The all importance of the river to the country meets early and general
recognition. In a hymn[749] it is lauded as “the creator of all things
good”: solemn rituals from the earliest down to Mohammedan times
implored “a good Nile”: temples in its honour existed at Memphis,
Heliopolis, and Nilopolis: at Silsileh ceremonies and sacrifices,[750]
from time immemorial, welcomed its annual rise; magnificent festivals
were universal throughout the land.[751]
To Egypt, river or country, goes out the undying reverence of all
Anglers. Whether Egyptian or the Sumerian civilisation were the
older; which of the two have left the earlier signs of a written
language[752]; whether the Egyptian surpassed the Assyrian empire in
extent or magnificence—about all these points “disquisitions” (in
Walton’s word) have not ceased.
But to Egypt belongs the glory of holding in future and happy thrall
world-wide subjects, who salute, or rather should salute (had previous
writers not been reticent on the point) her (and not Assyria) as the
historical mistress and foundress of the art of Angling.
In my Assyrian and Jewish chapters I stress the remarkable absence,
despite the close and long connections of these nations with the land
of the Nile, of anything graven or written which indicates knowledge of
the Rod. In Egypt two instances of Angling are depicted: the first[753]
probably (to judge by his place on the register) by a servant or
fishing-ghillie as early as _c._ 2000 B.C., the second by a magnate
some 600 years later.[754]
The argument of silence—because a thing is not depicted or mentioned
it therefore never existed—often pushes itself unjustifiably. May
not absence of the Rod be an instance? Had Mesopotamia (it may be
further urged) been endowed with the atmospherical dryness of Egypt
and the consequent preservative qualities of its soil instead of a
widely-spread marsh-engendered humidity, would not scenes of Angling
there probably meet our eyes? Humidity may account for great losses in
Mesopotamia, but its toll in the Delta of Egypt was also heavy. This
large area has yielded, compared with the Upper Kingdom, inappreciable
returns.
But even if the country of the Two Rivers had possessed the same
climatic conditions as the Upper Kingdom, it could never have become to
the same extent the historical storehouse for posterity of the works
and records of ancient Man.
Difference in religious belief, for one thing, precluded. The
Sumerians, the first settlers recognised by history in the plains
of Shinar, conceived (as did their successors the Babylonians and
Assyrians) the next world to be a forbidding place of darkness and dust
beneath the earth, to which all, both good and bad, descended. Hence
burial under the court of a house or the floor of a room, often without
any tomb or coffin, or much equipment for the life beyond the grave,
was sufficient.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account