stitutions; and if they were so well satisfied with them that every innovation was resisted, and the Ptolemies and Cæsars vainly endeavoured to suggest improvements in their laws, we may conclude that the system and regulations of the Egyptian priests were framed with wisdom, and tended to the happiness as well as to the welfare of the people. And when the members of the legislative body are possessed of superior talents, even though their measures are absolute, they frequently govern with great benefit to the community; and this paternal authority is certainly more desirable in the ruling power than physical force.

Some will also question the policy or the justice of adopting such exclusive measures in the study of religion; but we may be allowed to doubt the prudence of allowing every one, in a nation * peculiarly addicted to speculative theory, to dabble in so abstruse a study. We have observed the injury done to the morals of society in Greece, at Rome, and in other places, by the fanciful interpretation of mysteries and hidden truths, which being misunderstood, were strangely perverted; and licence in religious speculation has always been the cause of schism, and an aberration from the purity of the original. At a later period, when every one was permitted to indulge in superstitious theories, the Egyptians of all classes be

Ammianus Marcellinus (lib. xxii. c. xvi.) says, "Homines Ægyptii plerique subfusculi sunt, et atrati, magisque mæstiores, gracilenti et aridi, ad singulos motus excandescentes, controversi, et reposcones acerrimi."

came notorious for their wild and fanciful notions, which did not fail eventually to assail Christianity, for a time tainting the purity of that religion; and we find from Vopiscus, that the Emperor Aurelian considered them "smatterers in abstruse science, prophecy, and medicine; eager for innovation, which formed the subject of their songs and ballads; always turning their talents for poetry and epigram against the magistrates, and ready to assert their pretended liberties."

There is therefore less reason to censure the Egyptian priests for their conduct in these matters, though a little insight into the foundation of their theological system would have been more beneficial to the people than the blind creed of an imaginary polytheism, which was contrary to the spirit of the religion they themselves professed, but which the people were taught or left to believe. For it was unjust and cruel to conceal under the fabulous guise of a plurality of gods that knowledge of the attributes and omnipotence of the Deity which the priests themselves possessed*; and it was iniquitous to degrade the nature of the divinity by bringing it down to the level of the gross imaginations of the people, when they had the means of raising their minds, by giving them an insight into some of those truths which have merited the name of "the wisdom of the Egyptians." The unity of the Deity would have been a doctrine. which all classes might have been taught; and the

I allude to the priests of an early epoch, and not in the time of the Romans.

eternal existence and invisible power of Îhôah would have offered a higher notion of the Cause and Ruler of all things than any mention of his attributes, or the fanciful representation of a god in the sculptures of their temples. It would have been unnecessary to explain the nature or peculiar occupation of a trinity, the mysterious connection between truth and the creative power (which is referred to in their sculptures); and imprudent to confuse their ideas with the notion of intermediate temporal and intellectual agents, or with the abstruse science of numbers and geometrical

emblems.

If the priests were anxious to establish a character for learning and piety, they were not less so in their endeavours to excel in propriety of outward demeanour, and to set forth a proper example of humility and self-denial; and if not in their houses, at least in their mode of living, they were remarkable for simplicity and abstinence. They committed no excesses either in eating or drinking; their food was plain, and in a stated quantity, and wine was used with the strictest regard to moderation. And so fearful were they lest the body should not "sit light upon the soul §,"

I use the Hebrew name of the deity in unity," the Being of Beings," """ who is and was; " Jehovah (Yehouah); this word has been still further changed by our custom of giving J the force of G: of which there are many instances, as Jacob, Judah, jot, and others. + Herodot. ii. 37.

During the fasts, which were frequent, Plutarch says they abstained from it entirely. (Plut. de Is. s. vi.) The Jewish priests were not permitted to drink wine when they went "into the tabernacle of the congregation." Levit. x. 9.

§ Plut. de Is. s. v. ; on the principle of plus de corps, moins d'esprit.

and excess should cause a tendency to increase "the corporeal man," that they paid a scrupulous attention to the most trifling particulars of diet: and similar precautions were extended even to the deified animals: Apis, if we may believe Plutarch*, not being allowed to drink the water of the Nile, since it was thought to possess a fattening property.

They were not only scrupulous about the quantity, but the quality of their food; and certain viands were alone allowed to appear at table. Above all meats, that of swine was particularly obnoxious; and fish both of the sea and the Nile was forbidden themt, though so generally eaten by the rest of the Egyptians. And indeed, on the 9th of the month Thoth‡, when a religious ceremony obliged all the people to eat a fried fish before the door of their houses, the priests were not even then expected to conform to the general custom, and they were contented to substitute the ceremony of burning theirs at the appointed time. Beans they held in utter abhorrence; and Herodotus affirms § that "they were never sown in the country; and if they grew spontaneously, they neither formed an article of food, nor even if cooked were ever eaten by the Egyptians." But this aversion, which originated in a supposed sanitary regulation, and which was afterwards so

*Plut. de Is. s. v.

+ Pythagoras borrowed his aversion to fish from Egypt. Plut. Symp. viii. 8.

Plutarch says, "the first month," which was Thoth. The 1st of Thoth coincided, at the time of the Roman conquest, with the 29th of August. Plut. de Is. s. vii. Vide Herodot ii. 37.

Herodot, ii. 37.

scrupulously adopted by Pythagoras, "did not," as I have already had occasion to observe*, "preclude their cultivation ;" and Diodorust expressly states, that some only abstained from them, as from others of the numerous pulse and vegetables which abounded in Egypt. Of these, lentils, peas, garlick, leeks, and onions were the most objectionable, and no priest was permitted to eat them under any pretence; but that the prohibition regarding them, as well as certain meats, was confined to the sacerdotal order, is evident from the statements of many ancient writers; and even swine were §, if we may believe Plutarch ||, not forbidden to the other Egyptians at all times: "for those who sacrifice a sow to Typho once a year, at the full moon, afterwards eat its flesh."

It is a remarkable fact that onions, as well as the first fruits of their lentils ¶, were admitted among the offerings placed upon the altars of the gods, together with gourds**, cakes, beef, goose, or wild fowl, grapes, figs, wine, and the head of the victim; and they were sometimes arranged in a hollow circular bunch, which, descending upon the table or altar, enveloped and served as a cover

In my Egypt and Thebes, p. 216.

+ Diod. i. 89.

Plut. s. viii. Diod. i. 81. Juv. sat. xv. "Porrum et cepe nefas violare ac frangere morsu."

On the day of the full moon, says Herodotus, the people eat part of the victim they have sacrificed to that deity, but on no other occasion do they taste the meat of swine. ii. 47.

Plut. de Is. s. viii.

They were offered in the month of Mesore (August). Plut. de Is.

s. lxviii.

** Cucurbita lagenaria, y, fructu longiore, eduli, of Linn. Arab. qarra toweel.