in the reign of Amasis there were said to have been twenty thousand inhabited cities.1 This may, perhaps, be considered an exaggeration; but what is very observable is that Diodorus Siculus, who traveled in Egypt four centuries after Herodotus, and whose jealousy of the reputation of his great predecessor made him anxious to discredit his statement,2 does, nevertheless, on this important point, confirm them. For he not only remarks that Egypt was at that time as densely inhabited as any existing country, but he adds, on the authority of records which were then extant, that it was formerly the most populous in the world, having contained, he says, upwards of eighteen thousand cities.3

These were the only two ancient writers who, from personal knowledge, were well acquainted with the state of Egypt; and their testimony is the more valuable because it was evidently drawn from different sources; the information of Herodotus being chiefly collected at Memphis, that of Diodorus at Thebes.5

1 Επ' ̓Αμάσιος δὲ βασιλέος λέγεται Αἴγυπτος μάλιστα δὴ τότε εὐδαιμονῆσαι, καὶ τὰ ἀπὸ τοῦ ποταμοῦ τῇ χώρῃ γινόμενα, καὶ τὰ ἀπὸ τῆς χώρης τοῖσι ἀνθρώποισι. καὶ πόλις ἐν αὐτῇ γενέσθαι τὰς ἁπάσας τότε δισμυρίας τὰς οἰκεομένας (Herodotus, Book ΙΙ, chap. clxxvii).

2 Diodorus, who, though an honest and painstaking man, was in every respect inferior to Herodotus, says, impertinently enough, ὅσα μὲν οὖν Ηρόδοτος καί τινες τῶν τὰς Αἰγυπτίων πράξεις συνταξαμένων ἐσχεδιάκασιν, ἑκουσίως προκρίναντες τῆς ἀληθείας τὸ παραδοξολογεῖν, καὶ μύθους πλάττειν ψυχαγωγίας ἕνεκα, παρήσομεν (Bibliothec. Hist., Book I, chap. lxix, Vol. I, p. 207). In other places he alludes to Herodotus in the same tone, without actually mentioning him.

8 Πολυανθρωπίᾳ δὲ τὸ μὲν παλαιὸν πολὺ προέσχε πάντων τῶν γνωριζομένων τόπων κατὰ τὴν οἰκουμένην, καὶ καθ ̓ ἡμᾶς δὲ οὐδενὸς τῶν ἄλλων δοκεῖ λείπεσθαι. ἐπὶ μὲν γὰρ τῶν ἀρχαίων χρόνων ἔσχε κώμας ἀξιολόγους, καὶ πόλεις πλείους τῶν μυρίων καὶ ὀκτακισ χιλίων, ὡς ἐν ταῖς ἀναγραφαῖς ὁρᾶν ἐστι κατακεχωρισμένον (Diod. Sic., Bibliothec. Hist., Book I, chap. xxxi, Vol. I, p. 89).

4 Notwithstanding the positive assertions of M. Matter (Histoire de l'École d'Alexandrie, Vol. II, p. 285; compare Histoire du Gnosticisme, Vol. I, p. 48), there is no good evidence for the supposed travels in Egypt of the earlier Greeks, and it is even questionable if Plato ever visited that country. "Whether he was ever in Egypt is doubtful" (Bunsen's Egypt, Vol. I, p. 60). The Romans took little interest in the subject (Bunsen, Vol. I, pp. 152-158); and, says M. Bunsen (p. 152). "with Diodorus all systematic inquiry into the history of Egypt ceases, not only on the part of the Greeks, but of the ancients in general.” Mr. Leake, in an essay on the Quorra, arrives at the conclusion that after the time of Ptolemy the ancients made no additions to their knowledge of African geography (Journal of Geographical Society, Vol. II, p. 9).

5 See on this some good remarks in Heeren's African Nations, Vol. II, pp. 202-207; and as to the difference between the traditions of Thebes and

And whatever discrepancies there may be between these two accounts, they are both agreed respecting the rapid increase of the people and the servile condition into which they had fallen. Indeed, the mere appearance of those huge and costly buildings, which are still standing, is a proof of the state of the nation that erected them. To raise structures so stupendous,1 and yet so useless, there must have been tyranny on the part of the rulers and slavery on the part of the people. No wealth, however great, no expenditure, however lavish, could meet the expense which would have been incurred if they had been the work of free men, who received for their labor a fair and honest reward. But in Egypt, as in India, such considerations were disregarded, because everything tended to favor the upper ranks of society and depress the lower. Between the two there was an immense and impassable gap. If a member of the industrious classes changed his usual employment or was known to pay attention to political matters, he was severely punished; 5 and under no circumstances

Memphis, see Matter, Histoire de l'École d'Alexandrie, Vol. I, p. 7. The power and importance of the two cities fluctuated, both being at different periods the capital. Bunsen's Egypt, Vol. II, pp. 54, 55, 244, 445, 446; Vyse on the Pyramids, Vol. III, pp. 27, 100; Sharpe's History of Egypt, Vol. I, pp. 9, 19, 24, 34, 167, 185. 1 Sir John Herschel (Discourse on Natural Philosophy, p. 60) calculates that the great pyramid weighs 12,760,000,000 pounds. Compare Lyell's Principles of Geology, p. 459, where the still larger estimate of 6,000,000 tons is given. But according to Perring, the present quantity of masonry is 6,316,000 tons, or 82,110,000 cubic feet. See Bunsen's Egypt, Vol. II, p. 155, London, 1854, and Vyse on the Pyramids, 1840, Vol. II, p. 113.

2 Many fanciful hypotheses have been put forward as to the purpose for which the pyramids were built; but it is now admitted that they were neither more nor less than tombs for the Egyptian kings! See Bunsen's Egypt, Vol. II, pp. xvii, 88, 105, 372, 389; and Sharpe's History of Egypt, Vol. I, p. 21.

3 For an estimate of the expense at which one of the pyramids could be built in our time by European workmen, see Vyse on the Pyramids, Vol. II, p. 268. On account, however, of the number of disturbing causes, such calculations have little value.

4 Those who complain that in Europe this interval is still too great may derive a species of satisfaction from studying the old extra-European civilizations.

5 Wilkinson's Ancient Egyptians, Vol. II, pp. 8, 9. "Nor was any one permitted to meddle with political affairs, or to hold any civil office in the state.". "If any artisan meddled with political affairs, or engaged in any other employment than the one to which he had been brought up, a severe punishment was instantly inflicted upon him." Compare Diod. Sic., Bibliothec. Hist., Book I, chap. lxxiv, Vol. I, p. 223.

was the possession of land allowed to an agricultural laborer, to a mechanic, or indeed to any one except the king, the clergy, and the army. The people at large were little better than beasts of burden; and all that was expected from them was an unremitting and unrequited labor. If they neglected their work, they were flogged; and the same punishment was frequently inflicted upon domestic servants, and even upon women.2 These and similar regulations were well conceived; they were admirably suited to that vast social system which, because it was based on despotism, could only be upheld by cruelty. Hence it was that the industry of the whole nation being at the absolute command of a small part of it, there arose the possibility of rearing those vast edifices which inconsiderate observers admire as a proof of civilization, but which, in reality, are evidence of a state of things altogether depraved and unhealthy; a state in which the skill and the arts of an imperfect refinement injured those whom they ought to have benefited; so that the very resources which the people had created were turned against the people themselves.

That in such a society as this much regard should be paid to human suffering it would indeed be idle to expect. Still, we are

1 Wilkinson's Ancient Egyptians, Vol. I, p. 263; Vol. II, p. 2; Sharpe's History of Egypt, Vol. II, p. 24.

2 Wilkinson's Ancient Egyptians, Vol. II, pp. 41, 42; Vol. III, p. 69; Vol. IV, p. 131. Compare Ammianus Marcellinus, in Hamilton's Ægyptiaca, p. 309. 3 Vyse on the Pyramids, Vol. I, p. 61; Vol. II, p. 92.

musste.

4 "Ein König ahmte den andern nach, oder suchte ihn zu übertreffen; indess das gutmüthige Volk seine Lebenstage am Baue dieser Monumente verzehren So entstanden wahrscheinlich die Pyramiden und Obelisken Aegyptens. Nur in den ältesten Zeiten wurden sie gebauet: denn die spätere Zeit und jede Nation, die ein nützliches Gewerbe treiben lernte, bauete keine Pyramiden mehr. Weit gefehlt also, dass Pyramiden ein Kennzeichen von der Glückseligkeit und Aufklärung des alten Aegyptens seyn sollten, sind sie ein unwidersprechliches Denkmal von dem Aberglauben und der Gedankenlosigkeit sowohl der Armen, die da baueten, als der Ehrgeizigen, die den Bau befahlen" (Herder, Ideen zur Geschichte, Vol. III, pp. 103, 104. See also p. 293, and some admirable remarks in Volney, Voyage en Égypte, Vol. I, pp. 240, 241). Even M. Bunsen, notwithstanding his admiration, says of one of the pyramids: “The misery of the people, already grievously oppressed, was aggravated by the construction of this gigantic building. . . . The bones of the oppressors of the people who for two whole generations harassed hundreds of thousands from day to day," etc. (Bunsen's Egypt, Vol. II, p. 176, a learned and enthusiastic work).

startled by the reckless prodigality with which, in Egypt, the upper classes squandered away the labor and the lives of the people. In this respect, as the monuments yet remaining abundantly prove, they stand alone and without a rival. We may form some idea of the almost incredible waste when we hear that two thousand men were occupied for three years in carrying a single stone from Elephantine to Sais;1 that the Canal of the Red Sea alone cost the lives of a hundred and twenty thousand Egyptians; and that to build one of the pyramids required the labor of three hundred and sixty thousand men for twenty years.3

If, passing from the history of Asia and Africa, we now turn to the New World, we shall meet with fresh proof of the accuracy of the preceding views. The only parts of America which before the arrival of the Europeans were in some degree civilized were Mexico and Peru; to which may probably be added that long and narrow tract which stretches from the south of Mexico to the Isthmus of Panama. In this latter country, which is now known as Central America, the inhabitants, aided by the fertility of the soil," seem to have worked out for themselves a certain amount of knowledge; since the ruins still extant prove the possession of a mechanical and architectural skill too considerable

1 Καὶ τοῦτο ἐκόμιζον μὲν ἐπ ̓ ἔτεα τρία, δισχίλιοι δέ οἱ προσετετάχατο ἄνδρες ἀγωγέες (Herodotus, Book II, chap. clxxv). On the enormous weight of the stones which the Egyptians sometimes carried, see Bunsen's Egypt, Vol. I, p. 379; and as to the machines employed, and the use of inclined roads for the transit, see Vyse on the Pyramids, Vol. I, p. 197; Vol. III, pp. 14, 38.

2 Wilkinson's Ancient Egyptians, Vol. I, p. 70; but this learned writer is unwilling to believe a statement so adverse to his favorite Egyptians. It is likely enough that there is some exaggeration; still no one can dispute the fact of an enormous and unprincipled waste of human life.

3 Τριάκοντα μὲν γὰρ καὶ ἓξ μυριάδες ἀνδρῶν, ὡς φασι, ταῖς τῶν ἔργων λειτουργίαις προσήδρευσαν, τὸ δὲ πᾶν κατασκεύασμα τέλος ἔσχε μόγις ἐτῶν εἴκοσι διελθόντων (Diod. Sic., Bibliothec. Hist., Book I, chap. lxiii, Vol. I, p. 188).

4" When compared with other parts of the New World, Mexico and Peru may be considered as polished states" (History of America, Book VII, in Robertson's Works, p. 904). See, to the same effect, Journal of Geographical Society, Vol. V, P. 355.

5 Compare Squier's Central America, Vol. I, pp. 34, 244, 358, 421; Vol. II, p. 307, with Journal of Geograpical Society, Vol. III, p. 59; Vol. VIII, pp. 319, 323

to be acquired by any nation entirely barbarous. Beyond this nothing is known of their history; but the accounts we have of such buildings as Copan, Palenque, and Uxmal make it highly probable that Central America was the ancient seat of a civilization in all essential points similar to those of India and Egypt; that is to say, similar to them in respect to the unequal distribution of wealth and power, and the thraldom in which the great body of the people consequently remained.2

But although the evidence from which we might estimate the former condition of Central America is almost entirely lost, we are more fortunate in regard to the histories of Mexico and Peru.

1 Mr. Squier (Central America, Vol. II, p. 68), who explored Nicaragua, says of the statues, “The material, in every case, is a black basalt, of great hardness, which, with the best of modern tools, can only be cut with difficulty." Mr. Stephens (Central America, Vol. II, p. 355) found at Palenque "elegant specimens of art and models for study." See also Vol. III, pp. 276, 389, 406; Vol. IV, p. 293. Of the paintings at Chichen he says (Vol. IV, p. 311), "They exhibit a freedom of touch which could only be the result of discipline and training under masters." At Copan (Vol. I, p. 151), "it would be impossible, with the best instruments of modern times, to cut stones more perfectly.” And at Uxmal (Vol. II, p. 431), Throughout, the laying and polishing of the stones are as perfect as under the rules of the best modern masonry." Our knowledge of Central America is almost entirely derived from these two writers; and although the work of Mr. Stephens is much the more minute, Mr. Squier says (Vol. II, p. 306) what I believe is quite true, that until the appearance of his own book in 1853, the monuments in Nicaragua were entirely unknown. Short descriptions of the remains in Guatemala and Yucatan will be found in Larenaudière, Mexique et Guatemala, pp. 308-327, and in Journal of Geographical Society, Vol. III, pp. 60–63.

2 See the remarks on Yucatan in Prichard's Physical History of Mankind, Vol. V, p. 348: "A great and industrious, though perhaps, as the writer above cited (Gallatin) observes, an enslaved population. Splendid temples and palaces attest the power of the priests and nobles, while as usual no trace remains of the huts in which dwelt the mass of the nation."

3 Dr. M'Culloh (Researches concerning the Aboriginal History of America, pp. 272-340) has collected from the Spanish writers some meager statements respecting the early condition of Central America; but of its social state and history properly so called nothing is known, nor is it even certain to what family of nations the inhabitants belonged, though a recent author can find "la civilisation guatemalienne ou mistecozapotèque et mayaquiche vivante pour nous encore dans les ruines de Mitla et de Palenque" (Mexique et Guatemala, par Larenaudière, p. 8, Paris, 1843). Dr. Prichard, too, refers the ruins in Central America to "the Mayan race." See Prichard on Ethnology, in Report of British Association for 1847, p. 252. But the evidence for these and similar statements is very unsatisfactory.