The Saites took control over the western Delta with the support of the Assyrians, who had driven the Kushite rulers (25th Dynasty) from Egypt by 665 BC. Gradually, Psamtik I of Sais extended his control and by the eighth year of his reign he controlled the entire Delta. He supported men loyal to him for controlling positions in important Nile Valley towns, and he opened negotiations with the Thebans. By the ninth year he had persuaded the high priestesses of the temple of Karnak (the "God’s Wife" and the "Divine Votaress of Amen"), who were the last remnants of Kushite control in Thebes, to adopt his daughter Nitocris as their successor. He made no attempt to interfere otherwise with the administrative structure in Thebes, but, with this move, he had become undisputed king of a reunited Upper and Lower Egypt and the founder of the 26th Dynasty. Slowly the powerful old Theban and Middle Egyptian families were replaced by new officials, some but not all of whom came from the Delta. By the time Psamtik I was firmly established as King of Upper and Lower Egypt, his initial dependence on Assyria was abandoned. He made a few gestures in western Asia which might have been construed as offensive by the Assyrians, but they were too busy elsewhere to be able to react. By the end of his long reign, Psamtik and Egypt were firm allies of the Assyrians in their struggle with the Babylonians. Trade contacts continued between Egypt and the Levant and there seems to have been some sort of "agreement" between Egypt and Judah in which the Egyptians encouraged (and sometimes provided ineffective assistance to) the leaders of Judah in their opposition to the Babylonians. Many Jews fleeing from the Babylonians escaped to Egypt.
Since the Egyptians were for the most part unable to exercise any military control in Syro-Palestine, they turned their attention to control of the seas. By participating in the booming international trade across the Mediterranean, Egypt, with its agricultural wealth, was assured access to both "staples" and luxury goods from abroad. By developing a strong navy. using new ships designed specifically for Mediterranean service, they could control movements of men and supplies in times of war. Numerous foreigners now lived in Egypt, many of whom were drawn by commercial potential as trade opened up throughout the Mediterranean. There were military garrisons staffed mainly by non-Egyptians, not only on Egypt’s frontiers but also within the country; perhaps these were intended to help establish and maintain control over areas which had only recently been politically independent. The mercenaries were only a part of the growing number of people, mostly but not entirely Greek-speaking, who were moving into the Delta, the center of Egyptian society throughout the Late period. Memphis, at the apex of the Delta, was the administrative capital of the country, a flourishing, sophisticated, "multicultural" city. The development of strong economic and political/diplomatic ties between Egypt and the cities of the Greek mainland and Asia Minor, as a result of immigration, increased trade and development of the Egyptian navy, and had important consequences later.
During the long and prosperous reign of Amasis, the last major Saite king, the new and dynamic culture of Saite Egypt crystallized. While Egypt remained largely a redistributive economy (with the palace, the temples and even high officials serving as the points of collection, storage and distribution), private enterprise was supported and commercial practices were tightened. Administrative corruption (in the temples and elsewhere) was attacked, and excessively wealthy (and powerful) individuals who might threaten the stability of the dynasty were "encouraged" to donate their wealth to the temples. Both public and private building flourished. The 26th Dynasty is a period which clearly exemplifies change within continuity. The Saites took what they felt to be the best of their ancient cultural tradition, modernized it, incorporated important innovations, and produced a culture which not merely "survived" but flourished in a very different, new world.
One of the most important innovations which took place during the Late period was the development of new scripts. Demotic developed in Lower Egypt and is first attested during the reign of Psamtik I. Its use spread south with the Saites and by the reign of Amasis had led to a huge increase in numbers and types of documents, official and private, administrative, economic, religious and legal. The introduction of demotic does not merely indicate a vast increase in the number of documents which the Egyptians wrote. It also coincides with a period of immense creativity in Egyptian literature. On the legal side, the switch to demotic reflects significant changes in the underlying system. Where the law previously emphasized a mechanical process of reciprocity (for example, "I have given you X in exchange for F), now volition and intention became important. Changes in the form of so-called "marriage contracts" (actually economic documents whereby a man entails his property for his children) also appear during the reign of Amasis. In some cases, the changes seem to reflect modifications in the legal or social system itself. However, it is impossible to tell whether these changes began in Saite times or whether a conservative legal-documentary system was only slowly coming to reflect a social system which had changed much earlier. Certainly the high legal status of women, which is so striking in contrast to most other ancient societies, is well attested early in Egyptian history.
Egypt became part of the Persian empire in 525 BC, when the Persian king Cambyses captured the capital at Memphis. He was vilified by the classical authors, and the Jewish mercenary community at Elephantine preserved a tradition of the "destruction of all the temples of the Egyptian gods" by Cambyses. But the contemporary records refute Herodotus’s specific claim that Cambyses killed the sacred Apis bull and Cambyses’s bad repute in later times may have stemmed from the fact that he cut back drastically on the revenue of the temples and antagonized the priesthood. Darius I had been with Cambyses in Egypt and by about 517 BC, when he had control of the empire, he returned to Egypt, where he supervised the digging of a "Suez" canal (begun under the Saite king Neko), connecting Persia by sea with the Egyptian Delta and thus the Mediterranean. He took some pains to behave and have himself portrayed in Egypt as a legitimate and beneficent ruler. Despite Darius’s generally sympathetic treatment of captured lands, the end of his reign was marked by further rebellion in the empire and Egypt itself revolted in 486 BC. When Xerxes succeeded Darius in 485 BC, he quickly put down the Egyptian rebellion. Neither he nor any of his successors ever visited Egypt and his treatment of Egypt and the Egyptians was extremely harsh.
Throughout the period of the Persian empire (27th—31st Dynasties) the Persians regarded Egypt as merely one province in its empire, albeit a rich one. Egypt was governed as a satrapy, with the satrap and other senior officials being Persians appointed by the king. The Saite bureaucratic organization of the country was largely retained, with Persians put in most high positions (both in Memphis and in the provinces). Aramaic was the official government language of the Persians.
The records of an Aramaic-speaking colony of Jewish mercenaries stationed on the island of Elephantine, at the First Cataract, provide information about the colony, its relations with its Egyptian neighbors and officials of the Persian government. In some ways the Jewish community maintained its separate identity, keeping their Hebrew names, their own religion and marriage laws, but in other ways the community very much resembled its Egyptian neighbors. Legal scholars have discussed why the Egyptian and Jewish systems of land tenure, including land lease, are so similar.
Some time after 450 BC, during a period of peace and prosperity, Herodotus visited Egypt and wrote his vivid account of Egyptian history and culture. Herodotus, as well as his Egyptian informants, had anti-Persian sentiments. He went to Egypt with the traditional Greek reverence for Egyptian culture and history and he looked at Egypt in terms of general themes (for example, Egypt as the opposite of Greece and the rest of the world). What he recorded was the result of what he looked for and asked about; the deficiencies frequently reflect the attitudes he took with him.
The beginning of the reign of Artaxerxes (464-423 BC) was marked in Egypt by the first of a long series of rebellions by West Delta chieftains, who allied themselves with anyone who was antagonistic to the Persians. Finally, about 404 BC, at the death of Darius II, the Persians were driven out. During the next sixty years (404-343 BC), three different "dynasties," or ruling families, from different cities in the Delta successively wrested power from one another. Major temple construction in the Delta and in Upper Egypt during the longer reigns, especially those of the 30th Dynasty, reflected the relative wealth and security of the country. The number and quality of royal and private monuments, including statuary, also attest to the cultural and economic strength of Egypt under its last native dynasts. Indicative of the role of Egypt in the international commerce of the period is the Delta city of Naukratis, whose Greek residents traded extensively throughout the eastern Mediterranean.
Since the Persian king throughout this period thought of Egypt as just one more rebellious province, and regularly attempted to reconquer it, Egyptian foreign policy consisted of support (sometimes covert or "moral," sometimes formal military aid) for anyone who was opposing the Persian king. This led to a shifting set of alliances between Egypt and the Greek cities, especially Athens and Sparta, and Cyprus, and also led to the stronger Egyptian kings intervening in Syro-Palestine to support those local dynasts who were rebelling against the Persians or could be persuaded to do so. But in reality Egypt was the "Broken Reed" of the Bible, whose support of anti-Persian factions proved unsuccessful in the long run. Egyptian military commanders were frequently Greek and the outcome of several battles was modified by recall (often instigated by the Persians) of some of these leaders to their home cities.
Artaxerxes III Ochus recaptured Egypt in 343 BC, but rebellion continued until its conquest by Alexander in 332 BC. Legend has it that the Egyptians welcomed Alexander as a liberator from the Persians. Alexander had himself crowned king in the appropriate pharaonic manner in Memphis. He went to Siwa Oasis in the Western Desert to consult its oracle, a favorite one in the Greek world, and he was declared the son of Amen/Zeus. He founded Alexandria and established competitive games, drama and a musical festival in the Greek manner. Very soon after he left Egypt in the hands of administrators, who took advantage of his absence to aggrandize themselves. It was not until Ptolemy, one of Alexander’s generals, claimed Egypt as his "prize" after the death of Alexander that Egypt again had a stable, well-run administration, centered in Egypt and designed to promote the wealth and welfare of the country.
Aside from replacing an Egyptian or Persian ruling elite with a Greek/Macedonian one, the major contribution of the early Ptolemies was a quality and unity of leadership over an extended period. It was in their interest to build up Egypt’s wealth, and this they did for several generations. The Ptolemies, like the short-lived Egyptian dynasts but unlike the Persians, centered themselves in Egypt, with their capital at Alexandria, although Memphis retained its economic, legal and religious importance. Agriculture remained the foundation of the economy and although some land was worked directly for the crown, most land was worked by private individuals who owned or rented it. There was some agricultural reform, introduction of some new crops, and some new technology and expansion of cultivation, especially in the Fayum, where extensive efforts took place to reclaim potential agricultural land around the lake. This expansion was carried out partly to provide land for soldiers and high government officials and involved creation of several Greek cities and a Greek cultural overlay in the Fayum.
Alexandria became the capital of Hellenistic Egypt, where the Ptolemies and their courtiers resided. But Alexandria catered to a larger world of the eastern Mediterranean, and Memphis retained its economic and cultural importance for Egypt (and grew in importance to the Ptolemies as they came to focus more and more on the core Nile Valley). Alexandria was consciously Greek, rejecting Egyptian culture (and Egyptian natives to the extent that it could). Here was the famous Library of Alexandria and many of the most famous intellects of the Hellenistic (and Roman and Byzantine) world came to study or work and teach in Alexandria. In the early Ptolemaic period, royal patronage of the arts and sciences (including literature) attracted poets, scientists and scholars from all over the Greek world to the Library and Museum. Royal patronage continued through the middle Ptolemaic period and a succession of librarians introduced and organized a program of collecting and interpreting the Greek classical authors. Great advances were made in fields such as geography, mathematics, medicine and physics. By the late Ptolemaic period, Alexandria had become the center for the study of philosophy. At the same time there was growth in the Jewish community in Alexandria and in research in the fields of Jewish and Biblical studies.
However, outside the Fayum and Alexandria life remained much as it had been for centuries, or millennia. Even though the Ptolemaic period was more "monetized" than earlier, and some taxes, license fees and so on had to be paid in silver, Egypt was still heavily a redistributive economy and one of the functions of the palace was to serve as the collection and storage site for domestic and international produce, and as the site from which such goods then circulated through the general economy. Temples and major agricultural estates served as secondary redistribution centers within the system dominated by the palace. Such a system left plenty of room for local markets and local exchange of goods between individuals and it should be noted that such a system was characteristic not only of Late period Egypt, but also of pharaonic Egypt as early as the Old Kingdom. The extensive bureaucracy, ranging from senior central administrators dealing with economic and legal affairs of the entire country to local scribes responsible for collecting and recording taxes, is anticipated already in the New Kingdom. Even the cleruchic system of giving soldiers a small plot of land in return for their military service was a well-established (and relatively cheap) method of tying the loyalties of Egypt’s "foreign" soldiers to Egypt, perhaps seen most clearly during the Libyan dynasties (22nd-24th Dynasties).
The Ptolemies developed a growing attachment to, or use of, Egyptian religion, with the development of the royal cult and the cult of Serapis, and royal patronage of traditional Egyptian cults. Myth and ritual remained intact and the temples and priesthood remained major landowners and a major economic force, as they had been throughout Egyptian civilization. Extensive formal royal sponsorship of temple building and rebuilding continued through the Ptolemaic and into the Roman period. Such actions won the Ptolemies the support of the Egyptian priesthood (and the priests, in turn, had great influence over the rest of society). Priests, both those "employed" by temples and those who provided ongoing mortuary services for wealthy Egyptian families, were among the wealthier individuals in Ptolemaic Egypt. They owned some land but gained most of their wealth "in kind" through the age-old practice of reversion of offerings: goods given to the gods, or the deceased, were passed on to the priests, who could consume them or trade them for other goods.
Ptolemy I originally ruled as satrap, then as king. He was succeeded by his son and daughter (the beginning of the royal brother-sister marriages called "Egyptian," but not reflecting Egyptian customs), where the woman was the stronger force. Since Ptolemy had been in Egypt with Alexander, it is generally assumed that he recognized the potential wealth of the country as well as the relative ease of governing it without undue outside interference. However, he also maintained a claim over southern Syria (Coele-Syria) and Cyprus, presumably because of their natural resources, which complemented those of Egypt, and because of Ptolemy’s desire to control the Mediterranean and its trade and trade routes. Until 200 BC, control of these regions was contested by the Ptolemies and the Seleucids (in Syria), with the Ptolemies more frequently in the ascendancy. The six so-called "Syrian Wars," fought for control of this region, are the background for one of the best-known Egyptian texts, the Rosetta Stone, instrumental in the decipherment of Egyptian hieroglyphs. The final topic in the "Syrian Wars" took place in 168 BC when the Seleucid king Antiochus had himself crowned king of Egypt in Memphis. Rome, which had a vested interest in making sure that none of the kings of the eastern Mediterranean gained too much power, stepped in and ordered Antiochus out of Egypt. From this point on, Ptolemaic political history is a story of inept rule, dynastic strife and the growing involvement of Rome, all underlain by growing economic distress resulting from poor management and insufficient control of the enormous bureaucratic machinery.
Educated Greeks in Alexandria and other strongholds of Greek culture looked down on anyone who did not have a Greek education and some Egyptians came to hate their Greek overlords, but, for the most part, Egyptians and Greeks coexisted with a minimum of antipathy. Those problems that did exist (and there were more as the Ptolemaic period progressed) were far more frequently economic than cultural, and were frequently caused by corrupt officials. The resulting discontent and antagonism toward the system, combined with weak central government in the middle Ptolemaic period, or with dynastic strife in the later Ptolemaic period, produced a climate of rebellion, usually Egyptian-led (although sometimes Greek-led) and apparently never ethnically based.
Essentially, Ptolemaic Egypt was home to two separate, vital cultures maintained side by side, which occasionally interacted. The Ptolemies presented themselves to their Egyptian subjects as good Egyptian kings, and to their Greek-speaking subjects as good Greek kings (the ideals of kingship were much the same). In law there were two separate legal systems, Greek when the documents were written in Greek, Egyptian when the documents were written in demotic. In at least some legal matters Egyptian law was more favorable than Greek (especially in the case of women’s rights) and people who had a choice (for example, bilingual/bicultural people, especially in families in which there had been intermarriage) would choose to write their documents in Egyptian. In addition, all residents of Egypt, whether Greek-speaking or Egyptian-speaking, were subject to a system of royal law.
Both Greek and Egyptian literary traditions flourished. Extensive papyrus collections of Greek classics have been found even in relatively small, "provincial" towns with a Greek population. However, this period also was one in which major Egyptian literary texts of a number of genres were composed. Traditional genres, such as wisdom texts and narrative stories, were joined by genres with a Greek-flavored sub-stratum; but literary influence worked in both directions. There are examples of Egyptian mythical narrative tales translated into Greek, and some narrative stories about Egyptian kings are preserved only in Greek. The propagandistic value of Late period Egyptian literature and the participation of Egyptian writers in a larger, pan-Near Eastern approach to life have been noted. In art, too, the Egyptians of the Ptolemaic period demonstrated the vitality of their cultural tradition.
Although some authors stress the popularity of animal cults and other signs of "popular," as opposed to formal, religion, the animal cults were not only popular with the masses but were also subsidized by the king (whether "Egyptian," Persian, or "Greek"). At the same time the king was encouraging more standard traditional religion, including the cult of the divine ruler as well as those of old favorites such as Osiris and Isis (whose popularity spread far beyond Egypt). The new cult of Serapis was a very successful attempt by the early Ptolemies to make Egyptian religion appeal to the Greeks.
One of the most visible developments during the Late period is the role of apocalyptic literature in the life and politics of Egypt as well as in much of the rest of the Near East. Egypt has a long tradition of apocalyptic literature, dating back at least to the Middle Kingdom. The kings of Egypt are generally presented in the formal literature as "semi-divine," with links between the people and the gods and partaking a bit of each. In the Late period, the ideal Egyptian king had the same characteristics as earlier kings: he was beneficent to the gods, he carried out the law, he protected his people from foreign invasion and he followed all the proper rituals. But a new element was added: the idea that the length and success of a king’s reign directly reflected the extent to which he had acted as a proper king. In the past the Egyptian king had been assumed to be "good"; now it was assumed that the real nature of his leadership could be told from the length of his reign. This same tradition is found in Hebrew texts, such as the Biblical books of Kings, Judges and Chronicles. Conflict between the ideal king (who was merciful, just and powerful, and the guarantor of world order, ma ‘at) and the actual king was resolved by inserting a god or gods above the ruling king in the chain of command. Contemporary wisdom texts argued that wisdom consisted of self-control and pious acceptance of whatever the gods might send. Although man had moral freedom of choice and god endowed man with the capacity for good, and although proper conduct should result in happiness and prosperity, it was recognized that, in reality, this did not always happen. Divine will, unfathomable to man, manifested itself through Fate and Fortune and man must accept what came. Such concepts are also paralleled in non-Egyptian literature, including the Biblical story of Job. It is not to be suggested that either the Egyptian or the West Asian tradition was influencing the other, but rather that similar circumstances may have led to a similarity in world view. This apocalyptic vision appealed to "downtrodden" people, both in Egypt and elsewhere in the Hellenistic world.
To the extent that "foreign" rulers acted as traditional Egyptian pharaohs and allowed themselves to be presented as such to the Egyptians, the pragmatic Egyptians were satisfied and Egyptian civilization adapted to new conditions while remaining essentially Egyptian. Other institutions underwent some change (for example, the increase of foreign trade, the beginning of a monetary economy, the introduction of a mercenary army tied secondarily to the land, the introduction of demotic as the normal written language and the use of foreign languages in the court) without producing fundamental changes in Egypt’s institutional structure. Thus, although Egypt in the Late period had been removed from its earlier isolation and forced to be part of a larger world, its Egyptian character, attitude and ideals were not lost.
