Every reader of the Bible is familiar with its frequent references to Egypt as a land so rich in corn, that it not only produced abundance for its own dense population, but yielded supplies for exportation to neighbouring countries. Profane history corroborates these statements. Diodorus Siculus bears explicit testimony to the skill of the farmers of ancient Egypt. He informs us that they were acquainted with the benefits of a rotation of crops, and were skilful in adapting these to the soil and to the seasons. The ordinary annual supply of corn furnished to Rome has been estimated at 20,000,000 bushels. From the same author we also learn that they fed their cattle with hay during the annual inundation, and at other times tethered them in the meadows on green clover. Their flocks were shorn twice annually (a practice common in several Asiatic countries), and their ewes yeaned twice a year. For religious as well as economical reasons, they were great rearers of poultry, and practised artificial hatching, as at the present day. The abundance or scarcity of the harvests in Egypt depended chiefly upon the height of the annual inundation. If too low, much of the land could not be sown, and scarcity or famine ensued. On the other hand, great calamities befell the country when tho Nile rose much above the average level. Cattle were drowned, villages destroyed, and the crops necessarily much diminished, as in such cases many of the fields were still under water at the proper seed time. In 1818 a calamity of this kind took place, when the river rapidly attained a height of 3½ feet above the proper level.

It is from the paintings and inscriptions with which the ancient Egyptians decorated their tombs that we get the fullest insight into the state of agriculture amongst this remarkable people. Many of these paintings, after the lapse of two or three thousand years, retain the distinctness of outline and brilliancy of colour of recent productions. The acquaintance which these give us with their occupations, attainments, and habits is truly marvellous, and fills the reader of such works as Wilkinson’s Egypt with perfect amazement. Every fresh detail seems to give confirmation to that ancient saying, “There is nothing new under the sun.” The pictures referring to rural affairs disclose a state of advancement at that early date which may well lead us to speak modestly of our own attainments An Egyptian villa comprised all the conveniences of a European one of the present day. Besides a mansion with numerous apartments, there were gardens, orchards, fishponds, and preserves for game. Attached to it was a farm-yard, with sheds for cattle and stables for carriage horses. A steward directed the tillage operations, superintended the labourers, and kept account of the produce and expenditure. The grain was stored in vaulted chambers furnished with an opening at the top, reached by steps, into which it was emptied from sacks, and with an aperture below for removing it when required. Hand-querns, similar to our own, were used for grinding corn; but they had also a larger kind worked by oxen. In one painting, in which the sowing of the grain is represented, a plough drawn by a pair of oxen goes first; next comes the sower scattering the seed from a basket; he is followed by another plough; whilst a roller, drawn by two horses yoked abreast, completes the operation. The steward stands by superintending the whole. Nothing, however, conveys to us so full an impression of the advanced state of civilisation amongst the ancient Egyptians as the value which they attached to land, and the formalities which they observed in the transfer of it. In the time of the Ptolemies, their written deeds of conveyance began with the mention of the reign in which they were executed, the name of the president of the court, and of the clerk who drew them. The name of the seller, with a description of his personal appearance, his parentage, profession, and residence, was engrossed. The nature of the land, its extent, situation, and boundaries; the name and appearance of the purchaser were also included. A clause of warrandice and an explicit acceptance by the purchaser followed, and finally the deed was attested by numerous witnesses (so many as sixteen occur to a trifling bargain), and by the president of the court.

The nomades of the patriarchal ages, like the Tartar, and perhaps some of the Moorish tribes of our own, whilst mainly dependent upon their flocks and herds, practised also agriculture proper. The vast tracts over which they roamed were in ordinary circumstances common to all shepherds alike. During the summer they frequented the mountainous districts and retired to the valleys to winter. Vast flocks of sheep and of goats constituted the chief wealth of the nomades, although they also possessed animals of the ox kind. When these last were possessed in abundance, it seems to be an indication that tillage was practised. We learn that Job, besides immense possessions in flocks and herds, had 500 yoke of oxen, which he employed in ploughing, and a “very great husbandry.” Isaac, too, conjoined tillage with pastoral husbandly, and that with success, for we read that he sowed in the land Gerar, and reaped an hundred-fold —a return which, it would appear, in some favoured regions, occasionally rewarded the labour of the husbandman. In the parable of the sower, our Lord (grafting his instructions upon the habits, scenery, and productions of Palestine), mentions an increase of thirty, sixty, and an hundred fold. Such increase, although far above the average rate, was sometimes even greatly exceeded, if we take the authority of Herodotus, Strabo, and Pliny.

Along with the Babylonians, Egyptians, and Romans, the Israelites are classed as one of the great agricultural nations of antiquity. The sojourn of the Israelites in Egypt trained them for the more purely agricultural life that awaited them on their return to take possession of Canaan. Nearly the whole population were virtually husbandmen, and personally engaged in its pursuits. Upon their entrance into Canaan, they found the country occupied by a dense population possessed of walled cities and innumerable villages, masters of great accumulated wealth, and subsisting on the produce of their highly cultivated soil, which abounded with vineyards and oliveyards. It was so rich in grain, that the invading army, numbering 601,730 able-bodied men, with their wives and children, and a mixed multitude of camp-followers, found “old corn” in the land sufficient to maintain them from the day that they passed the Jordan. The Mosaic Institute contained an agrarian law, based upon an equal division of the soil amongst the adult males, a census of whom was taken just before their entrance into Canaan. Provision was thus made for 600,000 yeomen, assigning (according to different calculations) from sixteen to twenty-five acres of land to each. This land, held in direct tenure from Jehovah, their sovereign, was strictly inalienable. The accumulation of debt upon it was prevented by the prohibition of interest, the release of debts every seventh year, and the reversion of the land to the proprietor, or his heirs, at each return of the year of jubilee. The owners of these small farms cultivated them with much care, and rendered them highly productive. They were favoured with a soil extremely fertile, and one which their skill and diligence kept in good condition. The stones were carefully cleared from the fields, which were also watered from canals and conduits, communicating with the brooks and streams with which the country “was well watered everywhere,” and enriched by the application of manures. The seventh year’s fallow prevented the exhaustion of the soil, which was further enriched by the burning of the weeds and spontaneous growth of the Sabbatical year. The crops chiefly cultivated were wheat, millet, barley, beans, and lentiles; to which it is supposed, on grounds not improbable, may be added rice and cotton. The ox and the ass were used for labour. The word “oxen,” which occurs in our version of the Scriptures, as well as in the Septuagint and Vulgate, denotes the species, rather than the sex. As the Hebrews did not mutilate any of their animals, bulls were in common use. The quantity of land ploughed by a yoke of oxen in one day was called a yoke or acre. Towards the end of October, with which month the rainy season begins, seedtime commenced, and of course does so still. The seedtime, begun in October, extends, for wheat and some other white crops, through November and December; and barley continues to be sown until about the middle of February. The seed appears to have been sometimes ploughed in, and at other times to have been covered by harrowing. The cold winds which prevail in January and February frequently injured the crops in the more exposed and higher districts. The rainy season extends from October to April, during which time refreshing showers fall, chiefly during the night, and generally at intervals of a few days. The harvest was earlier or later as the rains towards the end of the season were more or less copious. It, however, generally commenced in April, and continued through May for the different crops in succession. In the south, and in the plains, the harvest, as might be expected, commenced some weeks earlier than in the northern and mountainous districts. The slopes cf the hills were carefully terraced and irrigated wherever practicable, and on these slopes the vine and olive were cultivated with great success. At the same time the hill districts and neighbouring deserts afforded pasturage for numerous flocks and herds, and thus admitted of the benefits of a mixed husbandry. With such political aud social arrangements, and under the peculiarly felicitous climate of Judea, the country as a whole, and at the more prosperous periods of the commonwealth, must have exhibited such an example of high cultivation, rich and varied produce, and wide-spread plenty and contentment, as the world has never yet elsewhere produced on an equally extensive scale. Not by a figure of speech but literally, every Israelite sat under the shadow of his own vine and fig-tree; whilst the country as a whole is described (2 Kings xviii. 32) as “a land of corn and wine, a land of bread and vineyards, a land of oil-olive and of honey.” An interesting illustration of the advanced state of agriculture in these ancient times is afforded by the fact, that, making allowance for climatic differences, the numerous allusions to it with which the Scriptures abound seem natural and appropriate to the British farmer of the present day.

The unrivalled literature of Greece affords us little information regarding the practical details of her husbandry. The people who by what remains to us of their poetry, philosophy, history, and fine arts, still exert such an influence in guiding our intellectual efforts, in regulating taste, and in moulding our institutions, were originally the invaders and conquerors of the territory which they have rendered so famous. Having reduced the aboriginal tribes to bondage, they imposed upon them the labour of cultivating the soil, and hence both the occupation, and those engaged in it, were regarded contemptuously by the dominant race, who addicted themselves to what they regarded as nobler pursuits. With the exception of certain districts, such as Bceotia, the country was naturally unfavourable to agriculture. When we find, however, that valleys were freed from lakes and morasses by drainage, that rocky surfaces were sometimes covered with transported soil, and that they possessed excellent breeds of the domesticated animals, which were reared in vast numbers, we infer that agriculture was better understood, and more carefully practised, than the allusions to it in their literature would seem to warrant.

Amongst the ancient Romans agriculture was highly esteemed, and pursued with earnest love and devoted attention. “In all their foreign enterprises, even in earliest times,” as Schlegel remarks,“they were exceedingly covetous of gain, or rather of land; for it was in land, and in the produce of the soil, that their principal and almost only wealth consisted. They were a thoroughly agricultural people, and it was only at a later period that commerce, trades, and arts, were introduced among them, and even then they occupied but a subordinate place.” Their passion for agriculture survived very long; and when at length their boundless conquests introduced an unheard-of luxury and corruption of morals, the noblest minds amongst them were strongly attracted towards the ancient virtue of the purer and simpler agricultural times. Several facts in Roman history afford convincing proof, if it were required, of the devotion of this ancient people to agriculture, in their best and happiest times. Whilst their arts and sciences, and general literature, were borrowed from the Greeks, they created an original literature of their own, of which rural affairs formed the substance and inspiration. Schlegel and Mr Hoskyn notice also the striking fact, that whilst among tho Greeks the names of their illustrious families are borrowed from the heroes and gods of their mythology, the most famous houses amongst the ancient Romans, such as the Pisones, Fabii, Lentuli, &c., have taken their names from their favourite crops and vegetables. Perhaps it is not too much to assert, that many of those qualities which fitted them for conquering the world, and perfecting their so celebrated jurisprudence, were acquired, or at all events nourished and matured, by the skill, foresight, and persevering industry, so needful for the intelligent and successful cultivation of the soil. The words which Cicero puts into the mouth of Cato give a fine picture of the ancient Roman enthusiasm in agriculture. “I come now to the pleasures of husbandry, in which I vastly delight. They are not interrupted by old age, and they seem to me to be pursuits in which a wise man’s life should be spent. The earth does not rebel against authority; it never gives back but with usury what it receives. The gains of husbandry are not what exclusively commend it. I am charmed with the nature and productive virtues of the soil. Can those old men be called unhappy who delight in the cultivation of the soil? In my opinion there can be no happier life, not only because the tillage of the earth is salutary to all, but from the pleasure it yields. The whole establishment of a good and assiduous husbandman is stored with wealth; it abounds in pigs, in kids, in lambs, in poultry, in milk, in cheese, in honey. Nothing can be more profitable, nothing more beautiful, than a well-cultivated farm.”

In ancient Rome each citizen received, at first, an allotment of about two English acres. After the expulsion of the kings this allotment was increased to about six acres. These small inheritances must, of course, have been cultivated by hard labour. On the increase of the Roman territory the allotment was increased to fifty, and afterwards even to five hundred acres. Many glimpses into their methods of cultivation are found in those works of Roman authors which have survived the ravages of time. Cato speaks of irrigation, frequent tillage, and manuring, as means of fertilising the soil. Mr Hoskyn, from whose valuable contribution to the History of Agriculture we have drawn freely in this historic summary, quotes the following interesting passage from Pliny, commenting on Virgil: — “Our poet is of opinion that alternate fallows should be made, and that the land should rest entirely every second year. And this is, indeed, both true and profitable, provided a man have land enough to give the soil this repose. But how, if his extent be not sufficient? Let him, in that case, help himself thus. Let him sow next year’s wheat-crop on the field where he has just gathered his beans, vetches, or lupines, or such other crop as enriches the ground. For, indeed, it is worth notice that some crops are sown for no other purpose but as food for others, a poor practice in my estimation.” In another place he tells us, “Wheat, the liter it is reaped, the better it casts; but the sooner it is reaped, the fairer the sample. The best rule is to cut it down before the grain is got hard, when the ear begins to have a reddish-brown appearance. ‘Better two days too soon than as many too late,’ is a good old maxim, and might pass for an oracle.” The following quotation from the same author is excellent:—“Cato would have this point especially to be considered, that the soil of a farm be good and fertile; also, that near it there be plenty of labourers, and that it be not far from a large town: moreover, that it have sufficient means for transporting its produce, either by water or land. Also, that the house be well built, and the land about it as well managed. But I observe a great error and self-deception which many men commit, who hold opinion that the negligence and ill-husbandry of the former owner is good for his successor or after-purchaser. Now, I say, there is nothing more dangerous and disadvantageous to the buyer than land so left waste and out of heart; and therefore Cato counsels well to purchase land of one who has managed it well, and not rashly and hand-over-head to despise and make light of the skill and knowledge of another. He says, too, that as well land as men, which are of great charge and expense, how gainful soever they may seem to be, yield little profit in the end, when all reckonings are made. The same Cato being asked, what was the most assured profit rising out of land? made this answer,—‘ To feed stock well.’ Being asked again, ‘ What was the next?’ he answered, ‘To feed with moderation.' By which answer he would seem to conclude that the most certain and sure revenue was a low cost of production. To the same point is to be referred another speech of his, ‘ That a good husbandman ought to be a seller rather than a buyer;’ also, ‘ that a man should stock his ground early and well, but take long time and leisure before he be a builder for it is the best thing in the world, according to the proverb, ‘to make use, and derive profit, from other men’s follies.’ Still when there is a good and convenient house on the farm, the master will be the closer occupier, and take the more pleasure in it; and truly it is a good saying, that ‘ the master’s eye is better than his heel.’”

“It is curious,” says Mr Hoskyn, “to read such passages as these, and to find the very same subjects still handled, week after week, in fresh and eager controversy in the agricultural writings and periodicals of the present day, eighteen centuries after those opinions were written.”

In the later ages of the empire agriculture was neglected, and those engaged in it regarded with contempt. Many fair regions once carefully cultivated, and highly productive, were abandoned to nature, and became a scene of desolation, the supplies of overgrown Rome being drawn from Egypt, Sicily, and other provinces, which became notable as the granaries of the empire.

Under the Goths, Vandals, and other barbarian conquerors, agriculture in Europe, during the middle ages, seems to have sunk into the lowest condition of neglect and contempt. We owe its revival, like that of other arts and sciences, to the Saracens of Spain, who devoted themselves to the cultivation of that conquered territory, with hereditary love for the occupation, and with the skilful application of the experience which they had gathered in other lands in which they had established...