384 social evolution in Egyptpharaohs. Thebes rioted, and nomes withdrew their sup-
port in critical ventures. Nubia and the eastern empire
were lost to Egypt, and the people experienced no sense
of unity or destined powers.
The loss of FESTIVALSand rituals altered the social
fabric of Egypt in the same era. Even the cultic cere-
monies celebrated in this era could only mimic the splen-
dors of past rites. Cultic experiences were vital to the
Egyptians, who did not want to delve into the theological
or esoteric lore. Seeing the image of the god, marching
through temple courts and singing the popular hymns of
the day, was enough to inspire the average man or woman
on the Nile. HERIHORand other Amunite leaders began a
renaissance, but the dynasty could not sustain power.
The true renaissance came with the Libyans of the
Twenty-second Dynasty (945–712 B.C.E.). The Egyptians
for the most part accepted the rule of this foreign clan,
the descendants of the MESHWESH Libyans who had
fought for a place in the Nile Valley during the New
Kingdom era. SHOSHENQ I(r. 945–924 B.C.E.) appeared as
a new warrior pharaoh, expanding the nation’s realms. He
refurbished temples and restored a certain level of piety
in the land. At his death, however, the dynasty was splin-
tered by the Twenty-third (828–712 B.C.E.), Twenty-
fourth (724–712 B.C.E.), and Twenty-fifth (770–712
B.C.E.) Dynasties.
THE LATE PERIODThese doomed royal lines had limited authority and no
following among their fellow Egyptians who watched the
Nubians gain power. PIANKHI(r. 750–712 B.C.E.) pro-
claimed the Twenty-fifth Dynasty the bearer of Amun and
the restorer. He soon controlled all of Egypt, as the peo-
ple supported his religious revival and were subdued by
his barbaric cruelty. Those Egyptians who opposed him
and his Nubian forces ended up as slaves, a new policy in
the nation.
This Nubian line was interrupted by a brief occupa-
tion of the Nile Valley by the Assyrians, led by ESSARHAD-
DON. TAHARQA(r. 690–664 B.C.E.) fled to Nubia and then
fought to regain his throne. There was no massive upris-
ing of the Egyptians to aid him in his quest because the
battle had nothing to do with good versus evil or the
restoration of ma’at.The people understood that this was
a contest between Assyrians and Nubians, played out on
the banks of the Nile. The mayor of Thebes at the time,
MENTUEMHAT, represented his fellow countrymen as the
foreign armies swept across the land. A ranking priest of
Amun at Thebes and called “the Prince of the city,”
Mentuemhat watched events unfold but maintained his
routines and his obligations. He appeared so able, so
competent, that the Assyrians withdrew from Thebes,
leaving him in charge of the area.
Remarkably, no Egyptian rebellion arose to eject the
foreign occupiers. The population of that era did not pos-
sess the same spirit as their ancestors. They retreated,
instead, aware of the impact of alien intruders and yet
unmoved by the march of invading forces. A spirit of
renewed nationalism was developing in the nomes, how-
ever, and a cultured revival was evident in the far-flung
regions that did have direct contact with the political
seats of power. They equated all of the dynastic forces at
war within the land as enemies, the spawn of SET, and
sought peace and the old ways within their nomes.
This was a peculiar social reaction, but it was deeply
rooted in the traditions of Egypt. The native people
feared chaos, recognizing it as the root of destruction in
any human endeavor. The Egyptians appear to have had a
growing sense of the inevitable in this historical period.
Egypt was no longer safe, no longer protected by the
deserts or shielded by warrior pharaohs. The clans could
only protect their traditions and their spiritual lore by
defending their limited resources and domains.
The Twenty-sixth Dynasty at SAISoffered the nation a
shrewd royal line of administrators and militarily active
rulers. The Persians, led by CAMBYSES(r. 525–522 B.C.E.),
put an end to this native dynasty by taking control of
Egypt as the Twenty-seventh Dynasty (525–404 B.C.E.).
By 404 B.C.E., the Twenty-eighth Dynasty displayed the
only resistance force of the era. The Twenty-ninth
(393–380 B.C.E.) and Thirtieth (380–343 B.C.E.) Dynas-
ties followed, providing competent rulers but mandated
by realities that dragged Egypt into vast international
struggles. The people watched as the resources and
armies of the Nile were squandered in defense of foreign
treaties and alliances that offered Egypt little promise.
One ruler of the era, TEOS(r. 365–360 B.C.E.), robbed
Egypt’s temples to pay for his military campaigns beyond
the nation’s borders.
THE GRECO-ROMAN PERIOD
When the Persians returned in 343 B.C.E., the Egyptian
people offered no resistance. ARTAXERXES III OCHUSled a
large Persian force into the Nile Valley, and only one man,
KHABABASH, led a short-lived revolt. The arrival of
ALEXANDER III THE GREATin 332 B.C.E. brought joy to the
Egyptians, and they greeted him as a true liberator. The
Persians had been cruel taskmasters for the most part,
but they had also held Egypt’s historical glories in dis-
dain. This attitude had a chilling effect on the native
people. The artistic, architectural, and agricultural
achievements of Egypt drew such conquerors to the Nile,
but they arrived with alien attitudes and even contempt.
Egypt was also a conglomeration of peoples in that
era. Many groups had come to the land, and races min-
gled easily in all areas. The bureaucracy and the temples
continued to function with stability because the Egyp-
tians refused to surrender to chaos even during cruel
occupations. The pattern of enduring and protecting the
unseen traditions and spiritual modes of the past became
the paramount activity of men and women in all areas of
the land. Their ancestors had watched foreign armies