[ocr errors][merged small]

Garrisons were left in Alexandria (where Kleber was made governor), Rosetta and Aboukirrand the army, now 30,000 strong, inarched in 5 divisions towards Cairo, the capital of Egypt. Not far from it, near the pyramids of Gizeh, a decisive battle was fought. Murad Bey had entrenched himself there, with about 20,000 Mameluke infantry, several thousand Mameluke cavalry, and 40 pieces of cannon. The well-directed fire of the French, and the resolution with which they used their bayonets, frustrated all the attacks of the Mamelukes, who fled to the contiguous deserts, as soon as the camp and village of Embabey were taken by storm. AH the cannon and 400 camels fell into the hands of the French; 3000 of the enemy lay dead on the field; the French lost few men in comparison. This happened on the 23d, and Bonaparte entered Cairo on the 24th; for Ibrahim Bey, who was to cover it, after the unfortunate Issue of the battle of the pyramids, was driven by Desaix over the deserts to Upper Egypt. Napoleon established a government here, consisting of seven members, summoned the sheiks, mollas and sheriffs, who promised to acknowledge the French republic, and, on his side, pledged himself to respect the Mohammedan religion, and the property of the inhabitants. July 25, general Bonaparte left Cairo to pursue the Mamelukes, and, after many combats with them, returned to the capital, leaving Regnier as commandant of the province of Charquich. On his return to Cairo, an aid of Kleber brought him the news of the defeat of the French fleet at Aboukir (q. v.) by Nelson. The defeat was in part owing to the negligence of admiral Brueys and vice-admiral Villeneuve, who allowed themselves to be surprised, when the whole fleet was taking in water, and not ready for battle, and who have always been said to have acted against the express orders of general Bonaparte, who had directed them to enter the harbor of Alexandria, or to sail for Corfu, before he left the shore to penetrate into the country. Bourienne, however, in his Mtmoires (Paris, 1829), asserts that Bonaparte never gave such orders.* General Bonaparte saw his communication with France threatened, and himself exposed to the greatest of all enemies, want Exasperated by the transformation of so important a dependency as Egypt into a French

* Bonaparte wrote an affectionate letter to the widow of admiral Brueys, who had been killed in the battle of Aboukir, gave her a pension after he became consul, and educated her sons.

province, the Porte declared war against France, September 2, 1798, and menaced an attack from the side of Asia. The inhabitants of Cairo rebelled. Many of the French, especially the savants, artists and mechanics, were murdered; buty 'after a bloody conflict in the city, September 23 and 25, the insurgents, who had fled to the principal mosque, were compelled to surrender unconditionally. After the restoration of quiet, Bonaparte, having organized a system of government for Egypt, on French principles, marched, February 27, 1799, with about 18,000 men, from Cairo to Syria, took the fort of El-Arish, in the desert, then Jaffa, and, having conquered the inhabitants of Naplous, at Zeta, procured there a supply of provisions, which he greatly needed, in order to bo able to undertake the siege of St. Jean d'Acre, and was again victorious at Jafet. In the mean while, the English, who had appeared before St. Jean d'Acre under sir Sidney Smith, had succeeded in reinforcing the Turkish garrison of this place with several hundred infantry and artillery, and introducing ammunition. This enabled the Turks to repel several assaults, and, notwithstanding the most violent fire from the French batteries, to sustain the attack so long, that Bonaparte was obliged to raise the siege. During this siege, general Bonaparte marched, with 25,000 men, towards the plain of Fiuli, where 40,000 of the enemy had assembled. On the 16th and 17th of April, they were beaten in the memorable battle of mount Tabor, near the Jordan. It was on the retreat from St. Jean d'Acre, that the Turkish prisoners were said to have been put to death at Jaffa, and the French soldiers, sick of the plague in the hospitals, poisoned. (For some remarks on this subject, see the article Jaffa.) A third of the army had become the victims of war and the plague. After a fatiguing march of 26 days, the troops arrived at Cairo. A Turkish fleet soon after landed ^OOO1 men at Aboukir, who took the fort there. Bonaparte quickly led his best troops thither, stationed himself near the fountain between Alexandria and Aboukir, and offered battle to the Turks, July 25. Mustapha Pacha, with all his retinue and artillery, was taken; 2000 Turks perished in the waves or in battle, and the remainder of the army, which had thrown itself into the fort of Aboukir, was compelled to surrender unconditionally Aug. 2. By this victory, general Bonaparte's power in Egypt was again confirmed. At this period, the French had experienced consid427


erable reverses in Europe. The battle of the Trebia had been lost, the French had evacuated the Genoese territory, Massena, in Switzerland, was in great danger. General Bonaparte saw the danger of his country, and the loss of his conquests in Italy, and resolved to return, having from the beginning permission to do so whenever he chose. But how could he have known the state of things in Europe? It has been often asserted, that he obtained his information from English papers, which the French officers had received from the English, when engaged in the exchange of prisoners. But would the general have undertaken so important a step merely on the authority of the English papers, which were known to contain many misrepresentations? The fact is, that his brother Joseph sent a Greek of Cephalonia, named Bombachi, to induce him to return. The order which gave the command to Kleber was dated August 22, 1799, and contained wise directions respecting the army and country. The instructions contain two keys of ciphers, one to be used in com mum cations to the directory, and the other in those made to himself. The conclusion, also, shows, that it did not escape him how necessary it might become, in some future time, to have die army personally attached to him. By the time his departure was known to the army, Bonaparte's frigate had weighed anchor. August 23, he left Aboukir in the Muiron, a Venetian vessel, commanded by rear-admiral Gantheaume. The situation of the troops under Kleber's command became more critical every day. General Verdier repelled a new disembarkation of the Turks, in November, 1799; but, for an army that could not be recruited, the smallest loss was serious. The advices from Europe were not encouraging; and, at this juncture, Kleber, having been informed that the grand vizier was marching from Syria to Egypt, with a large army, concluded, January 24, 1800, the treaty of El-Arish, with the vizier and sir Sidney Smith. By this treaty it was provided, that a truce should be granted to the French for three months, till the ratification of the treaty, when they should evacuate Egypt But the letter of Kleber to the directory, in which he set forth the miserable state of the army, and urged the ratification of the treaty, fell into the hands of the English admiral Keith, and was sent to England. It was now demanded that the whole French army should be made prisoners of war.

Kleber immediately resumed his arms, and defeated the vizier at Heliopolis, March 18, exacted a tax for the payment of his soldiers, formed new regiments of the Copts and Greeks, gave security to the coasts, and founded magazines. In the midst of his untiring activity, he was murdered in Cairo by a Turk, June 14, and the command devolved on Abdallah Menou. Meantime the English government had resolved to wrest Egypt from the French. March 1, the English fleet arrived before Alexandria, and, on the 13th, the disembarkation was accomplished at Aboukir. The French, about 4000 men strong, gave battle on the next day, but were forced to retire. Aboukir surrendered on the 18th, and the English entrenched themselves there. On the 21st, Menou commenced an attack, with 10,000 men, was beaten, and threw himself into Alexandria. But the English general Abercrombie was mortally wounded, and died on the 28th; Hutchinson succeeded him in the command. On the 28th, reinforcements were brought by a Turkish fleet, and the vizier was now approaching from Syria. On the 19di of April, Rosetta surrendered to the combined forces of the English and Turks. A French corps of 4000 men was defeated at Ramanieh, by 8000 English and 6000 Turks. 5000 French were obliged to retreat, at Elmenayer, May 16, by the vizier, who was pressing forward to Cairo, with 20,000 men; and the whole French army was now blocked up in Cairo and Alexandria. June 20, the siege of Cairo was formally commenced. There were but 7000 men to defend the city* against 40,000. It capitulated, June 27, to the English and Turks, on condition that general Belliard and his troops should evacuate the city and country, should be transported to France at the expense of England, and that the native Egyptiaus should be permitted to accompany him. August 17, they embarked at Rosetta, and arrived at Toulon in September, 1801, about 13,000 in number, of whom hardly 4000 were armed. General Menou still remained in Alexandria, Admiral Gantheaume had sailed, before Belliard's arrival, with several ships of the line, and from 3 to 4000 troops, from France, and arrived before Alexandria, but was compelled to hasten back to Toulon, with a loss of 4 corvettes. On the other hand, the English had received 5000 fresh troops from England, and now attacked Alexandria. They were already masters of castle Marabout, when Menou requested a truce; to which 428



he was impelled by a want of provisions, and a new reinforcement which had joined the British, consisting of 6000 men under general Baird, from the East Indies. Menou capitulated September 2. Alexandria, with all the artillery and ammunition, 6 French ships of war, and many merchantmen, together with all the Arabian manuscripts, all the maps of Egypt, and other collections made for the French republic, were given up. The French army was transported, with its arms and baggage, to a French harbor, which they reached at the end of November. The garrison of Alexandria had comprised above 8000 soldiers, and 1307 marines. Three years and six months had elapsed since the first embarkation at Toulon. Four weeks after the loss of Egypt, the preliminaries of peace were signed at London, October 1, 1801.*—This expedition to the valley of the Nile, as far as Philse, on the frontiers of Nubia—the island which served as the extreme frontier post of the Roman empire in the south (a German, named Waldeck, however, pretends to have discovered a pillar, erected by Vespasian's warriors, at the foot of the 'Mountains of the Moon)—was attended with important consequences for the higher interests of humanity; because science and art, in this expedition, went hand in hand with war. Those who say that Napoleon was not a friend to the arts and sciences will find it difficult to name any expedition, in which such ample provision was made for their advancement. These campaigns revealed to scientific Europe treasures which had been too long concealed by tyranny and barbarism. The ancient JJendcrah, Thebes, Latopolis and Edfu were disclosed, with their temples, palaces, ruins, obelisks and catacombs, to the view of the learned men who accompanied the expedition to Egypt. Secrets which neither Herodotus, Sirabo nor Diodorus had been able entirely to penetrate, and

* In R. R. Maddcn's Travels in Egypt, Nubia, Turkey and Palestine, in the years 1821, 25, 26' and 27, London, 1829, reprinted in Philadelphia, it is stated, that the French were much regretted by the Egyptians, and extolled as benefactors } that, "for the short period they remained, they left manifold traces of amelioration 5" and that, if they could have established their power, Egypt would now be comparativelv civilized. This reminds us of the regret which most intelligent Spaniards now express at the failure of the French to establish their power in Spain; and we have heard Hessians lament the loss of many institutions established in the kingdom of Westphalia, though nobody can deny that Jerome's government was defective in a high degree.

which had remained closely hidden from the view of all modern travellers, were now unfolded. The so long misunderstood Egyptian architecture was now displayed in all its grandeur; and the veil was raised, which had formerly covered a great portion of the history, the manners, the science and geography of this country. In one and the same spirit, this people inscribed on the walls ot its palaces, temples and sepulchres, the images of its gods and kings, the forms of its celestial observations, of its sacred usages and domestic life. These monuments of stone are the oldest traces of the human mind, showing to us the customs of nations in the ages reputed fabulous. The study of antiquities and legislation, as well as the history of Egypt, teaches anew the great truth, that all progress in the arts and sciences has an intimate connexion with the spirit of the political constitution and government of a country, and the necessity of a careful observance of justice and right. We now know, that, of all civilized nations, the Egyptians were the first to observe the course of the stars; since Europe has become acquainted, by means of the French, with the sculpture and architecture in which the Egyptians imbodied in stone their astronomical knowledge. Thus the zodiac of Denderah (see Dcndcrah), now in Paris, and other monuments, show the progress which this people had made in astronomy. Previously, no one suspected the existence of the store of papyrus manuscripts, which were found in the catacombs of Thebes. The rich decorations of these catacombs, including paintings almost uninjured by time, give us a glimpse of the habits and domestic life of the generation by whom they were built; and the discovery of the famous stone of llosetta has done much towards affording the longdesired clue to the hieroglyphics. (See Spohn.) The monuments of Egypt witnessed the rise and fall of Tyre, Carthage, Athens and Rome, and yet exist. When Plato lived, they were venerable for their antiquity, and will command the admiration of future generations, when, perhaps, every trace of our cities shall have vanished. In the Egyptian nation, every thing that concerned religion and government partook of the character of eternity, in a climate where all animal and vegetable life rises speedily to perfection, and as speedily decays. The permanence of the institutions of the country was certainly influenced by the sight of the public monuments, on which time had tried its cor

[merged small][ocr errors]

roding power in vain. While beholding these stupendous works, we reflect with awe on the generations that have passed away since they arose, and the ages that must elapse before the pyramids shall bow their heads to the dust. Every thing that zeal in the cause of science, combined with the most extensive knowledge, has been able to collect, in a land rich as Egypt is in monuments of every kind, and in the rarest curiosities, is comprised in a work, compiled at the cost of the French government, by tiie committee for Egyptian antiquities. This work corresponds* in the grandeur of its proportions, to the edifices which it describes. The Description de VEgypte, ou Recueil des Observations et des Recherches pendant VExpidition de VArmee FranQaise, &5 vols., with more than 900 engravings and 3000 sketches (the last number appeared in 1826), contains all the transactions of the institute of Cairo. The first of the three great divisions contains the antiquitiesr the second the modern condition, and the third the natural history of Egypt. In compliance with the wishes of Napoleon, only a few copies were printed. Of these, a small number were sent to foreign courts. None of the essays were received till after a previous examination by a committee consisting of the savants and artists who had accompanied the army under Bonaparte to Egypt. Among these were Bcrthollet, Costar, Degenettes, Fourier, Girard, Monge, Conte and Laurent. The place of the two last, who died during the progress of the work, was supplied by Jomard and Jallois, to whom were afterwards added DelilJe and Devilliers. Louis XVIII and Charles X caused the publication of this valuable work to be continued, and, in 1821, Panckoucke, a bookseller in Paris, was permitted to undertake a new edition, and make use of the valuable copperplates of the former edition. Jacotin's splendid map of Egypt, constructed by the French engineers on the spot, is annexed to the Atlas of Egypt. The discoveries of Champollion (q. v.), and the prevalent zeal for investigating the "country of wonders," may be said to have had their origin in the French expedition to Egypt. The chapter on this expedition, in sir Walter Scott's Life of Napoleon Bonaparte, is very deficient and incorrect. The account of this expedition and of the motives which prompted it, given in the third and eighth chapters of the second volume of Buehholz's Geschichte Napoleon Bonaparte^ s (History of N. Bonaparte)y

Berlin, 1829,3 vols,, is better. See also the memoirs of the duke of Rovigo (Savary). There has been published, quite recently, the first livraison of VHistoire scientifique et militaire de ^Expedition Frangaise en Egypte (Paris, 1830), under the direction of X. B. Saintine, with an atlas, preceded by a history of Egypt from the earliest times, and with an account of the administration of Ali Pacha, and likewise Campagne d'Egypte, suite de VHistoire de France, par Anquetil, 3d vol. by F. Fayot, Paris, 1830.

Egyptian Mythology. (See Cemetery, CJiaron, and Hieroglyphics.)

Ehrenbreitstein; an important fortress, on a rock upon the Rhine, opposite Coblentz, in the former archbishopric of Treves. The French continued to blockade it in 1798 and 1799, during the negotiations for peace, till at length it was obliged to surrender for want of provisions, January 29, and, in 1801, was blown up. At the bottom of the rock, near the little town of Thal-Ehrenbreitstein, is the castle of the elector, which, however, was in great part destroyed during the siege. In 1802, the dilapidated fortress, the village, and the jurisdiction appertaining to it, were bestowed upon the prince of Nassau Weilberg, by way of indemnity. They were subsequently ceded to Prussia, and now belong to the Prussian grand-duchy of the Lower Rhine (the province of Cleves-Berg). The fortress has been lately rebuilt, on the newest and most approved principles, so that it is considered one of the finest fortresses in the world. (See Coblentz.)

Ehrenstrcem; a Swedish officer, one of the principal persons engaged in the conspiracy against the regency, 1793. At the death of Gustavus III, from whom he had received several marks of honor and trust, he joined a conspiracy, headed by baron Armfelt (q. v.), to overturn the regency, and raise the young king to the throne, before the time appointed by law, and the will of Gustavus III. The plot was accidentally discovered. Armfelt escaped, and the whole weight of vengeance fell upon his accomplices. Ehrenstrcem defended himself with eloquence and ability on his trial, but was sentenced to die. He went with calmness and resolution to the scaffold; and the executioner was on the point of giving the death stroke, when it was announced that his sentence was commuted to perpetual imprisonment. On the accession of Gustavus IV, he was released, and withdrew into retirement, with a pension from the king.

Eichhor>\ John Godfrey, one of the 430


greatest scholars of Germany in Oriental literature, biblical criticism, and literary and general history, born 1752, at Dorrenzimmern, in the principality HohenloheOhringen, was at first rector of the school at Ohrdruf, in the principality of Gotha; in 1775, was made professor at Jena, where lie remained till 1788, when he became professor in Gottingen. He gave the first evidence of Ms knowledge of Oriental literature and histoiy in his History of the Commerce of the East Indies before Mohammed (Gotha, 1775). At Gottingen, he devoted himself chiefly to biblical criticism. The results of his inquiries were published in his Allgemeine Bibliothek der biblischen Literatur, from 1788 to 1801, closing with the tenth volume. This work is connected with a previous work published by him, from 1777 to 1786, in 18 parts, called Repertorium ftir biblische und inorgenlandische lAteratur. He also published an Introduction to the Old and New Testaments (the former went through a fourth edition in 1824); also, the Apocryphal Writings. These last works were published afterwards together, under the title of Critical Writings, in a revised edition (Leipsic, 7 vols., 1804—1814). These works contributed much to spread a sound criticism of the Scriptures, grounded on a knowledge of sacred antiquities, and the Oriental modes of thinking. To these works may be added his Primitive History (Urgeschichie), published at Nuremberg, 1790—93, with an introduction and notes, by Gabler, in which he critically examines the Mosaic records. Eichhorn afterwards turned his attention to history. He formed the plan of a history of the arts and sciences, from their revival to the end of the 18th century, of which particular parts have appeared under different titles (e. g., The History of Poetry and Eloquence, by Bouterwek; The History of Military Science, by Hoyer), and form separate works. Eichhom wrote, with this view, two volumes of a General History of European Civilization and Literature in modern Times. He did not finish it, and afterwards gave up the direction of this undertaking. Pie began, in 1799, a survey of the whole history of literature, but did not finish the 2d volume till 1814 (containing the history of literature for the three last centuries). He has composed several valuable historical works, of which, among others, his Ancient History of the Greeks and Romans, consisting entirely of extracts from the original historians, are in high repute (Antiqiia Historic ex ipsis veterum Script Ro

man. Narrationabus contexta, 'Gottingen, 1811, 2 vols.; Antique Historia ex ipsis vet Script Graec. Nairat. contexta, Leipsic, 1812, 4 vols.). In 1804, he published the first edition of his History of the three last Centuries, considered in a general view, and in relation to the changes that have occurred in the particular countries of Europe, Asia, Africa and America. In 1818 appeared a 3d edition in six volumes, which brings down the history to the latest period. His last historical work is the Early History of the Illustrious House of the Guelphs (Hanover, 1817), in which he traces back the history of that family to the earliest times which afford any notices of it. Several separate treatises of his are to be found in the commentaries of the Gottingen society of science, and in the Fundgruben des Orients. Since 1813, he has conducted the Gottingen Literary Gazette.

Eichhorn, Frederic Charles, a distinguished student of German histoiy and law, son of the preceding, was born at Jena, 1781. He studied at Gottingen, was an instructer there a considerable time, and, in 1805, was appointed professor of law in Frankfort on the Oder; after that, at Berlin, 1811, where he remained till 1817, when he removed to the same office in Gottingen. He distinguished himself in the campaign of 1813 against the French, and received the iron cross. His History of the German Politics and Jurisprudence first appeared 1808—18; 3d edition, Gottingen, 1821—23, 4 vols. In company with Savigny and Goschen, he has published, since 1816, A Historical Journal of Jurisprudence, in which is to be found his treatise on the origin of the German cities, which serves as a further exposition of his views given in the work mentioned above.

Eichstaedt, Henry Charles Abraham, a distinguished philologist of modern times, was bom Aug. 8, 1770, at Oschatz, where he was partly educated by his father, a clergyman. He is now professor in the university of Jena, and editor of theJenaische Allgemeine lAteratur-Zeitung (Jena Universal Literary Gazette). His works are some editions of the classics (Diodorus Siculus, Halle, 1800—2,2 vols., and Lucrefius, Leipsic, 1801), critical treatises, illustrating the genuine principles of interpretation (De dramate Grcecorum comico-satyrico, Leipsic, 1793, and on TibuUus,Ph(zdrm, &c), also translations of histories, relating principally to Greek or Roman antiquity, e. g. Mitford's History of Greece, from the English, Leipsic, 1802—8, 6 vols.

« 上一頁繼續 »