OCR Text |
Show 102 GENERAL REMARKS ON ICONOGRAPIIY. For the [Xth dynasty, we have seemingly again a synchronism, that of M os s with RAMES. ES IT., and wiLh Mcnephthah IT.; but it is of liW value for exact dates, b cause the duration of the O'OV rnment of the IIobrews by their Judges is very uncertain. Biot's astr·onomical calculation is more valuable, with the nid of which we may stauliHlt tbat Im I., flLthcr of RAMESSNS the O'l' at, lived about 1500 J3. C.-[say 15th century J3. C.]; and hence that th XVIIth dynast.y hogan to r iO'n towards tho eighteenth cm1tury B. C. N cvcrth l ~;s, as tho Vicomtc de Rouge, (whose authority we follow in prcfcrcn e to other Egyptologists, since he cxpr sscs himself most cautiously in d aling with chrono]oO'ical fio·mes, and avoids hypothee s) says, "it wonld not be astonishing if we should be here mistaken to tho extent of one or two ccntmics, inasmuch as the historical documents are vitiated, and the hierogJyphical monuments incomplete." "'L'hus we have reached," continues de Rot1g6, "the time of the expn1Hion of tho hcpltcrds, beyond whom no certain calculation is as y t possible from the monuments known. The texts do not agree how long th se terrible guo~;ts occupied and ravaged Egypt, and tho mouum nts arc silent about them. However, their domination laBtccl for a long time, since several dyna tics succeed d one another before the (1 liveranco, and that is all we know about it. Nor al'c we better informed con cming tho duration of the first empire, and we have no certain means for measuring the age of those pyramids which bear oviuence of the gl'andcur of tbo tlrst Egypt. NovortheloAB, if w remember tbat tho generations which built them are s parato<l fr·om our em, first by the eighteen centuries of the second empire, then by the very long p riod of the Asiatic invasion, a11d laAtly by several dynasties of numerous powerful kings, the age of the pyramids will not Jose anything of its majesty in the eyes of the hiAtol'ian, althongb he be 1mable to fix it with exact precision." It is to such an early period of the history of mankind that some of the statnos and reliefs of J~gypt can now be traced back with certai 11ty; and ov0n they do not present us with the rudiments of an in{i.tntino art, bnt arc actually Ai ecim nA of the hig)Jest artistic character. Like Minerva springing forth fr·om the head of Jupiter, a full-grown arm d virgin, Art in Egypt appears, in the very earliest monum nts, fully developed, -archaic in some respects, but not at all barbarouB. Through the kindness of MM. de Rong6, Mariette, Dov6ria, and f3a~7.maun, and of Chev. Lepsius at 13erlin, and theit· regard for Mr. Gl.ru.don,. we arc enabled to publiAh a A rics of royal and prin e'ly cillgws of the first or Old Emr ire, carefulLy copied, often photogmphi- GENERAL RE~!ARKS ON IOONOGRAPIIY. 103 cally, from those original statues and reliefs at tho Louvre and other Museums. They are tho earliest monuments of human art known to us; being portraits of tho Egyptian aristocracy at a time preceding Abraham by many centuries. They enable us to form a correct idea of Egyptian art in its first phasis, before it became fettered by a traditionary hieratic typo. In an ethnological respect, they give us the true features of the original EO'yptians: and it is VCI'Y remar·kable that many statues and reliefs, later by more than two tLwusand years, bear exactly tho eamc character; that, again, two thousand y ars sub cquently have not changed the national type,-the JJ-,clh\h (p asant) of the pres nt day resembling his ancestors of fifty centuries ago, viz: the builders of the pyramids, so closely, that his Nilotic pedigree never can be seriously questioned hcnccfol'ward. The character of the Egyptian race is most distinctly oxpr ssod upon its monum nts throughout all tho phases of its history; and these sculptures of the IVth dynasty differ from those of later :.tr s merely in details, not in spirit. Ernest Renan, the great bemitic philo Logue, describes that character in the following words: "Tbo earliest [Cushito and liamitic] civilizations ~;tamp d with a character peculiarly materialistic; the religious and po tical i uRti n •ts little developed; tho artistical .ie ling rather weak; but the sentiment of elegance vcey refin d; a great aptitude ior handior·a('t, and for mathematical and astronomical sciences; litcmturo practi ally exact, but without idealism; tho mind positive, bent on business, woliaro, and the pleasur B; neither public spirit not· political life; on the contrary, a most elaborate civil admi nisLl'ation, such as JDur·opean nations never b came acquainted with, until tho Hmrmn epoch, and in our modern times." 47 The Egyptians were eminently a practical people, of so little imagination, that in religion they conceived no heroic mythology. Whilst their gods wore personi fi d abstmctions, all of them, with the only exception of tho Osirian group, stand without liio or l• is tory. In literatm·e the Egyptians never ro~;o above dr'Y hi~:~torical annals, religious hymns, proverbial precepts, poetical pa11 'gyri •s, and litut'gical compositions. Epic and dramatic poetry was foculc/8 romance •1 Iliatoire et Syst~me compar~ des Lar~guea S6mitiques, Paris, 1866; lo. partie, p. 4.74. •s The publication of M. Dll Rouofl'a oritioal translf\tion of the Saltier Papyrus, cont11ining tho pootio recital of tho Wo.rs of Ramsos, 14.th century, D. C., o.go.inst tho Asio.tio Shcta, or Kheta (rocontly rend to the lmperinl Institute), will prove thn.t tho metrionl stylo of these Egyptit\n cn.ntiolca frequently J'esombles ITebrew psn.lmody. Men.nwhilo, aoe somo briof specimens of hicroglyphion.l poetry in llmou, Ory&tal Palace Oatalogue, Egypt, 185G; pp. 266-8. 3 |