We travelled under the powerful and, in every way efficient protection of the Viceroy. We had an explicit and written permission to make excavations, wherever we should consider it desirable, and we employed it, to acquire a number of interesting monuments for the Royal Museum at Berlin, which would either have remained in Egypt as rubbish under the sand-hills, or exposed, like so many others, to be destroyed, for all kinds of material purposes.

The scientific results of the expedition have, in almost all respects, surpassed our own expectations. In confirmation of this it will be sufficient briefly to survey these results, which I shall do in the following pages, according to their principal objects, and by entering into some of the details.

The plan of the journey, as a whole, and in its individual parts, was founded principally with a Historical purpose in view. The French-Tuscan expedition, compared with ours was a _Journey of Discovery_, with all the advantages, but also with all the disadvantages, connected with such an undertaking. We were able from the commencement to aspire after a certain completeness, within the wide limits that were assigned us, not however failing in making new discoveries, which were as important as they were unexpected. The investigation of the most ancient Egyptian times, namely, the epoch of the first Pharaonic Monarchy, from about 3900 to 1700 before Christ, extending the history of the world almost two thousand years farther back, was left entirely unfathomed by Champollion. He only ascended the Nile valley as far as the second Cataract, beyond which there existed a great number of Egyptian monuments of all kinds, wholly unexamined, in which we must seek for an explanation of all those Ethiopian antiquities which are inseparable from the Egyptian.

The most important results we obtained, therefore, were in Chronology and History. The Pyramid-fields of Memphis gave us a notion of the Civilisation of Egypt in those primitive times, which is pictorially presented to us in 400 large drawings, and will be considered in future as the first section in that portion of the history of man, capable of investigation, and must be regarded with the greatest interest. Those earliest Dynasties of Egyptian dominion, now afford us more than a barren series of empty, lost, and doubtful names. They are not only free from every real doubt and arranged in the Order and the Epochs of time, which have been determined by a critical examination, but by showing us the flourishing condition of the people in those times, both in the affairs of the State, Civil affairs, and in the Arts, they have received an intellectual and frequently a very individual historical reality. We have already mentioned the discovery of five different burial-places of the 6th Dynasty in Central Egypt, and what we obtained from them. The prosperous times of the New Monarchy, namely, the period of splendour in the Thebaid, as well as the Dynasties which followed, were necessarily more or less completed and verified. Even the Ptolemies, with whom we appeared to be perfectly acquainted in the clear narratives of Grecian history, have come forward in a new light through the Egyptian representations and inscriptions, and their deficiencies have been filled up by persons who were hitherto considered doubtful, and were hardly mentioned by the Greeks. Lastly, on the Egyptian monuments we beheld the Roman emperors in still greater and almost unbroken series, in their capacity of Egyptian governors, and they have been carried down since Caracalla, who had hitherto been considered as the last name written in hieroglyphics, through two additional later emperors, as far as Decius, by which means the whole Egyptian monumental history has been extended for a series of years in the other direction.

Egyptian Philology has also made considerable progress by this journey. The lexicon has been increased by our becoming acquainted with several hundred signs, or groups, and the grammar has received a great many corrections. Such copious materials have also been acquired for these purposes, especially by the numerous paper impressions of the most important inscriptions, that Egyptian Philology must be essentially furthered by their being gradually adopted. For owing to the strict accuracy of these impressions, they are almost as valuable, in many investigations, as an equally large collection of original monuments. In addition to this, the history of the Egyptian language, which by the great age attributed to the earliest written monuments, embraces a period of time between five or six thousand years, becomes now of much greater importance in the universal history of the human language and writing. Among the individual discoveries we made, the one which attracted most attention, was that of the two decrees on the Island of Philæ, which were bilingual, namely, written in hieroglyphics, and in the demotic character,—one of which contains the decree belonging to the Rosetta inscription, referring to the wife of Epiphanes.

In spite of numerous writings upon Egyptian Mythology, it has nevertheless been hitherto deficient in a fixed monumental basis. In the Temple at Thebes we beheld a series of representations whose meaning had not hitherto been recognised, and which seem to me to afford entirely new conclusions for the correct comprehension and development of Egyptian mythology. The series of the first arrangement of the gods mentioned by Herodotus and Manetho, which in modern investigations has been differently arranged in its details by all scholars, is at length placed beyond all doubt, and certainly differs in all essential points from what has been hitherto everywhere adopted. I will briefly allude here to another fact, important both in the history of mythology as well as in a purely historical point of view, and which was elicited by an attentive investigation of the monuments. The direct succession of the reigning royal family was interrupted, towards the end of the 18th Dynasty. Through the monuments we became acquainted with several kings of this period, who were not afterwards admitted in the legitimate lists, but were regarded as unauthorised cotemporary or intermediate kings. Among these Amenophis IV. is to be particularly noted, who, during a very active reign of twelve years, endeavoured to accomplish a complete reformation of all secular and spiritual institutions. He built a royal capital for himself in Central Egypt, near the present Tel-el-Amarna, introduced new offices and usages, and aimed at no less a thing than to abolish the whole religious system of the Egyptians, which had hitherto subsisted, and to place in its stead the single worship of the _Sun_. In all the inscriptions composed during his reign, there is not one Egyptian god mentioned except the Sun; even in other words the sacred symbols were avoided, _e. g._ the word _mut_, mother, Coptic ⲙⲁⲧ, was no longer written as usual with the hawk 𓅐𓐴𓏏, the symbol of the goddess _Mut_, but 𓐝𓐰𓏏, MT, with the universal phonetic signs. Indeed, the former gods and their worship were persecuted to such an extent by this king, that he erased all the gods’ names, with the single exception of the Sun-god _Ra_, from every monument that was accessible throughout the country, and because his own name, Amenophis, contained the name of Ammon, he changed it into Bech-en-aten, “Worshipper of the Sun’s disk.” Therefore the fact, which has often been previously remarked, that at one particular period the name of Ammon was intentionally destroyed, forms only part of an event which had a much wider influence, and which unexpectedly reveals to us the religious movements of those times.

The History of Art has never yet been considered in the point of view from which Egypt, and all that concerns it, is now regarded. This necessarily formed a particular object of our expedition, and most directly gained by the increased chronological knowledge we obtained concerning the monuments. For the first time we were able to pursue all its branches during the old Egyptian Monarchy, previous to the invasion of the Hyksos, and accordingly to extend both it and the history of Egypt about sixteen centuries farther back, and some tens of years lower down in time. The different epochs of Egyptian art now first appeared clear and distinct, each marked by its peculiar character, intimately connected with the general development of the people. They had so frequently been misunderstood, that no one believed in their existence; they were lost in the general uniformity. I must mention, as one of the most important facts connected with this, that we found innumerable instances on unfinished monuments of three different canons of proportions of the human body; one belonging to the most ancient Pharaonic Monarchy, another later than the 12th Dynasty, when Thebes first began to flourish; a third, which appears at first in the time of the Psammetichi, with an entire alteration in the Principle of the division, and which remained unaltered till the time of the Roman emperors. The last is the same which Diodorus expressly mentions in his first book. Among the separate branches of Egyptian art, Architecture, which was almost unnoticed by the French-Tuscan expedition, was with us peculiarly attended to, by the extremely careful and circumspect labours of our architect Erbkam. This was befitting the important position occupied by this particular branch, in which grandeur, that element of art, peculiarly belonging to the Egyptian beyond all other nations, was capable of being developed, and has developed itself to the utmost. The study of the sculpture and paintings devolved upon the other artists who accompanied us, and the ability and fidelity with which they fulfilled their task must be recognised by every one. The Egyptian style associated with the limited views characteristic of the infancy of art, nevertheless possesses a highly-cultivated ideal element, which must be acknowledged by every one. The genius of Greece could never have bestowed on art such a marked character, indicative of a period of prosperous liberty, if it had not received it as a severe, chaste, and carefully nurtured child from the Egyptians. The principal task of the history of Egyptian art is to point out wherein consisted this cultivation of art, peculiar to the Egyptians, above all the primitive nations of Asia.

In the next place, Egyptian archæology, in the widest sense of the word, claimed a large portion of our time and attention: an extensive field, already examined, both successfully and diligently, by Wilkinson and Rosellini, which they were enabled to do by means of the inexhaustible number of separate objects belonging to every-day life, still in preservation, and by the representations of them, which are found in all directions, far surpassing any other ancient remains.

On that account it was still more necessary to make a stricter investigation, and to regard it from a higher point of view, rather than accumulate a greater number of individual things, that notwithstanding obtruded themselves on all sides, and which, besides, we collected in large quantities, as material to work upon.

Lastly, Geography and Chorography, which travellers are especially expected to promote, required to be more peculiarly prosecuted. We must particularly mention here, that besides the peculiar investigation of the Pyramid fields at Memphis, and in the Faiûm, which have been already alluded to, our records of the ruins of towns, and ancient monuments in the Nile country, as far up as Sennâr, are more perfect and exact than any hitherto made. With regard to the modern geographical names, which must always be viewed in comparison with the ancient, I have been most particular in obtaining the Arabic names—at least, throughout the district we traversed—in order to counteract, as far as lay in my power, the insufferable confusion in the names which are marked down. During the journey, I made special maps for the individual portions of the eastern mountains of Egypt and the peninsula of Sinai, and I collected geographical accounts from travellers concerning some remote districts, which we did not enter, and which are but little known; and I had geographical drawings made of them. Our investigations of the historical places in the peninsula of Sinai have been already alluded to. The discovery, mentioned above, of the most ancient Nilometer at _Semneh_, has added, in a remarkable degree, also to the history of the physical condition of the Nile valley; since it is quite evident, from the water just above the second Cataract, standing at that time twenty-two feet higher than at present, and the height of the water in the Thebaid being contemporaneously twelve to fifteen feet lower, that the fall of the Nile in the intermediate country was thirty-five feet greater in those times than it is now. But this gradual levelling of the bed of the river must have had the most decided influence on the history of the cultivation of the valley, and of the whole population; because the soil on the banks of the river in the district of Nubia, more especially owing to the considerable sinking of the water, being inaccessible to the natural overflowings, was laid dry, and could only be irrigated with great difficulty, and imperfectly, by means of artificial water-wheels.

Considerable progress was made in the knowledge of the African languages, by the investigation which I was principally enabled to make in the southern part of our journey. I inquired into and noted down as much of the grammar and vocabulary of three languages, as would enable me to give a distinct idea of them. First, Kongára, spoken at Dar-Fûr and the adjacent countries, a Central African-Negro language. Secondly, the Nuba language, which is spoken in two chief dialects, in one part of the Nubian-Nile valley and in the neighbouring countries situated to the south-west, and also appears to be derived from the interior of Africa. It had hitherto never been a written language, and I collected together for the first time a piece of written Nubian literature, for I made a Nubian Sheikh, who was perfectly familiar with the Arabic language and writing, translate the Fables of Locman, a portion of the Thousand and One Nights, and the Gospel of St. Mark, from the Arabian into the Nubian tongue, and write down besides nineteen Nubian songs, some of them in rhyme, some only rhythmical, and translate them into Arabic. Unfortunately, these precious packets, all but the Nubian gospel, were lost in Europe, with little hope of recovery. The third language investigated by me was the Beg´a, which is spoken by the Bischâri nation, who dwell between the Red Sea and the Nubian Nile. This language occupies an important position with reference to philology, since it seems to be a branch of the original Asiatic stock, of which the African offsets may be comprehended under the name of the HAMITIC languages; and is, besides, particularly interesting in our study of the monuments, because, most probably, it was once the key to decipher the ancient Ethiopian inscriptions, numbers of which were discovered by us upon the Island of Meröe, and from that place, in the Nile valley, as far down as Philæ. These inscriptions are written in simple characters, from right to left, and derive their origin from the powerful nation of the Meröitic Ethiopians, whose direct descendants we behold in the present Beg´a nations. By comparing those languages with the other languages of Africa, which are already better known, I think I shall be able to separate, according to fixed principles, these “Hamitic languages” of north and north-east Africa (which may still be referred to their native home in Asia) from the numerous other languages of this enigmatical continent; and I am now engaged in preparing these philological investigations for special publication.

I must finally mention, among the results of our journey, two collections of inscriptions. In the first place, all the Greek inscriptions in the countries we travelled through were carefully sought out, and impressions of them were taken upon paper; by which Græco-Egyptian archæology, and more particularly the learned collections of inscriptions which have lately excited such lively interest, will probably be completed, confirmed, or justified in a satisfactory manner. Secondly, in the peninsula of Sinai we made as perfect a collection as was possible of the so-called _Sinaitic Inscriptions_, which are found engraved on the rocks in different districts of the peninsula, but principally in the neighbourhood of the old town of Faran, at the foot of the mountain range of Serbâl, and at a resting-place of the caravans in Wadi Mokatteb, situated farther north, which is named after them.

We were only able casually to turn our attention to objects of Natural Science; nevertheless, I did not however neglect, especially during remote mountainous journeys, to collect specimens of stone and earth from the more remarkable localities. We not only visited the celebrated stone quarries in the chalk mountains of Tura, in the sandstone range of Selseleh, in the granite rocks of Assuan, and others situated in the Nile valley, but also those alabaster quarries of El Bosra, opposite Siut, which were discovered a few years ago by the Bedouins, in which last we found a rock-inscription from the commencement of the 17th Dynasty. They resemble those quarries of granite and brecciaverde at HAMMAMÂT, upon the road leading from Qeneh to the Red Sea, which have been worked from the earliest times, and also the porphyry and granite quarries at Gebel Fatireh (Mons Claudianus), and at Gebel Dochân (Mons Porphyrites), in the Arabian chain of mountains, celebrated in the Roman period. I also had an opportunity of purchasing an interesting Ethnographical and Natural History collection in Alexandria, obtained by H. Werne during Mohammed Ali’s second expedition up the Nile, which penetrated as far as the 4° N. lat., of which an account was published; and I received a valuable collection of Egyptian fishes for the Anatomical Museum in Berlin, from the celebrated French physician Clot Bey.

LETTERS FROM EGYPT AND ETHIOPIA.

DEDICATED, WITH THE PROFOUNDEST VENERATION AND GRATITUDE, TO ALEXANDER VON HUMBOLDT.