from the care they took to preserve and embalm them, and from the express statements of ancient writers. Herodotus mentions the concern they felt at their loss, and the general mourning that ensued in a house, even if they died a natural death; every inmate being obliged to shave his eyebrows, in token of sorrow, for the loss of a cat, and the head and whole body for the death of a dog. When ill, they watched and attended them with the greatest solicitude; and, if any person purposely, or even involuntarily †, killed one of these revered animals, it was deemed a capital offence; nor could all the influence of the magistrates, nor even the dread of the Roman name prevent the people from sacrificing to their resentment an incautious Roman who had killed a cat, though it was evident that he had done it unintentionally.

"So deeply rooted in their minds," says Diodorus, "was the superstitious regard for the sacred animals, and so strongly were the passions of every one bent upon their honour, that, even at this time, when Ptolemy had not yet been called a king by the Romans, and the people were using every possible effort to flatter the Italians, who visited the country as strangers, and studiously avoided any thing which could excite disputes, or lead to war, on account of their dread of the consequences, they positively refused to restrain their anger, or to spare the offender."

Some remains of this prejudice in favour of the

*

cat may still be traced among the modern Egyptians, who even allow it to eat from the same dish †, and to be the constant companion of their children ; though the reputed reason of their predilection for this animal is its utility in watching and destroying scorpions, and other reptiles, which infest the houses.

Dogs are not regarded by them with the same feelings; they are considered unclean, and are seldom admitted into the house, except by some persons of the Málekee sect, who do not, like the Shaffaees, and Hanefees, consider themselves defiled by their touch. But though they draw this marked distinction between them, the character given to the two animals appears to be in favour of the dog; which they represent, in the true spirit of oriental fable, when asked hereafter respecting the treatment it received from man, concealing all the numerous injuries it has received, and magnifying the few benefits, while the cat is supposed to deny the obligations conferred upon it, and to enIdeavour to detract from the merits of its benefactor.

Though the death of a cat is not attended with lamentations or funeral honours, it is looked upon by many of the modern Egyptians to be wrong to kill, or even to illtreat them and some have carried their humanity so far as to bequeath by will a fund for their support, in compliance with which

*They are much more tractable and attached in Egypt than in Europe. The cat and dog are not there the emblems of discord. This is a general custom with the Moslems.

these animals are daily fed in Cairo at the Cadi's court, and the bazár of Khan Khaleel.

The clap net was of different forms, though on the same general principle as the traps already mentioned. It consisted of two sides or frames, over which the network was strained; at one end was a short rope, which they fastened to a bush, or a cluster of reeds, and at the other was one of considerable length, which, as soon as the birds were seen feeding in the area within the net, was pulled by the fowlers, causing the instantaneous collapsion of the two sides.* The Egyptian nets were very similar to those used in Europe at the present day, but probably larger, and requiring a greater number of persons to manage them than our own; this, however, may be attributed to an imperfection in their contrivance for closing them.

As soon as they had selected a convenient spot for laying down the net, in a field or on the surface of a pond, the known resort of numerous wild fowl, they spread open the two sides or flaps, and secured them in such a manner that they remained flat upon the ground, until pulled by the rope. A man, crouched behind some reeds, growing at a convenient distance from the spot, from which he could observe the birds as they came down, watched the nett, and enjoining silence by placing his hand over his mouth, beckoned to those holding the rope to keep themselves in readiness, till he saw them assembled in sufficient numbers, * Vide wood-cut, No. 333. part 2.

when a wave of his hand gave the signal for closing

the net.

1

2

No. 338.

Clap nets from the sculptures.

The sign adopted by the Egyptians to indicate silence is evidently shown, from these scenes, to have been given by placing the hand over the mouth; not, as generally supposed *, by approaching the forefinger to the lips; and the Greeks erroneously concluded, that the youthful Harpocrates was the deity of silence, from his appearing in this attitude; which, however humiliating to the character of a deity, was only illustrative of his extreme youth, and of a habit common to children in every country, whether of ancient or modern

times.

Some nets were of a single piece, stretched over a frame; others were furnished with addi*And by Plutarch, De Isid. s. 68.

tional sections of a diamond shape, and in some the interior portion was surrounded by an outer circuit of an oval form, to which the ring of the rope was attached.

It is probable that the ancient Egyptians adopted the same ingenious method of catching ducks, widgeons, and other water fowl, as the modern inhabitants of Lower Egypt †; who, when the inundation covers the lands, creep unperceived to the water's edge, and placing a gourd upon their head, with two holes cut in front, through which they look, swim towards the unsuspecting birds, and taking them one after the other by the legs, suddenly pull them under the water, and tie them to their girdle; thus, in a short space of time, securing great numbers, without alarming the rest.

The birds taken in nets were principally geese, ducks, quails, and some small kinds which they were in the habit of salting, especially in Lower Egypt, where Herodotus tells us they "ate quails, ducks, and small birds undressed, having merely preserved them in salt, living at the same time on all sorts of birds and fish, not reckoned sacred, which were eaten either roasted or boiled." For though geese constituted a very great portion of the food of the Egyptians, both in the upper and lower country, and are more frequently represented in the sculptures than any bird, it is not to be supposed that they were preferred to the

* This calls to mind the nets mentioned by J. Pollux, v. 4., of which a square part termed the ẞpoxos became poμboɛudes, of a rhomboïdal figure, as soon as the net (aprvç) was stretched.