I. Ancient Egypt.

1. The Land.

The Names (§ 1).

Extent, Boundaries and Divisions (§ 2).

Climate and Products (§ 3).

2. The People.

Ethnology and Language (§ 1).

Customs (§ 2). 

Manufactures (§ 3). 

Officials (§ 4). 

3. Chronology.

4. History.

Conspectus and Sources (§ 1). 

Hyksos, Pharaohs and their Successors to the Exodus (§ 2). 

Exodus to the Assyrian Period (§ 3).

Period of Assyrian Contact (§ 4). 

Babylonian and Later Periods (§ 5).

5. Religion.

General Features (§ 1). 

Polytheism Dominant (§ 2).

Religious Texts (§ 3).

6. Exploration and Excavation.

The First Period, 1798-1830 (§ 1).

Private and Tuscan-Prussian Work, 1832-50 (§ 2).

Mariette, 1851-81 (§ 3).

The Recent Period, since 1881 (§ 4).

General Results (§ 5).


II. Modern Egypt.

Statistics, General and Religious (§ 1).

The Orthodox Greek Church (§ 2).

Other Communions (§ 3).



I. Ancient Egypt.--1. The Land:

1. The Names. The name is derived from the Greek Aigyptos, which is a possible, but not a probable, derivative from one of the native names of Memphis; the Semitic names, Hebrew, Miraim, Babylonian, Miri, Assyrian, Muur, all go back to a common root. The etymology of both sets of names is uncertain. The native name was Kemet (km-t), "black," in reference to the color of the arable soil when contrasted with the sand and rock which border it.


2. Extent, Boundaries and Divisions. Egypt has a superficial area scarcely equal to that of Belgium; shaped like a fan with a disproportionately long handle--the Nile valley, which averages only about ten miles in width. From the dawn of its history it was divided

into two parts, indicated in the title of the kings, "lord of Upper and Lower Egypt," the point of division being somewhat south of Cairo. In ancient times each of these parts was divided into twenty-two nomoi, districts, recognized for administrative purposes, but their origin is to be found in tribal limits. The union of the two parts into one kingdom was ascribed to Menes, the first king, and it marked the actual beginning of Egyptian history. The arable ground was formed by the silt brought down by the Nile, and its fertility was due to the same agency. This is particularly true of the northerly portion, the Delta, though the removal of a few inches of the surface renders the ground sterile. Within historic times the land along the coast has been gradually sinking. Formerly the Nile discharged into the Mediterranean and the Red Sea by seven mouths, only two of which now remain, the others being represented by canals. On the west of Egypt is the Libyan desert, from which the sands blow over the arable land at certain seasons. On the east also it is desert in the southerly portion; at the northeast the (former) Bitter Lakes represent an old arm of the Red Sea to the north of which was a series of garrison towns intended to guard against the incursions of the Bedouin.


3. Climate and Products. Upper Egypt is a land of almost perpetual sunshine; storms and rain occur near the coast. The preservation of the antiquities of the land is due to this circumstance, as the dry sand is a great conserver of even the fragile papyrus. The fertility of the soil is due to irrigation by the Nile under natural conditions or when artificially impounded. Reference is made to this fertility (Gen. xiii. 10), and to artificial irrigation (Deut. xi. 10) in the Old Testament. The seasons are reckoned as three: beginning with the inundation (about July 20), spring, and harvest, the last beginning toward the end of March. The fauna of ancient Egypt was very varied, as is evident from the pictures on tomb walls and in the variety of animal forms utilized for the hieroglyphic writing. The camel and horse were imported late: the horse (I Kings x. 28) was introduced apparently by the Hyksos. It was used principally in war, with the chariot, and was depicted as a hieroglyphic sign after the New Kingdom only. The camel (Gen. xii. 16; Ex. ix. 3: J passages) is not mentioned till the Greek period. The ass has always been the burden-bearer. The flora was luxuriant, but not greatly varied, being mainly restricted to the staples, making Egypt the "granary" of the ancient world. The storage of grain products is mentioned in Gen. xli. 35, and is familiar from the remains of the "store city" Pithom (Ex. i. 11) discovered by Naville, and from the representations upon tomb walls. The latter depict structures like a haycock with an aperture at the top through which the grain was thrown. The usual Oriental method of threshing was by the feet of cattle (Deut. xxv. 4), and winnowing was done with shovel and fan (Isa. xxx. 24). Various articles of vegetable food used in Egypt are mentioned in Num. xi. 5. The papyrus which furnished the writing material of antiquity also flourished, but wood was scarce. Objects as large as a sarcophagus had to be made by joining pieces with wooden dowels, a process in which the Egyptian acquired great skill. Minerals known to the Egyptians were gold and iron, from the region of Syene and the south, copper or bronze from Sinai and Cyprus, and silver in smaller quantities by foreign import. Silver was scarcer and more highly valued than gold. Building stone was abundant and varied--limestone in the north, granite in the south, and sandstone between.


2. The People: 1. Ethnology and Language. No theory of the origin of the people has found general acceptance, except that the ruling class came from Asia, but whether by way of Nubia, the Red Sea and Koptos, or Suez, is disputed. It has been contended that the language points to an original Semitic stock, that the mythology indicates a Babylonian parentage, and that the racial features point southward. It is worthy of note that the inscriptions do not point to or hint at any consciousness of foreign extraction or any aboriginal immigration. The language has many characteristics of the Semitic group, mainly in its grammatical features; the vocabulary shows variations which indicate an entirely diverse origin. If it was originally Semitic the relation was collateral rather than by way of descent. The earliest connected texts now extant are the so-called "pyramid-texts" beginning in the end of the fifth dynasty (say 2650 B.C.) and strangely enough these texts are written in a more strictly phonetic form than those of later times. Herein consists the difficulty and uncertainty of their interpretation. The artistic ability also of this period and the degree of development of religious belief and practise are well worthy of remark. The classic period of the language was in the twelfth dynasty, and later periods attempted to imitate the earlier model. The Coptic was the daughter of the Egyptian, and continued to be spoken till the seventeenth century A.D. The original system of writing was strictly hieroglyphic, variations being due to abbreviations for the sake of speed and of adaptation to the writing material employed, papyrus. The characters used for stone sculpture, the hieroglyphic, consisted of pictures of objects in nature and domestic life executed in greater or less detail and with a remarkable degree of accuracy; the "hieratic" was not a "priestly" script, but merely an abbreviated form, the characters being applied to the papyrus with a brush; and the "demotic" was a further and later abbreviation of the hieratic, not a "popular" chirography. The first two were used coincidently and some mistakes in hieroglyphic texts can be corrected and understood only upon the assumption that the stonecutter misread a character in his hieratic copy. It is evident also in some of the recensions of the "Book of the Dead" that the scribes of the New Kingdom were unable to understand some of the characters and words found in early copies of the work in the chirography of the Middle Kingdom, and that their perplexity was as great as that of modern scholars. The characters used possess varied powers, some being purely alphabetic, others syllabic, and others ideographic or determinative.


2. Customs. Polygamy was practised as in the East generally, and concubinage was also a recognized institution, both depending upon the ability of the man to support a harem. The marriage practises of Egypt are set forth in great detail in Lev. xviii. and what is now known bears out the accuracy of the account. In the royal house, concerning which special opportunities for knowledge exist, several of the Pharaohs married their own sisters, following a divine example supposed to have been set notably in the case of Osiris and Isis. Political alliances were cemented by intermarriage. The taking of Sarah (Gen. xii. 14, 15) for the royal harem was an example of a general custom, and the story of Potiphar's wife finds an almost exact parallel in the "Tale of Two Brothers" in the D'Orbiney papyrus now in the British Museum. The statement that the son of Hadad was brought up with the sons of Pharaoh (I Kings xi. 20) is identical with the cases of many Egyptian officials who claimed it as a mark of honor that they were educated among the children of the court. The case of Moses (Ex. ii. 10) was similar in part only. The practise of shaving the head, changing the raiment, washing the feet, bowing in obeisance (Gen. xli. 14, xliii. 24, 28) were all part of Egyptian practise. Unfortunately little is known of the court ceremonial of Egypt, but what is known bears out the Biblical record. In the Ancient Kingdom the practise of "kissing the ground" before the king was so much the practise, that a high priest of Memphis mentions it as a mark of special favor that the king did not insist upon the performance of this act of submission, but required him to kiss his foot. But the rigor of this ceremony was relaxed in the period of the New Kingdom. Slavery was imposed upon conquered peoples in accordance with universal Oriental practise. The abhorrence of the Egyptian for foreigners (Gen. xliii. 32, xlvi. 34) is to be explained upon the ground of the fundamental difference between the two, as emphasized in the Egyptian conception of their origin. The great gods had appeared in Egypt only; there the great sun-god Ra had warred and ruled, and his posterity still sat upon the throne with the title "son of the sun," ruling over those who alone were entitled to the name of men, while foreigners were never men but only negroes, Libyans, or "miserable" Asiatics, who had once rebelled against the great god Ra, and for their insubordination had been driven north, south, and west. The special "abomination" in which shepherds were held (Gen. xlvi. 34) was not on account of the fact that the land had been conquered by "shepherd kings," though this may have made the conquest the more galling. To the Egyptian the shepherd was an unshaved, dirty, undressed pariah. His home was in the swamp, and while a necessary appendage to a large farm, he received no honor at the hands of his master. This seems the more strange, since it was with the utmost pride that the number of cattle, sheep, oxen, and goats is recounted and portrayed on the walls of the tombs.


3. Manufactures. The wagons provided by Joseph (Gen. xlv. 19) appear to have been carts adapted to the transport of household goods and of persons incapable of the prolonged standing required by the ordinary chariot. Both chariots and carts seem to have been introduced along with the horse in the dark period assigned to the Hyksos rule. Bricks were made of Nile mud, and were frequently stamped with the cartouche of the reigning Pharaoh. They were either baked or sun-dried. Naville reports that the bricks found at Pithom were of two sorts, mud mixed with straw and mud alone (Ex. i. 14, v. 7, 18). Unfortunately none of the bricks from Pithom bear a royal stamp. Linen and broidered work (Ezek. xxvii. 7) are mentioned specially, and beautiful specimens of this fabric are preserved in many museums. Baskets (Gen. xl. 16) for conveying small objects are depicted in funerary scenes of all ages, particularly in carrying grain and sand, and the same practise has persisted to the present time.


4. Officials. The title for the king (Gen. xii. 15) which is used in the Pentateuch, gives no clue to the identity of any particular individual mentioned. "Pharaoh" is derived from the native title, which is made up of the words per-aa, signifying "great house," and is similar to the Turkish "Sublime Porte." The claim of the divine origin of the ruling class is seen in the ordinary appendage to the coronation name, "son of Ra." Biblical references to the officers of the government are few. The position to which Joseph was named has approximate parallels. In the Ancient Kingdom there was a man who boasted the title of "overseer of the whole land," while officials having similar charge in later times recognize the geographical divisions of the land in their titles. In the New Kingdom we find a man who appears as the mouth piece of Pharaoh, and another whose office was that of "overseer of the granaries," of whom it is said that his province included not only Egypt but also Ethiopia and all the territory to the confines of Naharina (Mesopotamia). Potiphar (Gen. xxxvii. 36, xxxix. 1) is spoken of as captain of the guard (R. V., margin, "chief of the executioners "). The latter title is explained by the supposition that extreme punishment was executed by the chief officer of the body-guard. As this officer lived probably in the time of the Hyksos, and as very little is known about this period, little light can be thrown upon the subject. Later the body-guard was formed of mercenaries, and the position of chief was one of great importance. The mention of a chief baker and a chief butler (Gen. xl.) is exactly in line with the household service of the upper classes as well as that of the king. Each sort of service had a special corps which was charged with it, and each corps had its overseer. Similarly in the field each gang of workmen had an overseer or "taskmaster" (Ex. i. 11, iii. 7). Among the insignia of office mentioned as having been turned over to Joseph was the signet ring (Gen. xli. 42). As all legal and commercial documents were stamped with a seal, the significance of this emblem of office is apparent.


3. Chronology: Egypt, like other Oriental countries, used no era in dating the events of its history. All that have been handed down to us are partial lists of kings such as those of Abydos, Karnak, and Sakkarah, containing selections of seventy-six, sixty-one, and forty-seven royal names respectively, and even the sequence of these is doubtful. The only known complete native list, with the years of the reign of each king, was contained in the ever to be regretted Turin papyrus which was irreparably damaged during its journey to Europe. In its present fragmentary condition it is incapable of rendering much aid in fixing of Egyptian chronology. The historical work written in Greek by the native priest Manetho about 250 B.C. has been preserved only in excerpts of somewhat doubtful accuracy given by Josephus and Julius Africanus. Mistakes occur in the figures due both to copyists' mistakes and to apologetic emendation. Manetho's division of the entire period into thirty dynasties, however, furnishes a convenient method of indicating the relative location of events. Dates approximating exactness can not be assigned back of the New Kingdom, and precise chronology begins with the accession of Psammetichus in 663 B.C. It is claimed, however, that the date of Amenhotep I. of the twelfth dynasty, has been fixed astronomically at 2000 B.C., and that the reign of Thothmes III. extended from May 3, 1501, till Mar. 7, 1447. Many a priori theories and corresponding systems of chronology have been propounded, but the best results are only approximations so far as the earlier periods are concerned. One notable feature of recent investigation is seen in the tendency to reduce the length of the history as a whole. This is evident from the appended chronological table.

Dynasty.         Champollion.      Brugsch           Petrie.    Meyer.            Breasted.

1.-II.                 5867                4400              4777      3180              3400    ac.

III.                    5318                3966              4212                          2980    "

IV.                    5121                 3733              3998     2830              2900    "

V.                     4673                 3566              3721                          2750    "

VI.                    4425                 3300              3503     2530              2625    "

VII.-VIII.           4222                 3033              3322                          2475    "

IX.-X.                4047                                      2821                          2445    "

XI.                    3762                                      2985                          2160    "

XII.                  3703                  2466              2778     2130               2000   "

XIII.-XVII.         3417                  2233              2098     1930              1788    "

XVIII.               1822                  1700              1587                          1580    "

XIX.                 1473                  1400              1375     1530               1350    "

XX.                  1279                  1200              1202                           1200    "

XXI.                 1101                  1100              1102     1060               1090    "

XXII.                 971                    966                952       930                945    "

XXIII.                851                    766                755                            745    "

XXIV.                762                     733                731                            718    "

XXV.                 718                     700                721      728                 712    "

XXVI.                674                     666                664      663                 663    "

Persians            524                     527                525      525                 525    "

Greeks              331                                                                           332    "

Romans                                                                                              30    "

The figures of Brugsch are based on the average length of a human generation; Meyer's on the minimum reign-lengths shown by the records; astronomical calculations depend on eclipses as related to the Sothic periods of 1,460 years and the variable year of 365 days. The earlier systems suffered from insufficient data for the application of the method of "dead-reckoning," which is the only system really available.


4. History: 1. Conspectus and Sources. The predynastic period is little known, but excavations made mainly since the beginning of the present century have begun to throw light upon the subject. The work of De Morgan and Petrie is of initial importance. The main divisions of the history, based upon the thirty dynasties of Manetho are: (1) the Ancient Kingdom, dynasties I.-VI., say 3400-2475 B.C.; (2) the Middle Kingdom, dynasties XI.-XII., 2160-1788 B.C.; (3) the New Kingdom, dynasties XVIII.-XX., 1580-1090 B.C.; (4) the period of decline and foreign intervention, dynasties XXI.-XXV., 1090-663 B.C.; (5) the period of restoration, dynasty XXVI., 663-525 B.C.; (6) the Persian and Greek domination, dynasty XXVII. onward, 525-30 B.C.; for details as to the history, reference must be made to the special works on that subject. The gaps in the above list represent dark periods about which little is known. Dynasties seven to ten were occupied with internal strife resulting in the removal of the seat of power from Memphis gradually southward to Thebes. Dynasties thirteen to seventeen covered also a period of unrest and of foreign domination by the Hyksos, "Sheiks of the Bedouin," who were probably of Semito-Hittite race. The sources of the history are numerous and consist of antiquities illustrating manners and beliefs; texts on stone, leather and papyrus, containing the facts forming the raw material of historical representation; records in the cuneiform character and in Hebrew tradition as well as the accounts preserved by Greek travelers and historians. Aside from the Turin papyrus and Manetho's work, there is no evidence of the compilation of a complete list of the kings which could be called even a comprehensive outline or framework of the history. The annals of some of the kings, and the records of the separate temples constitute the historical writings of the Egyptians, and these extended scarcely beyond lists of names and reign-lengths. The available material is widely scattered, and while remarkably full for some periods, is for the most part meager and unsatisfactory.


2. Hyksos, Pharoahs and their Successors to the Exodus. It is probable that the immigration of the sons of Jacob must be assigned to the period of the Hyksos (before 1580 B.C.). There are pictures on tomb-walls which represent the approach of shepherds of peculiarly Semitic features, and a papyrus tells of permission granting grazing privileges to others of that race. There is also a Ptolemaic tradition of a seven-year dearth in the reign of Zoser (2890 B.C.). The journey of Abraham to Egypt and the resort thither against famine are quite in line with known fact. The theory which identifies the expulsion of the Hyksos with the Exodus of the Israelites (Josephus) is impossible chronologically without destroying the historicity of the latter event. Thothmes III. (1501-1447 B.C.) was the embodiment of the warlike spirit which the Egyptians had acquired from their conflict with the Hyksos. He pushed his conquests through Palestine, leaving a record of the places he had conquered on the walls of the temple of Amon at Karnak. In this list were included the names of Kadesh on the Orontes, Megiddo, Damascus, Hamath, Acco, Joppa, Gezer, etc. Later glimpses of the condition of the Palestinian dependencies of Egypt are derived from the cuneiform tablets found at Tell el-Amarna (see AMARNA TABLETS). These tablets were sent by the local vassals of the Pharaohs, and contain items of information, private and political, written in Babylonian, the language of the diplomacy of the period. The picture which they give is of the time just preceding the Exodus. They were composed for the information of Pharaohs who are generally supposed to have been largely under Semitic influence, one of whom made the only attempt in Egyptian history to introduce a monotheistic form of religion and worship. The attempt came to nothing permanent, and the power of Egypt in Palestine was overthrown soon afterward. Not till the time of Rameses II. (1292-1225 B.C.) was the reconquest attempted. He made his influence felt as far as the Lebanon, and his twenty-first year was marked by a treaty of peace with the Hittites. He is commonly regarded as the Pharaoh of the oppression, and the fact that he was the builder of Pithom confirms the Hebrew tradition. The absence of any personal designation in the title Pharaoh, precludes the possibility of absolute identification in most cases. The power of Egypt in Palestine did not long survive Rameses II., and it must have been during this period that the Hebrews took possession of the land.


3. Exodus to the Assyrian Period. The Exodus is usually assigned to the reign of Merneptah (1225-1215 B.C.) the successor of Rameses II. The earliest extant mention of the name of Israel is in a victory-stele (discovered in 1896) which this king erected. The name is enumerated in connection with other places in Palestine and Syria as scenes of the Pharaoh's conquests. On its face it is evidence that a tribe bearing this designation had been defeated in Palestine; but as it stands alone, an uncorroborated witness to the king's expedition, its value has been seriously questioned. Nevertheless it raises interesting and important questions. An unnamed Pharaoh, who in view of the subsequent history (I Kings xi. 40) could scarcely have been Sheshonk I. (Shishak), captured the city of Gezer and gave it to his daughter, the wife of king Solomon (I Kings ix. 16). This is the first intimation of Egyptian conquest in Canaan in nearly three hundred years. Sheshonk I. (945-924 B.C., called "Shishak," not "Pharaoh" in I Kings xi. 40, being the first time that the Old Testament gives a personal name to an Egyptian king) about 926 B.C. celebrated an expedition in which, among other places, he pillaged the temple at Jerusalem (I Kings xiv. 25-26). This expedition was not in favor of Jeroboam whom he had harbored (I Kings xi. 40) but against all Canaan. A place which he also ravaged was called "Field of Abram." Again there was a period in which the internal weakness of the government caused a cessation of campaigns in Palestine and Syria. The references of II Chron. xiv. 9-13 to "Zerah the Ethiopian," and of II Kings xvii. 4 to "So" (or Sewe) find no counterparts in the Egyptian records. If the latter was an Egyptian, he must have been a petty ruler in the North at the beginning of the Ethiopian domination in the South. See ASSYRIA, VI., § 10.


4. Period of Assyrian Contact. With Shabaka (712-700 B.C.) the first king of dynasty XXV began an attempt to ward off the danger from so powerful a neighbor as Assyria, and the peoples of Palestine and Syria were induced to join in an offensive alliance in spite of the realistic prophecy of Isa. xx. Sennacherib, however, defeated the allied forces at Altaku but returned home without reducing Jerusalem. In 688 B.C. Taharka ("Tirhakah, king of Ethiopia") succeeded to the throne. Against him an expedition was led by Esarhaddon in 674, and in the following year a battle was fought that resulted unfavorably to the Assyrian. Again in 670 he returned, and after having reduced Tyre, he conquered Egypt and received the allegiance of many petty princes, among whom Necho of Sais was one. But the withdrawal of Esarhaddon was the signal for the return of Taharka from Ethiopia whither he had fled. Asshurbanipal renewed the expedition and proceeded up the Nile, possibly to Thebes. After his departure a conspiracy arose in the Delta, for the restoration of Taharka, and it was headed by Necho of Sais. When it was suppressed, Necho was sent in chains to Assyria, but later he was pardoned and sent back as viceroy. Tanutamen, son of Shabaka and nephew of Taharka, tried to regain Egypt, and even took possession of Memphis. Again Asshurbanipal marched against Egypt and proceeded to Thebes, which he sacked and destroyed (Nahum iii. 8-10), and finally ended the Ethiopian domination (661 B.C. ). Psammetichus I., a son of Necho of Sais, was made king by Asshurbanipal, but after some years, and in consequence of the growing conflict between Babylonia and Assyria, he succeeded in making Egypt quite independent. During his reign there was a revival of the ancient models in all the relations and customs of the land. Necho, his son, in 609, invaded Palestine in an attempt to extend his kingdom to its ancient northern boundary. In 608 he conquered and killed Josiah at Megiddo (II Kings xxiii. 29), and took possession of the country as far as the Euphrates.


5. Babylonian and Later Periods. After the fall of Assyria the Babylonian conqueror in the person of Nebuchadrezzar threatened Egyptian supremacy in Syria, and in 605 defeated Necho at Carchemish (Jer. xlvi. and 1-12). After pursuing Necho to Egypt he made a compact with him by which all of Egypt's Asiatic pretensions were to be abandoned (II Kings xxiv. 7). Necho and his son, Psammetichus II., devoted themselves to the development of Egypt and to the imitation of ancient models in art and literature. Apries (Hophra, 588 B.C.) instigated a confederation of the petty kings of Western Asia which undertook to throw off the Babylonian yoke, but unsuccessfully. Nebuchadrezzar took Jerusalem in 586 B.C., and again in 568 he marched to the Delta as had been foretold by the fugitive Jeremiah (xliii. 8-13). The details of the expedition, however, are unknown. But the country was strong enough to resist the Babylonian forces successfully. In fact the government was so well established that it became a dominant power on the Mediterranean, with varying fortunes till the Persian conquest under Cambyses in 525 B.C. The period from 404 to 342 B.C. saw native rulers again; the Persians returned and ruled till the conquest of Alexander the Great in 332 B.C. This began the Ptolemaic period which lasted till the Roman period beginning in 30 B.C.


5. Religion: 1. General Features. The Egyptian religion is a large matter and the subject of much debate. It has been contended by some that it had a monotheistic basis, and by others that it was merely a form of totemism. The original deity seems to have been a local god, its bounds being prescribed by the village, town, city or nomos (county). Such deity was the special patron of the particular place, and to it appeal was made by those of the town. Each such deity took an animal form in which it was supposed to exercise its inherent powers. Each locality was believed to be inhabited by a multitude of inferior spirits, and these spirits were subject to a higher divinity. With the growth of a town or with a change in the capital, a change was made in the dignity of the particular deity under whose protection the city stood. But the most peculiar feature of the Egyptian religion was its syncretism. It seems to have been easy to merge one deity into another, and to attribute the powers assigned to one to another similar being. It is a frequent phenomenon that contradictory qualities are alleged of the same deity in different periods of the history, later attributes being added without the elimination of the earlier. Resulting contradictions seem not to have been noticed. There was evident also a gradual tendency to a simplification by the merging of many into fewer types, as in the case of the sun-god, with whom in the course of centuries a large number of deities who had acquired a more than local significance became identified. Nearly every god in the pantheon had certain distinguishing characteristics which were conventionally denoted by peculiarities of pose, of dress, of head, of ornament or other feature. Upraised arms and kneeling attitude were characteristic of the god of heaven, Shu; the youthful Horus was a child with a curled side-lock and a forefinger at lip. Bes was a dwarf with a large feather head-dress; Osiris had a royal crown flanked by feather plumes; Anubis had the head of the jackal and Horus the head of a hawk; Hathor was a woman with the ears of a calf, and Sebek had the head of a crocodile. About each one of a multitude of such forms there must have been a rich mythology. The story of Osiris, Isis, and Horus has been preserved after a fashion by Plutarch, but the great mass of the myths has perished. A few, such as the story of the destruction of mankind, have been preserved, but for the most part all that remains is a collection of references to characteristics in the nomenclature of the various gods. But the stories and beliefs on which these appellations rest have disappeared.


2. Polytheism Dominant. The claim for a monotheistic basis of the Egyptian religion rests upon dogmatic assumption or upon phrases and attributions found in divine hymns, prayers or religious texts. But to bear such an interpretation such phrases must be dislocated from their context. It is also necessary to disregard the fact that each city or province had its special tutelary deity with its special circle of subordinate deities, and that the triad, or even the ennead, not the individual without peer or companion, was the unit. The development of the religion up to the time of the pyramid-texts in the fifth dynasty is largely a matter of conjecture and debate. Since that time there has been nothing, except the ill-starred attempt of Amenhotep IV., which bears the slightest resemblance to monotheism, and only such expressions as indicate the headship of a particular god in a particular region, or his supremacy over other gods can be adduced in support. The argument in favor of pantheism is more plausible, but that is too abstract an idea to find lodgment with the Egyptian; he was too realistic. The whole question is one of speculation as to what the course of development was in the period preceding the pyramid-texts, that is in the period before, say, 4000 B.C., for these texts show a form of belief in a multitude of gods which remained practically unchanged through thousands of years. The Egyptian idea of divine service was based upon that of human service. As the king had attendants who dressed him and made his toilet, so the gods had priests to perform the same, and a large part of the service consisted in changing the garments of the images. The offerings presented were ostensibly for the nourishment of the god of the temple, but really for the attendants. There does not seem to have been any such thing as a burnt sacrifice, though quarters of beef are portrayed on the tables of offering along with bread, beer, wine, geese, and other viands. In this may lie the reason why the Egyptians regarded the sacrifices of the Hebrews as an abomination (Ex. viii. 26).


3. Religious Texts. The religious texts and books of the Egyptians were quite numerous, the chief place being occupied by the so-called "Book of the Dead." There were several recensions of the text, but no stereotyped form and no recognized sequence or fixed number of chapters. The chief purpose of the book was to benefit the dead and to instruct them in the matters of the future life and in the use of magical formulas for the avoidance of the dangers of the underworld. One of the notable chapters (usually numbered cxxv.) contains the "Negative Confession," consisting of forty-two sections each of which is addressed to a separate deity and contains a statement that the deceased had not committed some specified sin or evil deed. The volume is filled with the names of various deities, places or persons, and is a thesaurus of information with regard to the beliefs of the Egyptians. Underlying it all was a persistent belief in man's immortality which colored and determined many Egyptian religious practises. The pyramids and the rock-hewn tombs are witnesses to this faith. In order to insure the continued existence of the soul, the body must be preserved intact as a refuge for the soul, which was believed to possess the power of independent movement and action. When the body was destroyed the soul ceased to exist, hence the necessity for "everlasting" depositories for the dead and the embalming of the body.


6. Exploration and Excavation: 1. The First Period 1798-1830. Systematic exploration and excavation and study of the monuments of Egypt began with the Egyptian military campaign of Napoleon in 1798, which was accompanied by a number of competent scientists, artists, and savants, among whom were MM. Jollois and Devilliers, who examined the monuments then accessible. The results were published in memorable form under the auspices of the French Academy in Description de l'Égypte, ou recueil des observations qui ont été faites en Égypte pendant l'expédition de l'armée française (37 vols., Paris, 1820 1830). These magnificent volumes first acquainted the world with the existing remains of the past civilization of the Nile land. Prosper Jollois’ Journal d'un ingénieur attacé à l'expédition . . . 1798-1802, is published by G. Maspéro in Bibliothèque égyptologique (Paris, 1894) and throws a definite light upon the work of these scientists, since most of the sites since excavated with so large results are mentioned in the Journal. Memorable among the material results of the expedition was the Rosetta Stone discovered in Aug., 1799, at Rosetta, east of Alexandria, inscribed in hieroglyphic, hieratic, and Greek, which enabled Champollion to begin decipherment and make the first great contributions to Egyptology (See INSCRIPTIONS). Another expedition, under the Tuscan government supported by Charles X. of France and led by the French Champollion and the Italian Rosellini, the latter a professor at Pisa, went out in 1828, studied anew the monuments in the light of Champollion's achievements with the materials of the first expedition, and carried their researches as far as Nubia. Champollion died in 1832, but Rosellini stayed some years, and the results were published in Monumente dell' Egitto e della Nubia (3 vols. of plates, 8 of text, Pisa, 1832 sqq.), the French equivalents in Monuments de l'Égypte et de Nubie (4 and 8 vols., Paris, 1835 sqq.).


2. Private and Tuscan-Prussian Work, 1832-50. The next period began in 1832, at first under private enterprise, no great official efforts being made. Among the most notable and useful labors were those of the English engineer F. E. Perring and his associate Col. Howard Vyse, who took accurate measurements of the pyramids, especially those of Gizeh, and laid the foundations for all subsequent exact knowledge, verified and completed for the Gizeh pyramids by Petrie in 1881-82, results being assured often to one-tenth of an inch. The object of the building of the pyramids was discovered largely through the investigations of Perring and Vyse. In 1841 Alexander von Humboldt and Karl Josias von Bunsen induced Frederick William IV. of Prussia to send an expedition headed by Karl Richard Lepsius and a strong staff, which carried on work from 1842 into the sixties. Investigation was begun at the pyramids near Memphis and the conclusion was reached that these structures vary in size approximately in proportion to the length of the reign of the king for whose tomb each was prepared; that the tomb was begun at the beginning of the reign and increased in size by symmetrical outside casings as long as the king lived, when a final casing was added. This theory is denied by Petrie (Ten Years' Digging in Egypt, New York, n.d., pp. 141-142) but pronounced substantially correct by Steindorif (H. V. Hilprecht, Explorations in Bible Lands, Philadelphia, 1903, p. 633). Over 130 other tombs were discovered and the materials from them collected, including the inscriptions, for an outline history of Egypt. Explorations were extended southward up the Blue Nile past Khartum, where attention was paid to Ethiopian civilization, and eastward to the ancient mines of Sinai. Among individual achievements was the recovery at Tanis of a trilingual stele carrying the decree of Ptolemy III. Euergetes in hieroglyphic, demotic, and Greek, confirming in general the decipherment begun with the Rosetta Stone. Results were published by Lepsius (12 vols., Berlin, 1849 sqq.). The arrangement was not geographical, as had been the case with previous publications, but historical in the sequence of development as then understood. Thus the outlines of a new treatment were struck out which subsequent work has followed, amended, and filled out.


3. Mariette, 1851-81. With Auguste Mariette a new period began, and by the discovery near Memphis in Nov., 1851, of the Serapeum or cemetery of the sacred Apis-bulls intense interest was created. Sixty-four of these tombs were found with a vast amount of cultic, memorial, ornamental, and historical material, useful in constructing a picture of life, history, and belief. In 1857 Mariette was made director of the new museum at Cairo, and when permits already issued for excavations expired, he would not have them renewed and permitted no one but himself to dig for antiquities. His own activities were feverish and his excavations so extensive and so scattered that they could not be under his personal supervision. Moreover, the strictly scientific methods of the present had not come into existence, consequently through the carelessness or incapacity of his workmen many objects were irretrievably lost or ruined. No systematic account of the excavations was kept, and a record of work done by Mariette is consequently a desideratum which can never be supplied. His chief aim was to collect fine specimens for his museum, and the accomplishment of thorough work was a secondary end. Yet some of his discoveries were notable: as the statues of the seated scribe, now in the Louvre, and the Sheikh al-Beled ("village chief "), in the Cairo museum; at Abydos the temple of Seti I. and the Seti list of seventy-six royal ancestors with their names and titles; at Denderah, the temple of Hathor; at Edfu, the fine temple of Horus; and under his direction many volumes of the inscriptions recovered and copied were issued.


4. The Recent Period, since 1881. After Mariette's death in 1881 the direction remained in the hands of the French, but under competent and more generous management such as that of G. Maspéro, E. Grebaut, J. de Morgan, and Victor Loret. Permits to excavate were once more granted to representatives of other nations and interests, while for the Egyptian government researches were conducted at Luxor, Ombos, and in the Valley of the Kings, in which last place a notable fund of knowledge was accumulated, as it proved to be the hiding-place of the mummies of the kings of the seventeenth and eighteenth dynasties. Since 1883 the Egypt Exploration Fund and since 1893 the Egyptian Research Account (qq.v.) have been continuously at work; both have been favored agencies and their progress has been one of repeated triumphs under such brilliant workers as Edouard Naville, W. M. Flinders Petrie, F. Ll. Griffiths and E. A. Gardner. In 1894 the Swiss scholars F. J. Gautier and J. Jéquier entered upon work on the pyramids near Dahshur, and the tombs of Amenophis I. and Usertesen I. were recovered. Amélineau's work since 1895 has been momentous, including the recovery of a famous tomb of Osiris and the royal tombs of part of the first dynasty near Abydos. Meanwhile M. Gayet had begun work for the Musée Guimet. M. de Morgan's labor for the Cairo Museum at Abydos, Dahshur, Sakkareh and elsewhere has been continuous and important, especially in the investigation of neolithic interments and the discovery of the tomb of Menes near Nakada. Professor Spiegelberg has carried on a private enterprise for Lord Newberry at Memphis and elsewhere. More recent work has been done for the Germans by H. Schäfer, e.g., at Abusir, where a sun temple of the fifth dynasty was discovered.


5. General Results. The attempt to state the results of all these efforts has already filled hundreds of volumes. Here only the most general or most significant consequences can be given. The general course and extent of Egyptian history have been determined, though with many gaps and with deficiencies sufficiently indicated by the differences in the chronology as determined by different students shown in the chronological table given above. Yet the dynasties are few of which definite knowledge is not at hand, while the gaps are ever being filled in. The general course of civilization and of development of science, art, and letters in the Nile land is determined even into the prehistoric period, and the investigations have fixed within narrow limits the period of alien civilizations such as the Greek Mycenæan and Cretan. With this goes considerable light upon the movements and control of Mediterranean commerce and intercourse prior to 1000 B.C. New light is continually directed upon the two riddles of the Egyptian sphinx--the ethnology and language of the valley and delta. The increase in the number of monuments and cultic and social implements on the one hand and of inscriptions and literary remains on the other promise ultimate solution of these two problems. Single questions of importance settled definitely are: the relations of Egypt to Palestine in the fifteenth century B.C. (see AMARNA TABLETS); the situation of the Goshen of the Israelites through the location of Pithom (1883) and possibly Rameses (1906) along the Tanitic branch of the Nile; the relations of Egypt to Greece in the use of Greek mercenaries from the seventh to the fourth century B.C. by the excavations of the sites of Naukratis and Daphnæ (Tahpanhes); the character of the cult of Hathor (1906) through finding an untouched temple of the goddess with a cow sculptured in sandstone as the cultic object--the first discovery of a shrine with its deity and paraphernalia of worship intact; and the recovery of the site of the Onias temple (1906). Among the unexpected results is the recovery of early fragments of classical, Jewish, and Christian literature, including the famous Logia Jesu (see AGRAPHA), early bits of the Greek Old and New Testaments, new fragments of Sappho, and Menander, the Epitome of Livy covering several lost books; while of Baruch, Hermas, Pindar, Julius Africanus, Euripides, Æschines, the Iliad and the Odyssey, Plato, Demosthenes, and others, texts, fragmentary to be sure, earlier than any before known have been unearthed. Added to these are a mass of ostraca, accounts, letters, official documents, and other materials of the post-Alexandrine period which has already required a recasting of the history of the Greek language. With the last phase of work and of epoch-making finds the names of Bernard P. Grenfell, Arthur S. Hunt, David G. Hogarth and the versatile W. M. Flinders Petrie are indissolubly connected. See EGYPT EXPLORATION FUND.


II. Modern Egypt: 1. Statistics, General and Religious. Egypt fell under the dominion of the Turks in 1517, but retained its independence in great measure. It is now formally dependent on the Sultan, although it has its own prince, who is called Khedive. The present Khedive is Abbas II., crowned 1892. Since 1882 England has exercised actual control, which was secured until further notice by an agreement with France in 1904. The area of the country, which is now officially bounded on the south by Wadi Halfa, amounts, according to Hübner and Juraschek, to 994,275 square kilometers (somewhat less than 400,000 square miles) or a little over three times the area of Great Britain, but only one-thirtieth is fertile and inhabited. The census of 1897, according to the same authorities, showed a population of 9,821,045, a number slightly in excess of that given by the Almanac de Gotha, which includes about 113,000 foreigners, consisting mainly of Greeks, English, French, Austrians, and Hungarians. The majority of the English and Germans belong to the Protestant Church. Hübner and Juraschek give the number of Protestants as 11,894, while the Almanac de Gotha raises the number, probably with greater correctness, to 24,409. The number of Roman Catholics, according to the former, is 56,343; according to the latter, 61,051. By far the greater number of natives are Mohammedans. The majority of native Christians belong to the Coptic Church (q.v.), which, according to Hübner and Juraschek, numbers 608,446 members. There are also 53,479 "orthodox Greeks"; but no distinction is made between the members of the Orthodox Church proper, over which the ecumenical patriarch of Constantinople presides, and those Christians whom that Church regards as heretical and schismatic. The latter are represented by many denominations, especially the Armenian and Syrian Jacobites.


2. The Orthodox Greek Church. The Orthodox Church is under the jurisdiction of the patriarch of Alexandria. Egypt was for centuries the most splendid seat of the Oriental Church, but has declined more and more since the invasion of the Arabs. The most famous patriarch of modern times was Cyril Lucar (q.v.), who lived for the most part at Constantinople, where he became ecumenical patriarch in 1620. In 1846 the patriarchal residence was restored to Egypt, and is now at Cairo. The present incumbent of the see of Alexandria is Photios, a man of energy and ambition, who was consecrated in 1900 with the title of "most blessed and all-holy pope (Gk. papas) and patriarch of the great city of Alexandria and all Egypt, of Pentapolis and Pelusium, of Libya and Ethiopia." Under him are four titular metropolitans. Formerly the patriarchate had large estates in Rumania, but they were sequestrated some decades ago. It must not be supposed, however, that all the Orthodox who live in Egypt belong to the Church of Alexandria, but only those who settled there long ago, whose number is not over 10,000. Although the immigrant Greeks and Russians take part in the service held by the clergy of the patriarch, they have no rights concerning it. The most important privilege vested in the subjects of the patriarchate is his election, in which the laity take a prominent part. The congregations in Cairo and Alexandria are rich, and supply the patriarch with large means. The first patriarch to return to reside in the country founded schools and hospitals with ecclesiastical funds. The patriarch is aided in the government of the Church by a permanent synod, consisting of the four metropolitans, and a council, or committee, for secular and financial affairs. Some important monasteries belong to the patriarchate, especially the large cloister of St. George in Cairo; the monastery of Sinai is ecclesiastically independent.


2. Other Communions. The Roman Catholic Church has an influential mission in the country, and since the time of the crusades has nominally a patriarch there, although he actually resides at Rome, where he has the church S. Paolo fuori le Mure. The Uniates have a distinct organization. The Anglican Church is largely represented in the principal cities, and Presbyterian chapels also exist. German congregations are found at Cairo and Alexandria, where they include the Swiss and Evangelical French. From 1752 to 1783 the Moravians worked among the Copts, and since 1854 the United Presbyterians of the United States have been engaged in mission work. The Indian prince Dalip Singh (d. 1893), who married an Evangelical Coptic woman, supported the mission, which in 1907 had fifty-three organized congregations and 140 stations. Fifteen ordained missionaries, thirteen lay missionaries (including five medical missionaries), sixteen missionary sisters, thirty ordained native ministers, thirty native auxiliary missionaries, 333 teachers, and thirty-eight colporteurs are among the number now at work. There are 25,500 baptized members, and 6,580 communicants. In 1901 the contributions for church purposes amounted to about $31,650. In the 169 schools 13,406 pupils were taught (including 6,852 Copts and 2,924 Mohammedans), and $31,489 were contributed for educational work. In 1882 a mission among the Mohammedans was begun by the Anglican Church Missionary Society, but its success has not been great. Since 1892 the North African Mission has worked in the same direction in the Nile delta. A small Dutch mission is also at work, as well as the Egyptian General Mission, which has its headquarters in Ireland. See also "Egypt" under title AFRICA, vol. i., p. 67.


Bibliography: Articles which cover the whole topic except Modern Egypt are DB, i. 653 667; EB, ii. 1203-1247. The article in KL, i. 256-267 includes Modern Egypt.


On the archeology consult: A. Erman, Life in Ancient Egypt, New York, 1894 (supersedes all earlier works); the various Reports and other publications of the two societies treated below, which give results of their operations; the publications of the Mission archéologique française au Caire, Paris, 1885 sqq. (a magnificent series of volumes dealing with various topics); G. Perrot and C. Chipiez, Hist. of Art in Ancient Egypt, 2 vols., London, 1883; W. M. F. Petrie, Historical Scarabs, London, 1889; idem, Ten Years' Digging in Egypt, New York, 1892; idem, Egyptian Decorative Art, ib. 1895; G. Maspéro, Life in Ancient Egypt, ib. 1891; E. A. W. Budge, The Mummy: Chapters on Egyptian Funeral Archaeology, Cambridge, 1893; W. Max Muller, Asien und Europa nach altägyptischen Denkmlern, Leipsic, 1893; M. Benson and J. Gourlay, The Temple of Mut in Asher . . . illustrating the Hist. of Egypt and the Main Religious ideas of the Egyptians, London, 1899; J. de Morgan, Recherches sur lea origines de l’Égypte; l'âge de la pierre et les métaux, Paris, 1895-96; H. Wallis, Egyptian Pottery, London, 1898; M. Brodrick and A. A. Morton, Concise Dictionary of Egyptian Archaeology, Lb. 1901; J. Capart, Les Débuts de tart en Éqypte, Brussels, 1904, Eng. transl., Primitive Art in Egypt, Philadelphia, 1905; F. W. von Bessing, Monuments of Egyptian Sculpture, New York, 1906 (typical examples of art arranged chronologically); T. M. Davis, E. Naville, H. Carter, Theodore M. Davis' Excavations, New York, 1906; A. H. Gardiner, Inscription of Mes: Study of Egyptian Judicial Procedure, ib. 1906; G. Maspéro, Manual of Egyptian Archaeology, ib. 1906; P. E. Newberry, Scarabs: introduction to the Study of Egyptian Seals and Signet Rings, London, 1906; H. Schneider, Kultur und Denken der alten Aegypter, Leipsic, 1907; E. A. W. Budge, The Egyptian Sudan, its History and Monuments, 2vols., London, 1907.


On the history it is to be remarked that the earlier works are superseded and should be used only with the greatest care. Consult J. H. Breasted, A Hist. of Egypt, New York. 1905 (in connection with this may be employed Breasted's Ancient Records of Egypt, including the Historical Documents, 5 vols., Chicago, 1905-06); idem, History of the Ancient Egyptians, New York, 1908 (a brief and handy manual); A. Wiedemann, AegyptischeGeschichte, Gotha, 1884; E. Meyer, Geschichte des Altertums, vol.1., Stuttgart, 1884; idem, Geschichte des alien Aegyptens, Berlin, 1887; W. M. F. Petrie, A Hist. of Egypt from the Earliest Times to the Thirtieth Dynasty, 6 vols., New York, 1894 1905; A. H. Sayce, The Egypt of the Hebrews and of Herodotus, ib. 1895; F. G. Fleay, Egyptian Chronology, ib. 1899; G. Maspero, History of the Ancient Peoples of the Classic East, 3 vols., ib. 1897-1900; E. A. W. Budge, A list, of Egypt, 8 vols., ib. 1902. On the Greek period, besides the appropriate sections in works mentioned above, consult: J. P. Mahaffy, The Empire of the Ptolemies, London, 1895; M. C. Strack, Die Dynastic der Ptolemaer, Berlin, 1897. For the Roman period, J. G. Milne, History of Egypt under Roman Rule, London, 1899. On the external relations of Egypt, consult W. M. Müller, ut sup., and the literature under AMARNA TABLETS.


On the religion: A. Wiedemanu, Religion of the Ancient Egyptians, New York, 1897 (the best single work); G. Steindorif, The Religion of the Ancient Egyptians, ib. 1905 (covers the subject, but largely on the basis of Herodotus); M. Brimmer, Egypt: Three Essays on the Religion, Hist., and Art, Boston, 1891; G. Maspero,Études de mythologie et d'archéologie, 4 vols., Paris, 1893-1900; G. St. Clair, Creation Records in Egypt. Studies in the Book of the Dead, London, 1898; W. M. F. Petrie, Religion and Conscience in Ancient Egypt, ib. 1898; E. A. W. Budge, Egyptian Ideas of a Future Life, Oxford, 1899; idem, Egyptian Magic, ib. 1899; idem, The Gods of the Egyptians, 3 vols., London, 1905 (sumptuous and meaty); idem, Egyptian Heaven and Hell, lb. 1906; A. H. Sayce, Religions of Ancient Egypt and Babylonia, New York, 1903; A. Erman, Die ägyptische Religion, Berlin, 1905, Eng. transl., Handbook of Egyptian Religion, London, 1907; E. Naville, La Religion des anciens Égyptiens, Paris, 1906; DB, Extra volume, pp. 176 197.


On the literature: For the Book of the Dead, the recension of the British Museum copy was reproduced in color by Griggs, London, 1889; that of the Turin Papyrus was edited by R. Lepsius, Leipsic, 1842; The Book of the Dead was translated in part by Le P. Renouf for the Society of Biblical Archaeology, parts i-iv., London, 1893 95, completed by E. Naville, 1907; it has been translated into English by C. H. S. Davis, New York, 1894, and by E. A. W. Budge, 3 vols., London, 1898 (text, vocabulary, and translation). An excellent Fr. transl. is by P. Pierret, Paris, 1882. Collections are: K. Piehl, Inscriptions hiéroglyphiques, 3 vols., Leipsic, 1886-1903; Corpus papyrorum Ægypti, ed. R. Revillout and A. Eisenlohr, Paris, 1894 sqq.; Urkunden des aegyptischen Altertums, ed. G. Steindorif, Leipsic, 1903 sqq. Egyptian Tales from the Papyri, 2 series, ed. and transl. by W. M F. Petrie, New York, 1894-95 is of great interest psychologically and from the point of view of folklore. Consult also: Untersuchungen zur Geschichte und Altertumskunde Aegyptens, ed. K. Sethe, 4 vole., Leipsic, 1896 sqq.; H. Lepsius, Denkmäler aus Aegypten und Aethiopien, Leipsic, 1897 sqq. (4 vols. issued); G. Ebers, Papyrus Ebers, 2 vols., ib. 1875; I. Myer, The Oldest Books in the World, London, 1900; A. Erman, Aegyptische Chrestomathie, New York, 1895.


On exploration and excavation consult: G. Steindorif, in H. V. Hilprecht, Explorations in Bible Lands, Philadelphia, 1903; W. M. F. Petrie, Ten Years' Digging in Egypt, London, 1892; the Annual Archæological Reports of the Egypt Exploration Fund, 1890 sqq., furnish accounts not only of the work of that association but of the discoveries made by other investigators; Bibliothèque égyptologique, Paris, 1893 sqq., contains many memoirs of a historical nature concerning exploration and excavation.


On Modern Egypt: De Chabroe, Essai sur les mæurs des habitants modernes de L'Égypte, in Description de l'Éqypte, ii. 2, pp. 361 526, Paris. 1822; J. Silbernagl, Verfassung und gegenwärtiger Bestand sämmtlicher Kirchen des Orients, Landshut, 1907; H. Stephan, Das heutige Aegypten, Leipsic, 1872; M. Lüttke, Aegyptens neue Zeit, Leipsic, 1873 (the most comprehensive book for ecclesiastical matters); O. Schneider, Beitrage zur Kenntniss der griechiach-orthodoxen Kirche Aegyptens, Dresden, 1874 (important); O. Werner, Orbis terrarum catholicus, pp. 195 sqq., Freiburg, 1890; F. Kattenbusch, Lehrbuch dir vergleichenden Confessionskunde, 1. 170 sqq.. Freiburg, 1892; Abu Salih, Churches and Monasteries of Egypt, London, 1895; A. von Fircks, Aegypten, Berlin, 1895; E. L. Butcher, Story of the Church of Egypt, London, 1897 (good for the modern period); A. Watson, American Mission in Egypt, 1854-96, Pittsburg, 1898; A. B. Edwards, Pharaohs, Fellahs and Explorers. New York, 1891; M. Fowler, Christian Egypt, London, 1901; K. Baedeker, Egypt, London, 1902; K. Beth, Die orientalieche Christenheit der Mittelmeerländer, Berlin, 1902; H. Gundert, Die evangehsche Mission, ihre Länder, Volker und Arbeiten, pp. 232 sqq., Stuttgart, 1903; O. Hübner, Geographischstatistische Tabelle alter Länder der Erde, ed. F. von Juraschek, Frankfort, 1907; Gothaischer genealogischer Kalender, Gotha, 1906; C. R. Watson, Egypt and the Christian Crusade, Philadelphia, 1907, and the literature under Coptic Church.