Since the physical characteristics of the ancient Nilotic population, as derived from history and the monuments, coincide in a remarkable manner with the facts derived from anatomical comparison, it becomes in the next place necessary to offer some explanation of these results; or, to show at what periods and under what circumstances several different branches of the Caucasian race were blended into a single nation possessing more or less the characteristics of each, and this again modified in degree by another race wholly different from either. It is in the first place necessary to recur to the fact of the very long occupation of Egypt by successive dynasties of Hykshos or shepherd kings, and that these were not of one but of several nations—Phenicians, Pelasgi, and Scythians; while to these followed, at a long interval, an Ethiopian or Austral-Egyptian dynasty. Each of these great revolutions must have tended in turn to the amalgamation of the Egyptians with other nations; and this result may be referred to three principal epochs, independently of several subordinate ones.

The first epoch embraces the dynasty of the Hykshos or shepherd kings, commencing before Christ two thousand and eighty, and having a duration of two hundred and sixty years.

It is important, however, to observe, that Josephus quoting Manetho, makes the Hykshos dynasty last five hundred and eleven years; and the learned Baron Bunsen, whose work has not yet appeared, extends it to 1000, beginning B.C. 2514.^[120] The shorter period is that of Rosellini; but the longer one is perhaps most consistent with facts, and at least makes room for those various dominations which, in the lists of Manetho, precede the eighteenth dynasty; which last, headed by Amunoph the First, drove out the intrusive kings. During this long period the legitimate sovereigns were exiled into Ethiopia; and it is evident, that had MeroË been any other than a province or dependency of Egypt, it is hardly probable that the Egyptians,—kings, priests, and people,—could have found a safe asylum in that country during the long period of their exile. It is expressly stated by Josephus that the shepherd kings lived at Memphis, “and made both the upper and lower country pay tribute.” It would appear, however, that during the greater part of the Hykshos dynasty, the Egyptians retained possession of the Thebaid: nevertheless the occupation of Lower Egypt by their enemies, must have effectually precluded all communication with other countries excepting Ethiopia, southern Arabia and India; which fact will account for a vast influx of population from those countries, (and consequently from the slave-regions of Africa) into the Upper Nilotic provinces.

It is moreover reasonable to suppose that even after the expulsion of the Hykshos, multitudes of Egyptians would remain in Ethiopia,—that country wherein whole generations of their ancestors had lived and died; at the same time that great numbers of MerÖites, influenced by a variety of motives and especially by social alliances, would descend the Nile into Egypt.

It is moreover evident that while the Egyptians became thus fraternized with the nations of southern Asia, and the motley races of the Upper Nile, the provinces of Lower Egypt would be overrun with the Caucasian tribes of Europe and western Asia; for these, either as cognate with the Hykshos or as allies in their service, must have been in immense number to have conquered so populous a country, and especially to have kept possession during so long a period. It is to these events, then, that we attribute that blending of nations which appears to have been coeval with the early ages of the Nilotic Family, and which amply accounts for the ethnographic diversities every where manifest on the monuments.

The second epoch is comprised in the Ethiopian Dynasty of three kings, which lasted forty-four years, beginning B.C. 719.

These MerÖite or Austral-Egyptian kings, during their intrusive occupation of Egypt, would naturally, and indeed necessarily engage the neighbouring tribes, and especially such as were hostile to Egypt, as mercenary soldiers; and there are more than conjectural grounds for believing that the Negroes themselves were thus employed. We are told in the Sacred Writings (2 Chron. Chap. xii.) that when Shishak king of Egypt, who is identical with Sheshonk of the monuments,—went up against Jerusalem, he took with him “1200 chariots, and three-score thousand horsemen: and the people were without number that came with him out of Egypt; the Lubims, the Sukkiims and the Ethiopians.” Of this multitude we may presume that the horsemen, and people in chariots were part of the Egyptian army; the Lubims and Sukkiims are by most commentators regarded as Libyans and MerÖites, while, as the Ethiopians are placed last on the list, and are designated in the Hebrew original by the name of Cush, it is not unreasonable to suppose that they were Negroes. This view is sustained by a passage in Herodotus,^[121] who states that in the army of Xerxes which invaded Greece was a legion of Western Ethiopians, “who had hair more crisp and curling than any other men.”^[122] Now if the army of Xerxes embraced a legion of African Negroes, it would not be remarkable if the Egyptian troops should have been composed in part of the same people; which, indeed, with respect to the Ethiopian dynasty, may be assumed as a thing of course: for the MerÖites would naturally avail themselves of every expedient to establish their power by augmenting the number of their exotic confederates, and by extending to them those privileges which had once been sacred to particular castes. For these and other oppressive acts, the MerÖite kings were hated by the Egyptians; and no sooner were they expelled than their names were erased from the monuments.^[123]

The third epoch dates from the conquest by Cambyses, B.C. 525, and continues through the whole of the Persian dynasty, or, in other words, until the Ptolemaic era, B. C. 332,—a period of nearly two hundred years.

Every one knows that the Persian dominion in Egypt was marked by an utter disregard of all the established institutions. No occasion was omitted which could humble the pride or debase the character of the people. The varied inhabitants of Europe, Asia and Nigritia poured into the valley of the Nile, abolishing in degree the exclusiveness of caste, and involving an endless confusion of races.

The prelude to these changes and misfortunes can be traced to the reign of Psammeticus the First, who permitted to foreigners, and especially to the Greeks, a freedom of ingress which the laws and usages of the country had previously denied them. The same policy appears to have been fostered by the subsequent kings of the same dynasty, until its consummation by Amasis; (B.C. 569) when, in the language of Champollion-FigÉac, Egypt became at once Egyptian, Greek, and Asiatic; her national character was lost for ever; her armies were filled with foreign mercenaries; the throne was guarded by European soldiers, and continual wars completed the destruction of a tottering kingdom.^[124]