The History of the Ancient Civilizations. Duncker Max

inscriptions of the temples the Ptolemies and Roman Cæsars are named by the same solemn titles as the ancient Pharaohs.[253]

      We saw that priests were allotted to the spirits of the buried kings (p. 99). In the ruins at Luxor, spirits of heaven are carrying Amenophis III. into the presence of Ammon, who consecrates him king (p. 138). In the Ramesseum and in the palace at Medinet Habu we have pictures of the coronation of Ramses II. and Ramses III. In both, the four geese of the four spirits of heaven are bidden by the priest to announce to the spirits of the east and west, of the north and the south, that the king has put on the double crown. In the rock temple at Selseleh (p. 149), the goddess Anuke gives her breast to king Horus, who is depicted as already grown into a youth; in the rock temple at Beth-el-Walli, Isis and Anuke allow Ramses II. to suck at their breasts. In the Ramesseum, Ramses II. is led by the gods Mentu and Chunsu and the goddess Mut before Ammon (p. 171). These pictures, in which gods bring the kings before Ammon, and worship him, that he may bestow life and purity on the princes presented by them, are constantly recurring. On the monuments the kings are found sacrificing, not only to their divine forefathers, but also to themselves and their own divinity (p. 24). Tuthmosis III. dedicated a temple to the god Sesurtesen III., and ordained regular sacrifices to him; and Amenophis III. built a temple in Nubia to his own divinity (pp. 134, 137).

      Nowhere do we find a trace to show that the kings stood in need of the intervention of the priests in order to approach the gods, and without such intervention there can be no supremacy of the priests over the sovereigns of the state. Everywhere the kings come independently before the gods. Everywhere we find the sacrifices of the kings, not of the priests, offered. It is the kings who consecrate temples to the gods, in order that the king may obtain "lasting life and purity." It is the Pharaohs and not the priests who represent the state and people before the gods. The kings are at the same time the high priests, and stand at the head of religion as at the head of the state; their sons and grandsons, their mothers, wives, and daughters, are, according to the inscriptions, the priests of this or that god or goddess. The kings, as Diodorus assures us, were not waited upon by slaves, but by the sons of the most distinguished priests; by priests only could the ruling god of the country be served—and the priests did not omit to mention on their tombs, even at a very early period, the king in whose service they were prophets, scribes, and minstrels. In a word, the Pharaoh was not merely the head of the state, but also of the church, if such an expression may be allowed, and the power of the priests, without any real and ceremonial support, does not extend beyond the moral influence which religion exercised upon the heart of the king. Finally, it is the kings who are celebrated as the lawgivers of the land, and this excludes any thought of a supremacy of priests. Yet the influence of religion and of the priesthood on the king is not to be contested, although, under the military princes who governed Egypt after the expulsion of the Hyksos, the priests had to share their influence with the leaders of the army. Not till the time of Menephta, do we observe a more influential position assumed by the high priests at Thebes. This influence goes on increasing under the weak successors of Ramses III., and reaches its summit under the first princes of the dynasty of Tanis. Then it declined, and afterwards only came into operation under foreign supremacy.

If further proof were needed for the unlimited power of the kings than their representation of Ra and Horus, and the menial position of the priests, we should find it in the gigantic structures which the Pharaohs left behind them. To carry out works of this kind is impossible unless the monarch has absolute disposal of the labour of his subjects. But these buildings were undoubtedly the main interest and the main occupation of the kings. In this they follow the characteristic traits of the whole nation. In building temples and erecting images, their object was just as much to confer honour on the gods as to preserve the remembrance of the homage which they had offered to them. The preservation of their own actions and names, which these buildings in the eyes of the Egyptians "caused to live," is the main object of the structure, and along with the sacrifices of the kings, and the evidence of the favour of the gods, the sculptures on the temples display the martial exploits of the kings. If the kings erected pyramid tombs, it was in order that their corpses might rest in security, and the tumulus "cause their name to live" in the generations to come. If they built temples, it was that the gates, walls, frescoes, and inscriptions might preserve their acts for posterity. The buildings of the Pharaohs are the history of their reigns written in stone.

The ceremonial which surrounded the life of the Pharaohs is described by Diodorus. In the morning the king first read the communications received from every quarter; then he performed his ablutions, put on his robes, and offered sacrifice to the gods. While the sacrificial animal was being led to the altar the high priest offered prayer to the gods, beseeching them to grant life and all good things to the king, as he was a righteous ruler. He was pious to the gods, gentle towards men, strong, just, and courageous, an enemy of lies, a sharer of his goods with others, and master of his desires; one who did not punish the wicked so severely as they deserved, and gave to the good more than their proportionate share. Then the priest laid the punishment of any error into which the king might have fallen on his servants, and urged him to a pious life, "not by reproaches," as Diodorus expressly observes, "but by commendations." When the sacrifice was finished, the priest read to the king the apothegms and achievements of distinguished men, that is, no doubt, of previous kings, out of the sacred books. We know that poems of considerable extent on historical subjects were in existence.[254] In the same way the remaining part of the day was allotted to definite occupations. For walking, for bathing, even for sleeping with the queen, definite hours were appointed. The king might only eat the flesh of calves and geese—the food of the priests—and take a fixed portion of wine. Diodorus regards it as wonderful that the kings should have subjected themselves to this ceremonial. In this he leaves out of sight the fact that the god of the land was expected to lead the life of a god, and also, a thing which could not indeed be so obvious to him, that all periods present proofs to what oppressive rules of state and etiquette rulers are willing to subject themselves in order to exhibit their dignity and majesty. Yet this was not the object chiefly held in view in the regulation of the king's life, nor was it the love of the Egyptians for systematic and fixed arrangements. The king was at the same time the first priest of the land; and therefore the regulations of the priestly life applied to him also. Moreover, the Egyptians were extremely careful to keep themselves pure from the unclean, in order by such purity to preserve life and salvation. With this object, priests and laity alike regulated all their actions, their eating and drinking, feeding and clothing, by a minute ritual. It was the first duty of the king to protect the purity of Egypt. He was the Horus of the land, who had struck down disorder, impurity, and evil, and therefore, like the victorious god, he must shine out in the brightness of unsullied purity. Thus the king had to lead the pure life of a priest; he could eat none but the priestly food, and every duty must be performed at a favourable moment, for the Egyptians were under the dominion of a widespread astrological superstition. This system further required that every fault he might happen to commit should be taken from him and laid upon others. It is probably the plan sketched by the priests for the king's life, of which Diodorus has preserved some traces; we know that among the sacred books those of the minstrels contained regulations for the life of the king. Whatever flattery and homage was thus intended for the great and gracious king, the Pharaohs no doubt observed so much as seemed suitable to them. Of a later king, Amasis, we are told that he emancipated himself from the customary ceremonial, and when business was over, gave himself up to relaxation and enjoyment. Yet his reign was a long one, and regarded with affection by the Egyptians.

The Pharaohs were surrounded with all the state of Oriental despots. On the picture of the coronation, the assumption of the Pschent by Ramses III. at Medinet Habu, the