"The

Clarke and his friends at their arrival, and, after congratulating them upon the successes of the British army, and proffering every assistance in their power to expedite the entry of the British into their city, one of those gentlemen asked Dr Clarke, if the commander-in-chief (Lord Hutchinson) knew that the French possessed the Tomb of Alexander?-"We desired them," says Dr Clarke, "to describe it; upon which they said that it was of one entire and beautiful green stone, shaped like a cistern, and taken from the mosque of St Athanasius; that among the inhabitants this cistern had always borne the name of Alexander's Tomb. Upon further conversation, it was evident that this could be no other than the identical monument to which our instructions from Cairo referred." The French had committed the most unwarrantable outrages to obtain it: they had guaranteed to the Moslems the most inviolable possession of their sanctuaries, but their treaties were infringed. mosque of St Athanasius," says Dr Clarke, "was forcibly entered by a party of their pioneers with battle-axes and hammers, and the Tomb of Iscander, founder of the city,' was borne away amidst the howling and lamentations of its votaries." Dr Clarke then relates how he got possession of this relic of antiquity. "We were told that it was in the hold of an hospital ship, named La Cause, in the inner harbour; and being provided with a boat, we there found it half filled with filth, and covered with rags of the sick people on board. It proved to be an immense monolithal sarcophagus, or, according to the name borrowed from the Greeks, a soros (or sacred place), converted in ages long posterior to its formation into a cistern, according to a custom which has been universal in the East, wherever such receptacles of the dead have been discovered. It was brought to England, and deposited in the British Museum; but the fact of its having been the tomb of Alexander the Great has been much disputed, and excited considerable controversy at the time."

Alexandria, like other ancient cities in modern times, sunk into decay, and of little importance, was once the metropolis of the kings of Egypt, and long the grand emporium of commerce and wealth. The ancient city stood about twelve miles from the Canopic branch of the Nile, with which river it was connected by a canal, and thus participated in the benefits of the periodical inundations. The Lake Mareotis bathed its walls on the south, and the Mediterranean on the north. Its circumference, including the suburbs, according to Pliny, was about fifteen miles. One great street, running directly north and south, thus allowing free passage to the northern wind, which alone conveys refreshing coolness to Egypt, was 2000 feet wide, and must have excelled any thing of the kind in the world. It began at the Gate of the Sea on the north, and terminated at the Gate of Canopus on the south. This magnificent street was intersected or crossed by another of the same width, which at their junction formed a grand square, half a league, or a mile and a half, in circumference; and from the centre of this great square the two Gates were seen at once, and the vessels arriving both south and north, with the treasures of foreign merchandize and the wealth of distant climes. In these two streets stood various palaces, temples, and public buildings, constructed of marble and porphyry, and those far-famed obelisks, many of which are now adorning the metropolis of the world. The palace and gardens of the Ptolemys, the first of whom, Ptolemy Soter, one of Alexander's generals, began a new dynasty of Egyptian kings, were without the walls, stretching along the shores of the Mediterranean beyond a promontory called Lectreos, and occupied a space equivalent to a fourth part of the city. Each of the Ptolemys who succeeded to the Egyptian throne added to those magnificent buildings and gardens; and within their enclosures were the Museum, an Academy or University, if it may be called so, a stately temple in which the body of Alexander was deposited, and groves and

buildings worthy of powerful sovereigns and an enlightened people. The other palaces, temples, theatres, and buildings, with which Alexandria and its suburbs were adorned, were most numerous and splendid. But the great glory of Alexandria was its magnificent harbour, situated in a deep and secure bay of the Mediterranean Sea. A neck of land, about a mile in length, stretched from the continent to the Isle of Pharos, opposite the city. This neck of land divided the great harbour into two that division towards the north being styled the Great Port, and the other Eunostos, or the Safe Return. A wall, drawn from the island to the rock on which the Pharos, or Light-House, was built, preserved the former port from the westerly winds. "In the great harbour," says a recent writer, proceeding on Strabo's account, "was the little island of Anti-Rhodes, where stood a theatre and a royal place of residence. Within the harbour of Eunostos was a smaller one, called Kibotos, dug by the hand of man, which communicated with Lake Mareotis by a canal. Between this canal and the palace was the admirable temple of Serapis, and that of Neptune, near the great place where the market was held. Alexandria extended likewise along the northern banks of the lake. Its eastern part presented to view the Gymnasium, with its porticoes of more than 600 feet long, supported by several rows of marble pillars. Without the Gate of Canopus was a spacious circus for the chariot races. Beyond that, the suburb of Nicopolis ran along the sea-shore, and seemed a second Alexandria. A superb amphitheatre was built there, with a raceground for the celebration of the Quinquinnalia." The celebrated light-house or watch-tower of Pharos, built on the isle of that name, and reckoned one of the Seven Wonders of the world, was begun in the reign of Ptolemy Soter, and finished in the first year of the reign of Ptolemy II. surnamed Philadelphus, his son, who also that year joined the islet of Pharos, seven furlongs distant from the continent, by a causeway. This was

the work of Dexiphanes, a celebrated architect, whose son Sostratus, at the same time, completed the tower. That tower or light-house was an immense square building of white marble, on the top of which fires were constantly kept burning for the direction of mariners. It contained several storeys, adorned with columns, balustrades, and galleries, to which the architect had contrived to fasten artificial looking-glasses, that vessels at a distance might be descried. The building cost 800 talents, which in Attic money would amount to £165,000; if Alexandrian, to double that sum.

As it does not fall within the plan of the present work to enter minutely into the history of this famous city, at one time second only to Rome itself for greatness and beauty, we merely mention that the same year in which the Pharos was completed, Ptolemy Philadelphus also brought the image of the god Serapis from Pontus to Alexandria. It was erected in a suburb of the city, and a magnificent temple erected, called Serapeum, which, according to Ammianus Marcellinus, was only inferior to the Capitol at Rome. Within the precincts of this temple was the famous Alexandrian Library, founded by Ptolemy Soter for the use of the Academy or Museum he had instituted in the city. Ptolemy Philadelphus, his successor, made so many additions to it, that at his death it had increased to one hundred thousand volumes. The method by which those books or manuscript volumes were collected was, to seize all the books which were brought by the Greeks and other foreigners into Egypt, and send them to the Academy or Museum, where they were transcribed by persons employed for that purpose, and those transcripts were given to the proprietors, but the originals were retained in the Library. Ptolemy Euergetes borrowed the works of Sophocles, Euripides, and Æschylus, from the Athenians, but he returned only copies of them, transcribed in a most beautiful manner, depositing the originals in his own library, at the same time presenting the Athen

ians with fifteen talents, equivalent to £150,000, for the exchange. As the Museum or Academy was first in that quarter of the city called Brucheon, near the royal palace, the Library was also deposited there; but when the manuscripts amounted to 400,000 volumes, another library was added within the Serapeum, or temple of the god Serapis, already alluded to, as a branch of the original Library. The books lodged in this other branch of the Alexandrian Library in course of time amounted to 300,000 volumes, which, in addition to the 400,000 contained in the library at the Museum, amounted in all to 700,000 volumes, which the royal Library of the Ptolemys was said to contain. When Julius Cæsar attacked Alexandria, in his Egyptian wars, that division of the Library in the suburb Brucheon was accidentally burnt, and the 400,000 volumes it contained were consumed; but the library in the temple of Serapeum was preserved. Queen Cleopatra also deposited in it 200,000 volumes of the Pergamean Library, which had been presented to her by Mark Antony. These, and other additions from time to time, made the Serapean library more considerable than the former, and amply repaired the losses of the Brucheon; and though it was often afterwards plundered, it was continually restored, and filled with the same number of books. In this state it continued for centuries, long after Egypt had passed from the sceptre of the Ptolemys, who swayed it for 293 years, of great fame and use, till about the middle of the sixth century of the Christian era, when Alexandria was stormed by Amrou Ebn al Aas, the gen. eral of the Caliph Omar, at the head of the Saracens. At that period, there resided in the city a famous Peripatetic philosopher and grammarian named John Philoponus, who, apprehensive of the fate of the Library, from the well known disposition of the Saracens, and being in high favour with Amrou, ventured to request the preservation of the Library. The Saracen general, in whose eyes such

Am

a request was of trivial importance, was inclined to accede to his wishes. rou's notions of integrity and honour, however, induced him to write to the Caliph Omar on the subject. The answer of this Saracen prince is well known, and has been often quoted: “If these writings of the Greeks agree with the Koran, or book of God, they are useless, and need not be preserved; if they disagree, they are pernicious, and ought to be destroyed." Nevertheless the above story is disputed by several writers, and denied by Gibbon, the historian, who has placed his own simple negative against the concurrent testimony of antiquity; but whether it be true or not, it may be questioned if the loss to learning has been so great as is represented by some writers, who have enthusiastically deplored the destruction of those works of antiquity; for we must recollect that books in those early times differed greatly in their construction and importance from those in our own. Although much interesting information was undoubtedly lost by the stern decree of the Arabian Caliph, we may conclude that most of what is really valuable has been transmitted to us by other channels. The sentence issued by Omar was obeyed. The volumes of the Alexandrian Library were distributed as fuel to the baths in the city, of which there were no fewer than 4000. Among the valuable books then destroyed were a complete copy of the Old Testament, the works of all the ancient poets, historians, and philosophers, and many others now unknown, the consuming of which occupied more than six months.

Alexandria, when in its glory, was extremely populous. Diodorus Siculus relates that in his time, forty-four years before Christ, it contained 300,000 free inhabitants, and if, as has been well conjectured, the slaves were as numerous, the whole population would then amount to 600,000. But, like other crowded cities, it was often the scene of tyrannical massacres. About 140 years before the Christian era it was almost depopulated by Ptolemy Physcon, who, without any

provocation, gave liberty to his soldiers to murder the inhabitants. Some time afterwards that tyrant ordered a second massacre of all the young men of the city, simply because they complained of his odious conduct. Alexandria did not suffer much from Julius Cæsar, if we except the burning of the library in the Brucheon, which was accidentally occasioned by some vessels having caught fire belonging to the Egyptian fleet, and approaching too near the houses of that district of the city. The Emperor Caligula was greatly inclined to favour the Alexandrians, because they were ready to confer upon him divine honours; and he at one time, A.D. 40, had an intention of massacring the senators and knights of Rome, and removing to Alexandria. At that period the Jews, of whom there were upwards of one million throughout Egypt, were numerous in Alexandria, and they occupied two-fifths of the city. They had been of such service to Julius Cæsar, that, before he left Alexandria, he confirmed all their privileges, and caused his decree to be engraved on a brass tablet. Whether the Jews took advantage of this decree, and irritated the citizens by their imprudent conduct, or whether the citizens were stimulated by jealousy, a terrible massacre of them took place, A.D. 67. Upwards of 50,000 Jews were put to the sword; their houses and shops were plundered; they were declared strangers in Alexandria; those who escaped were compelled to wander about the fields or by the sea-shore,, without shelter or subsistence. When the Emperor Adrian visited Egypt, A.D. 141, he found the city of Alexandria beginning to decay. He disliked the manners of the Egyptians, and of the Alexandrians in particular; nevertheless, he granted them many favours, confirmed them in all their privileges, and repaired many of their public and private buildings. They thanked him when he was present, but as soon as he departed, they repaid him by bitter lampoons and satires. This great man was duly sensible of their conduct,

but, like a philosopher, he disdained to resent it. "The city of Alexandria," he says, "is rich and powerful, with great trade, which produces plenty. No one is idle there; some blow glass, others make paper; many are employed about linen, and making of clothes; all have some trade; but all, whether Jews or Christians, acknowledge only one deity-their own interest. I wish that this city, the first of all Egypt for grandeur and riches, had better inhabitants. Nothing equals their ingratitude. I have granted them every thing they could desire; I have restored their ancient privileges; I have given them new ones: in consequence of this, they were grateful to me when I was present, but I had scarcely turned my back, when they insolently attacked my son Verus; and I believe you know what they have said of Antoninus." They did not so easily escape one of Adrian's successors, the Emperor Caracalla. When he visited the city, A.D. 215, he also became the subject of their severe satires, and, exasperated at the liberty they had assumed, he ordered a general massacre of the inhabitants by his guards, which continued two days. A dreadful carnage was the consequence, and few of the inhabitants were spared. He deprived them of their privileges, suppressed the Academy, ordered all strangers to depart, and built up the streets with walls, guarded by his troops. This tyrant was soon afterwards slain, and Alexandria recovered its former glory, but only to endure new calamities. Under the reigns of Gallienus and Dioclesian, vast numbers of the Alexandrians were slain, the city wasted and plundered by contentions and sieges. Still it recovered, and we find the Emperor Constantine employing the Alexandrian fleet in the beginning of the fourth century, for the purpose of conveying corn from that city to Constantinople, his new city, which he then termed New Rome. In A.D. 365, a terrible earthquake shook the greater part of the Roman Empire; and on that occasion 50,000 Alexandrians lost their lives by a fearful inundation

of the city caused by that convulsion of nature. At length, after experiencing a variety of vicissitudes unnecessary to be detailed in the present work, and after having been successively under the Ptolemys, and the Roman and Greek Emperors, Egypt was overrun by the Saracens, and Amrou advanced against Alexandria, A.D. 639. After

a siege of fourteen months, in which he lost 23,000 men, Amrou took the city by storm, and planted the standard of Mahomet on its walls, Dec. 22, A.D. 640. Irritated at the opposition he had encountered, a general massacre of the citizens took place; and a city which had been the emporium of commerce and wealth for upwards of a thousand years was given up to plunder. Astonished at his conquest, Amrou thus wrote to the Caliph Omar:-"I have taken the city of the west. It is of immense extent. I cannot describe to you how many wonders it contains. There are 4000 palaces, 4000 baths, 12,000 dealers in fresh oil, 12,000 gardeners, 40,000 Jews who pay tribute, 400 theatres or places of amusement."

It would be tedious and unnecessary to follow the vicissitudes of Alexandria farther in its declension and fall. Although the revolutions which happened in the government of Egypt, after that country became subject to the Mahometans, ma ́terially affected this great city, yet the excellence of its port, and the advantages resulting from the East India trade to whomsoever were masters of Egypt, preserved it from total destruction. In the 13th century, when the elegancies and luxuries of life were beginning to be appreciated in Europe, Alexandria exhibited symptoms of reviving prosperity, without in the least approaching to its former state of magnificence. But after Egypt fell under the dominion of the Turks, their withering government checked its adventurous spirit, and the discovery of the passage to India round the Cape of Good Hope by the Portuguese in 1449, annihilated its importance as the great emporium of commerce, and from that period it rapidly declined.

Christianity was preached in Alexandria in the apostolic times, when it was constituted by the Apostles a bishopric and a patriarchate. The founder of the bishopric is universally acknowledged to have been St Mark the Evangelist. The bishop of Alexandria, long before popery corrupted the government and discipline of the Christian church, was one of the four chief patriarchs or bishops of the Catholic Apostolic Church who presided in the councils of bishops; and all the churches in Africa, especially in its Eastern division, were under his jurisdiction. The patriarchs of Alexandria had also the privilege of consecrating the abuma, or chief bishop of the Abyssinian church. Some illustrious names in the annals of the church

are found among the bishops of Alexandria, such as Clemens, Origen, St Athanasius, and others who flourished here. The Arian heresy, which denies the divinity of our Saviour, and maintains him to be merely the highest of created beings, was first broached by Arius, a presbyter in the diocese, and, according to some writers, a native of Alexandria. This heresy, which greatly ravaged the church in the early ages, and which has since prevailed to a considerable extent throughout the Christian world, is now more generally known by the name of Unitarianism or Socinianism; but its supporters have been divided into various parties and sects among themselves. Alexandria still continues a bishopric and patriarchate in the Greek church, but the great majority of its modern inhabitants are Mahometans. This city, according to tradition, is famous as the place where the Septuagint version of the Old Testament was completed. The following story is credited by some writers, and disputed by others, and the reader may receive it in any manner he pleases. Josephus-and those who follow him in his narrative, especially Aristeas, maintain the correctness of his accountrelates, that Ptolemy Philadelphus, son of Ptolemy I. surnamed Soter, while collecting his library, sent for an authentic