EGYPT. 700 EGYPT. exception of the Crown domains, in the hands of a limited number of nol>le families. Neither at this time nor at any subsequent period is tUere any trace of a free jwasantry. Throughout all ancient Egj-ptian history the agricultural laborer was a serf, and the condition of his modern rep- resentative, the Egyptian fellah, is hardly better. The monuments of the older jieriod, erected without exception by wealthy nobles, have little to say in regard to the existence of a middle class; but that such a class exist cit can hardly be doubted. The splendid creations of the art and architecture of the Fourth and Fifth djTias- tics postulate the exi-tencc of a class of artists and artisans who could plan and carry out such works. While textile fabrics might be produced by the peasant women on large estates, other manufactures required the existence of a manu- facturing class. And finally, in the cities at least, there must have been merchants who han- dled the produce of the soil and articles of neces- sity and of luxury. Under the New Empire the agrarian conditions wei-e very dill'erent. The old noble families were exterminated or impoverished in the Hyksos wars, their lands came into the ])Ossession of the Crown, and large estates even- tually fell to the share of the temples. The agricultural serfs merely changed masters, and were oppressed pretty much as before; but the new conditions favored the rise of the middle class, who now came into much gieater promi- nence, and even held important offices in the Government and in the hierarchy. The Greek accounts of the division of the people into priests, warriors, and several other classes, each con- taining a number of subdivisions, must not be taken too literally, and are far from proving that castes like those in India existed. It seems to be true that all occupations were highly spe- cialized, and thus divided into a nimiber of branches; it is also true that Egyptian conser- vatism very frequently caused a son to adopt his father's occupation. But there was never any restriction in regard to the choice of an occupa- tion or against the intermarriage of classes, ex- cept in so far as siich matters were affected by those social prejudices which have existed at all times among all peoples. At the head of the whole social organization stood, of course, the King, who was not merely the supreme ruler, but the direct descendant of the sun-god RC and therefore entitled to divine honors. After his death he was worshiped as a god. His principal wife, the Queen, was of royal birth or descent, and not infrequently the sister of her husband. Such a marriage was re- garded by the E.g}-i)tians as highly advantageous, since the" issue inherited a double portion of the divine blood of Re. The Queen shared in all the honors of her husband, and, if she survived him, still possessed high inllucnee at Court, especially if she were the mother of his successor. From motives of policy, Egyptian kings often married foreign princesses; but these ladies never stood upon the same footing as the Queen; they were all subordinate wives, but one step higher than the other ladies of the harem. In the time of the Eighteenth Dynasty an Asiatic prince sent, as a gift for the harem of Amenophis III., his eldest daughter, accompanied by three hundred and seventeen beautiful damsels. It is therefore not surprising that the Egyptian kings should have a large posterity. Kameses II. is said to have had two hundred children, and of these, one hun- dred and eleven sons and lifty-nine daughters are mentioned in the inscriptions of their father. At the C'cuirt great state and ceremony were main- tained, and when the King appeared in public on ceremonial occasions he was attended by an army of courtiers, priests, bearers of the royal insignia, fan-bearers, ollicers of the household, and many other ollicials of various grades. Under the Old and Middle Empires the wealth and power were in the hands of the nobles. The heads of the great families were the nomarchs, who posses.sed large landed estates, and, with their relatives, filled all the higher offices of Court and State. In the time of the Fourth and Fifth dynasties, the nomarchs seem to have pre- ferred the neighborhood of the Court ; but under the feudal system of the Middle Empire they usu- ally resided on their estates, where they lived in princely style. In addition to his i)rivate prop- erty, the ruling nomarch enjoyed tlic revenue of the "liouse of the prince' which means the emolu- ments attached to his office arising from certain taxes and other sources of income. lie was also, by right of birth, a memlwr of the priestly col- lege of the local temple, and was usually its head. Under the New Empire, though most of the old titles were retained, the offices were chief- ly filled by priests and military officers. The nomarchs were no longer feudal princes, but Government officials who cotild be appointed or removed at the pleasure of the King or his ad- visers. Before the time of the New Empire, most of the nobles and high officers of State bore priest- ly titles and exercised priestly functi<ins. They monopolized, in fact, all the high offices of the priesthood, although it is probable that in most eases their duties were light and that they were only required to officiate upon certain stated occasions. The regular religious services were carried on by lower orders of priests, whose emoluments were not large and who seem to have occupied rather a subordinate ])osition in the social organization. In addition, there were brotherhoods of so-called 'hour |)ricsts,' com- posed of pi(ms laymen, each of whoni devoted a portion of his time to the tenqde service, while the whole body took part on certain special oc- casions. Tlicse brotherhoods disappear under the iliddle Empire. The great wealth lavislicd u])on the temples by the monarchs of the Eighteenth and subsequent dynasties brought about a very different state of affairs. The temples became great corporations, possessing immense wealth and large landed estates administered by their own officials and worked by their own serfs. The power wielded by the heads of these religious houses was very great, and the position of the whole prieslhooil was elevated in a marked degree. Apart from the material inlhunce given them by their wealth and political power, the priests were the exclu- sive custodians of the higher learning, and eser- cised a profound influence upon the minds of the superstitious Egyptians, by whom they were credited with the possession of magical power. The priests were divided into a number of classes, according to their several functions; all classes
