generally followed by f, or f and r; and sometimes placed between n and r. In like manner, the crux ansata, signifying life, is often followed by n and x, which in that case form its phonetic complement or key. This portion of hieroglyphical writing is evidently the youngest, for it presupposes the existence of the phonetic system. Still it is met with on the most ancient monuments. The number of these conventional groups is limited; we give 57, which we believe to be complete.

We have added the Egyptian numerals by way of Appendix to this table, as well as a copy of a passage in the Inscription of Rosetta, with both the texts, and a transcript of the hieroglyphics into the hieratic character, the comparison of which was first made by Lepsius.

A second Appendix to this book contains an explanation of the tables, as well as authorities on which the different readings rest; all arranged by Mr. Birch in the most succinct and synoptical form. In this manner we hope to be able to combine an introductory sketch of the whole hieroglyphical system, at once brief and intelligible, with the character of an historical work. For our main object in this Exposition, as well as in that of language and mythology, is to lay before our readers not conjectures but facts, and that historically. We do not offer isolated antiquarian observations, but try to develope the general structure of language, and the whole system of writing and of mythology, in order to point out how far they are the great and primeval work of the Egyptian mind. We attempt to conquer for the history of Egypt what we claim for history in general, the period antecedent to that point where history is generally supposed to begin. We endeavour to give an historical view of the great facts of Egyptian life in the ante-chronological period; and to show, as far as possible, the successive strata of development which they exhibit.

368

SECTION VI.

THE MYTHOLOGY OF THE EGYPTIANS.

INTRODUCTION.

THE THREE ORDERS OF GODS.

THE name and hieroglyphic of the son and successor of King Menes are derived from the god Thoth (Hermes), represented by the Ibis. Among the Kings of the 3rd Dynasty we have a Mares, i. e. one given by Ra, Phre (Helios); towards the close of the Old Empire, a Pat Athyres, or one dedicated to Aphrodite, Hathor; two named after Phtah, Vulcan, and several who derive their names from Ammon, the King of the Gods. Hercules also has given his name to one at least of their old Kings. The Great Gods, consequently, to the number of whom those above mentioned belong existed at that early period in the mythology of the Egyptians. We find another proof of this in the recurrence of the images and names of the same gods, written both pictorially and phonetically, on the monuments of the Old Empire, exactly in the same manner as they occur on those of the 18th Dynasty. Osiris and Nutpe, for instance, are found on the coffin of Menkeres. It is needless, therefore, to offer any further proofs of the truth of our assumption, that the mythological system forms a part of the national heritage on which the civilisation of the empire and people of Menes was established. The Temple of Vulcan, at Memphis, built by him, is mentioned by later annalists: at this very hour the remains of the Temple of Thebes exhibit the name of the great ruler of the 12th Dynasty. But as to these temples, as well as the worship which was celebrated in and about them, we know little-nothing at all as to

how it was conducted in the primeval time. It will be difficult, indeed, in spite of the echo of the legends of the golden temples of Thebes with her hundred gates, ever to ascertain anything of the time when the Egyptian empire was still limited to the frontier of the Thebaid. One fact, however, may be gathered from these traditions, that the separate Egyptian states, which existed prior to the empire of Menes, had their templeservice regularly organised, and that they were in possession, consequently, of all the arts which are implied by the existence of such a service.

Our object, however, is not to unravel legends and myths, nor shall we indulge in idle speculations upon a subject which we can never fathom. Our purpose rather is to establish beyond the possibility of doubt the great and astounding fact, that the empire of Menes, on its first appearance in history, possessed an established mythology, i. e. a series of gods, some of whom were genealogically connected, some entirely foreign to each other. Our aim in describing these deities must consequently be this, to distinguish as much as possible-as we did when treating of the language-the original from the more modern elements, the traditionary portion from its subsequent history. An historical disquisition has certainly to deal only with facts, but it must endeavour to demonstrate the principle from whence they spring. Now the especial importance of the primeval history of Egypt to us, in regard to mythology as well as language, is the circumstance, that it is the only history of the old world which admits of any authentic investigation. Even here the difficulties are very great-in all other histories they would seem to be insuperable. Mythology and language stand in a very different position. In the latter, changes are introduced slowly and in a marked manner (if no violent external influences be brought to bear on it); old forms of speech are re

tained for centuries together with the modern idioms; in a word, as long as writing exists, the principles on which language was formed in very remote ages may be handed down to the latest posterity. In the history of religions, however, the new form of worship necessarily expels the older, and endeavours to expunge every trace of its existence. Honours, often names even, are transferred to new gods, in the spirit of the old religion, and new myths are invented in order to obliterate the remembrance of the earlier. The profound spirit of modern philosophy has even proved that it is the characteristic of several mythological divinities to be invested at one period with functions and attributes totally opposite to those by which they were distinguished at another. The first result which the discovery of the ancient names of the gods by the side of their images produced, was, consequently, of a contradictory and destructive, rather than of a restorative nature. The only certain conclusion seemed to be, that the Greeks had little correct tradition, and that the moderns had in most cases misunderstood and overlooked that little. We find, moreover, in the funereal papyri a variety of mystic forms and names of divinities, of which there is no trace in the temple worship. It is a serious flaw in Champollion's Pantheon, a work which upon the whole is certainly the least satisfactory of all his labours, that he was not sufficiently cautious in introducing such deities. The researches and explanations of Wilkinson are much more sober and critical. He published at Malta, as early as the year 1828, a synopsis of the Egyptian divinities-a work now very scarce, 242 A more detailed and improved account is given in the fourth and fifth volumes of his " Manners and Customs," and in the sixth the pictorial representations, but unfortunately without mentioning the

242 Wilkinson, Materia Hieroglyphica. Malta, 1828. P. I. Pantheon.

monuments and records from which they are obtained. This omission is to a certain extent supplied by Rosellini's splendid work. Death, alas! hurried him away before he had time to add the text to his mythological illustrations, though, as above stated, they have been published posthumously. Science has since been indebted to Mr. Birch, the distinguished curator of the Egyptian collection in the British Museum, who is so repeatedly mentioned in this work, for very important and accurate notices upon this subject. The first part of his "Gallery of Antiquities" contains a series of remarkable representations of images of the gods from that grand museum, with explanations and illustrations such as might be expected from one so deeply versed in Egyptian lore-more especially as regards the peculiar type of each deity, and the antiquity of the delineations.243 The fourth and fifth numbers of the series of Egyptian monuments in copperplate, which Leemans, the curator of the museum at Leyden, is publishing, likewise contain most acceptable additions to Egyptology.24

244

Of the earlier researches, those of Jablonski, Zoega, Caeuzer, and Prichard even, valuable as they are in many other respects, we have been able to make but little use, although their writings must always command that consideration and respect which is due to their acute observations and sound scholarship. By deciphering the hieroglyphic names of the images of the gods, we have learned the true facts, and thereby established a sound basis for Egyptian mythology. It is impossible any longer to doubt how their deities were named and represented at different epochs.

243 The Gallery of Antiquities, selected from the British Museum. Part I. Egyptian Art, Mythological Illustrations, 1842. Part II. Historical Illustrations, 1843, 4to.

244 Monumens E'gyptiens du Musée d'Antiquités du Pays Bas, publiés par ordre du Gouvernement par le Dr. C. Leemans. Fol.