eal

Et ne Oe ee ee eee we
SH ft $2 it fe at
ea cc ;

Se ee

Nhe

>

ae

age ge
cones

as

Payee

a

+
a

<

BI bp da dee
sn Ey yd

rer

Semen
Te MA Sa

ete
tae Pate
ener s

afer

ay

ea

eh te
G2, heed
te EA

Se
me

a eh
Choke: eas

ere ed
Aiea as
Ms map oe

ey.
Reena ho
*

Statue of Rui, High Priest in the Reign of
3 Ramses IT

Rui is represented as resting his arms upon the head. of the
goddess Hathor. From Karnak. XIXth Dynasty. British
Museum. From the photograph by Messrs. Mansell & Co.

EGYPT AND WESTERN ASIA

IN THE
LIGHT OF RECENT DISCOVERIES

BY
L. W. KING, M.A., F.S. A., and H. R. HALL, M.A,

Department of Egyptian and Assyrian Antiquities, British Museum

Containing One Hundred Plates and Illustrations

=

LONDON
SOCIETY FOR PROMOTING CHRISTIAN KNOWLEDGE.
NORTHUMBERLAND AVENUE, W.C.
43, Queen Victoria Street, E. C.
BRIGHTON : 129, North Street
1907

PUBLISHERS’ NOTE

oe

It should be noted that many of the monuments and
sites of excavations in Egypt, Mesopotamia, Persia, and
Kurdistan described in this volume have been visited
by the authors in connection with their own work in
those countries. The greater number of the photo-
graphs here published were taken by the authors them-
selves. Their thanks are due to M. Ernest Leroux, of
Paris, for his kind permission to reproduce a certain
number of plates from the works of M. de Morgan, illus-
trating his recent discoveries in Egypt and Persia, and
to Messrs. W. A. Mansell & Co., of London, for kindly
allowing them to make use of a number of photographs
issued by them.

f aaeg
Pana a

PREFACE

a

The present volume contains an account of the most
important: additions which have been made to our
knowledge of the ancient history of Egypt and Western
Asia during the few years which have elapsed since the
publication of Prof. Maspero’s Histoire Ancienne des
Peuples de VOrient Classique, and includes short de-
scriptions of the excavations from which these results
have been obtained. It is in no sense a connected and
continuous history of these countries, for that has al-
ready been written by Prof. Maspero, but is rather
intended as an appendix or addendum to his work,
briefly recapitulating and describing the discoveries
made since its appearance. On this account we have
followed a geographical rather than a chronological
system of arrangement, but at the same time the at-
tempt has been made to suggest to the mind of the
reader the historical sequence of events.

At no period have excavations been pursued with
more energy and activity, both in Egypt and Western
Asia, than at the present time, and every season’s work
obliges us to modify former theories, and extends our
knowledge of periods of history which even ten years
ago were unknown to the historian. A new chapter
has been added to Egyptian history by the discovery of

vil

viii PREFACE

the Neolithic culture of the primitive Egyptians, while
the recent excavations at Susa are revealing a hitherto
totally unsuspected epoch of proto-Elamite civiliza-
tion. Further than this, we have discovered the relics
of the oldest historical kings of Egypt, and we are now
enabled to reconstitute from material as yet unpub-
lished the inter-relations of the early dynasties of Baby-
lon. Important discoveries have also been. made with
regard to isolated points in the later historical periods.
We have therefore included the more important of
these in our survey of recent excavations and their
results. The advances made in archeological research
during the last eighteen months are well illustrated by
Mr. Theodore N. Davis’ discovery of the tomb of Queen
Tii, by Dr. Wallis Budge’s publication of the results of
his excavations in the Sudan, by the completion of the
Egypt Exploration Fund’s work at Dér el-Bahari, and
by the find of cuneiform tablets, many of them written
in the Hittite language, at Boghaz Kéi in Asia Minor.
Such are the most important discoveries recently made ©
in Egypt and Western Asia.

We would again remind the reader that Prof. Mas-
pero’s great work must be consulted for the complete
history of the period, the present volume being, not a
connected history of Egypt and Western Asia, but a
description and discussion of the manner in which re-
cent discovery and research have added to and modified
our conceptions of ancient Egyptian and Mesopotamian
civilization.

Lonvon, May 1, 1907.

CONTENTS

—_o——
CHAPTER

I. Tue Discovery Or Prenistoric EGyPT . : ° y .
II ABypos AND THE First THREE DYNASTIES i , ‘ :
Ill. Mrmrpuis AND THE PYRAMIDS . ; : : ’ ; 5
IV. Recent Excavations IN WESTERN ASIA AND THE DAWN OF
CHALDZAN HIsTory i F i ‘ ; : P !
V. Exam anp BABYLON, THE COUNTRY OF THE SEA AND THE
KASSITES . . : : . 5 a a . : .
VI. Earty BasyLonran LIFE AND CusTOMS . . : F Ff
VII. Trempvtes AND Tomss OF THEBES - Nae Pe ar m ;
VIII. Tur AssyrtAN AND Nreo- BABYLONIAN EMPIRES IN THE LIGHT
or REcENT RESEARCH ; : ‘ ‘ i K ,
IX. Tae Last Days or AncrENT Eaypt . . ‘ ‘ F .

388
428

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

a oo
PAGE
Statue of Rui, High Priest in the Reign of Ramses IT ‘ . Frontispiece
The bed of an ancient watercourse in the Wadiyén, Thebes. : ; 7
Paleolithic Implements of the Quaternary Period . ; : ; . 8
Paleolithic Implements. ; ‘ ; 9
Upper desert plateau, where Paleolithic Tegieneuten are aie 4 «. AZ
Flint Knife mounted in a gold handle A : , : ; : en ee
Buff Ware Vase, predynastic period . : 17
Camp of the expedition of the University of California e Nae ed-Der,
1901 :. : : 27
Portion of the “ Stele of ales fered s Telloh, representing the beaded
of the dead after a battle . A 38
Obverse of a slate relief aa he, the King of + Upper Bayne’ in fe pari
of a Bull . ‘ ; ‘ , ; ee)
Reverse of aslate relief . : ‘ + OL
Obverse of a slate relief with se Niatentinns of ‘the Repaid nomes ¢ D2
Reverse of a slate relief representing animals . : , : i lay
Professor Petrie’s camp at Abydos, 1901. : ; - : : « 60
The Tomb of King Den at Abydos . : : ; ; Soa) wee
Examples of conical vase-stoppers taken from tation é , 7 a wd
The Tomb of King Tjeser at Bét Khallaf . : ‘ w 82
False Door of the Tomb of Teta, an official of the IVth Dynasty : . 86
The Shiinet ez-Zebib: the fortress-town of the IId Dynasty at iii (SO
Statue No. 1 of the Cairo Museum . . 100
Exterior of the southern Brick Pyramid of Dashtr: XIIth Dynasty or 20g
The Pyramids of Giza during the inundation . ‘ ; : oe kad
List of Archaic cuneiform signs. : : ; : : : : . 147
Fragment of a list of Archaic cuneiform signs . ‘ : : : . 150
Obelisk of Manishtusu, King of the City of Kish . 155
Babil, the most northern mound which marks the site of the wien’ ats,
of Babylon . ; ‘ : . . 160

“ Stele of Victory,” sepupsendihie N aram- Sin conquering his enemies . »» 160

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

Roughly hewn sculpture of a lion standing over a fallen man, found at
Babylon ;

General view of the dietchadiane? on ee Kasr at Babyian

View within the palace of Nebuchadnezzar II

Excavations in the temple of Ninib at Babylon .

The principal mound of Birs Nimrud, which marks the site of ae aibecn
city of Borsippa . ‘

The principal mound at Sliskghat; wie aac the site of ha the
ancient capital of the Assyrians . ‘ :

The mound of Kuyunjik, one of the fas bends of the anéioek Assyrian
city of Nineveh .

Winged bull in the palace of iSomnmonnns on » Rayan fh © principal
mound marking the site of Nineveh : :

Clay memorial-tablet of Eannadu, viceroy of Berean .

Marble gate-socket bearing an inscription of Entemena, a powerful Paieai
of Shirpurla , : . ee

Stone gate-socket bearing an ogee of Ur-Engur, an scaly ting of ie
city of Ur

Statue of Gudea, viceroy of Siete ’

Tablet inscribed in Sumerian with details of a survey re revit property .

Clay tablet, found at Susa, bearing an inscription in the early proto-
Elamite character ; ; :

Clay tablet, found at Susa, eeanie an eegien in te sane ates
Elamite character

Block of limestone, found at Susa, Saas Ladue iona of ae
Shushinak . :

Brick stamped with an teeripdan of He caimauatiee ;

Semitic Babylonian contract-tablet, inscribed in the reign of Bama
with a deed recording the division of property

A Kudurru, or Boundary-stone, inscribed with a text of Nanmariiieel

A Kudurru, or Boundary-stone, inscribed with a text of Melishikhu .

Upper part of the Stele of Hammurabi, King of Babylon .

Clay contract-tablet and its outer case, First Dynasty ;

A track in the desert . . : °

A camping-ground in the deaaets een Birejik and tints ;

Approach to the city of Samarra, situated on the left bank of the Tigris

A small caravan in the mountains of Kurdistan . ' :

The city of Mosul

The village of Nebi Yunus , . ‘ : °
Portrait-sculpture of Hammurabi, Kine of Bapeion

A modern machine for irrigation on the Euphrates . 3 : °
Kaiks, or native boats, on the Euphrates at Birejik . : . <

The modern bridge of boats across the Tigris opposite Mosul

PAGE

161
163
165
166

167

168

169

170
173

175

188
191
192

230

231

233
241

245
256
260
265
280
282
283
284
285
286
287
289
293
297
298

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

A small Kelek, or raft, upon the Tigris at Baghdad . . . ° .

Statue of Mera, Chief Steward, IXth Dynasty . ‘ . . .

Wall of XIth Dynasty: Dér el-Bahari . : ‘ : : .

Wall of XVIIIth Dynasty: Dér el-Bahari .

Excavation of the north lower colonnade of the XIth ‘a fale
Dér el-Bahari, 1904

The granite threshold and sandstone pillars of ie XIth Avaades (inci:
at Dér el-Bahari

Excavation of the tomb of a peiletobale on ne pinkie of ae XIth Dytasly
temple, Dér el-Bahari, 1904. ‘ : ;

Cases of antiquities leaving Dér el-Bahari for isatapOrt to Cairo

Shipping cases of antiquities on board the Nile steamer at Luxor, for if
Egypt Exploration Fund

Statue of Queen Teta-shera

The two temples of Dér el-Bahari

The upper court and trilithon gate of the XVIIIth priate fori at Der
el-Bahari ‘

The tomb-mountain of jheaen ote Ij in the aren Bie Thebes

The tomb-hill of Shékh ’Abd el-Kiirna, Thebes

Wall painting from a Tomb at Shékh ’Abd el-Kfirna, Westetd T eben

Fresco in the tomb of Senmut, at Thebes . : ; : :

The valley of the Tombs of the Queens at Thebes. ; .

The Nile-Bank at Luxor . - ,

The Great Temple at Karnak

M. Legrain’s excavation of the Karnak peatuee ;

Portrait-group of a great noble and his wife, of the time of the XVIIIth
Dynasty : : : .

A tomb fitted up as an epee S iaidanme

Stone Object Bearing a Votive Inscription of wetielaanain

Entrance into one of the Galleries or Tunnels of the principal mound a
Sherghat L 5 : . ;

Stone tablet of Tukulti-Ninib 3g ae of. sai : .

The Ziggurat, or Temple Tower, of the Assyrian city of Oniak.

Work on one of the Meas cs Hai of Sennacherib, near Bavian in
Assyria

The Principal Rock sissies hansa 3 in the Gorge of ie Gomel near aan

The rock and citadel of Van

Ancient Flight of steps and gallery on oT Tate of the Wooksolindet of a

Part of the ancient fortifications of the city of Van

Within the Shrine of E-makh, Temple of the Goddess Nin- meee

Trench in the Babylonian Plain, between the mound of the Kasr and Tell
Amran ibn-Ali, showing a section of the paved sacred way : .

The Great Dam of Aswan, showing water rushing through the sluices

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

PAGE

The Kiosk at Phile in process of underpinning and restoration, January,
1902 . e e ° e e e e 449
The Ancient Quay of Phile, Ni tara bah, 1904 ; : . 450

The Rock of Konosso in January, 1902, before the balding of a Dam . 452
The Isle of Konosso, with its inscriptions, November, 1904 : . . 454

EGYPT AND MESOPOTAMIA

In the Light of Recent Hucavation and Research

CHAPTER I

THE DISCOVERY OF PREHISTORIC EGYPT

URING the last ten years our conception of the

beginnings of Egyptian antiquity has profoundly
altered. When Prof. Maspero published the first vol-
ume of his great Histoire Ancienné des Péuplés des
VOrient Classique, in 1895, Egyptian history, properly
so called, still began with the Pyramid-builders, Sne-
feru, Khufu, and Khafra (Cheops and Chephren), and
the legendary lists of earlier kings preserved at Abydos
and Sakkara were still quoted as the only source of
knowledge of the time before the ITVth Dynasty. Of
a prehistoric Egypt nothing was known, beyond a few
flint flakes gathered here and there upon the desert
plateaus, which might or might not tell of an age when
the ancestors of the Pyramid-builders knew only the
stone tools and weapons of the primeval savage.

Now, however, the veil which has hidden the begin-
nings of Egyptian civilization from us has been lifted,
and we see things, more or less, as they actually were,

unobscured by the traditions of a later day. Until the
{

2 THE DISCOVERY OF PREHISTORIC EGYPT

last few years nothing of the real beginnings of history
in either Egypt or Mesopotamia had been found; legend
supplied the only material for the reconstruction of the
earliest history of the oldest civilized nations of the
globe. Nor was it seriously supposed that any rel-
ics of prehistoric Egypt or Mesopotamia ever would
be found. The antiquity of the known history of these
countries already appeared so great that nobody took
into consideration the possibility of our discovering a
prehistoric Egypt or Mesopotamia; the idea was too
remote from practical work. And further, civilization
in these countries had lasted so long that it seemed more
than probable that all traces of their prehistoric age
had long since been swept away. Yet the possibility,
which seemed hardly worth a moment’s consideration
in 1895, is in 1905 an assured reality, at least as far as
Egypt is concerned. Prehistoric Babylonia has yet to
be discovered. It is true, for example, that at Mukay-
yar, the site of ancient Ur of the Chaldees, burials in
earthenware coffins, in which the skeletons lie in the
doubled-up position characteristic of Neolithic inter-
ments, have been found; but there is no doubt whatever
that these are burials of a much later date, belonging,
quite possibly, to the Parthian period. Nothing that
may rightfully be termed prehistoric has yet been
found in the Euphrates valley, whereas in Egypt pre-
historic antiquities are now almost as well known and
as well represented in our museums as are the prehis-
toric antiquities of Europe and America. .

With the exception of a few paleoliths from the sur-

PREHISTORIC TRACES 3

face of the Syrian desert, near the Euphrates valley,
not a single implement of the Age of Stone has yet been
found in Southern Mesopotamia, whereas Egypt has
yielded to us the most perfect examples of the flint-
knapper’s art known, flint tools and weapons more
beautiful than the finest that Europe and America can
show.. The reason is not far to seek. Southern Meso-
potamia is an alluvial country, and the ancient cities,
which doubtless mark the sites of the oldest settlements
in the land, are situated in the alluvial marshy plain
between the Tigris and the Euphrates; so that ail traces
of the Neolithic culture of the country would seem to
have disappeared, buried deep beneath city-mounds, clay
and marsh. It is the same in the Egyptian Delta, a
similar country; and here no traces of the prehistoric
culture of Egypt have been found. The attempt to find
them was made last year at Buto, which is known to be
one of the most antique centres of civilization, and prob-
ably was one of the earliest settlements in Egypt, but
without success. The infiltration of water had made
excavation impossible and had no doubt destroyed
everything belonging to the most ancient settlement. It
is not going too far to predict that exactly the same
thing will be found by any explorer who tries to dis-
cover a Neolithic stratum beneath a city-mound of Baby-
lonia. There is little hope that prehistoric Chaldea
will ever be known to us. But in Egypt the conditions
are different. The Delta is like Babylonia, it is true;
but in the Upper Nile valley the river flows down with
but a thin border of alluvial land on either side, through

4 THE DISCOVERY OF PREHISTORIC EGYPT

the rocky and hilly desert, the dry Sahara, where rain
falls but once in two or three years. Antiquities buried
in this soil in the most remote ages are preserved intact
as they were first interred, until the modern investi-
gator comes along to look for them. And it is on the
desert margin of the valley that the remains of pre-
historic Egypt have been found. That is the reason for
their perfect preservation till our own day, and why
we know prehistoric Egypt so well.

The chief work of Egyptian civilization was fi
proper irrigation of the alluvial soil, the turning of
marsh into cultivated fields, and the reclamation of land
from the desert for the purposes of agriculture. Owing
to the rainless character of the country, the only means
of obtaining water for the crops is by irrigation, and
where the fertilizing Nile water cannot be taken by
means of canals, there cultivation ends and the desert
begins. Before Egyptian civilization, properly so called,
began, the valley was a great marsh through which
the Nile found its way north to the sea. The half-
savage, stone-using ancestors of the civilized Egyp-
tians hunted wild fowl, crocodiles, and hippopotami in
the marshy valley; but except in a few isolated settle-
ments on convenient mounds here and there (the fore-
runners of the later villages), they did not live there.
Their settlements were on the dry desert margin, and
it was here, upon low tongues of desert hill jutting out
into the plain, that they buried their dead. Their
simple shallow graves were safe from the flood, and,
but for the depredations of jackals and hyenas, here

ANCIENT BURIAL-PLACES 5

they have remained intact till our own day, and have
yielded up to us the facts from which we have derived
our knowledge of prehistoric Egypt. Thus it is that
we know so much of the Egyptians of the Stone Age,
while of their contemporaries in Mesopotamia we know
nothing, nor is anything further likely to be discoy-
ered.

But these desert cemeteries, with their crowds of
oval shallow graves, covered by only a few inches of
surface soil, in which the Neolithic Egyptians lie
crouched up with their flint implements and polished
pottery beside them, are but monuments of the later
age of prehistoric Egypt. Long before the Neolithic
Egyptian hunted his game in the marshes, and here
and there essayed the work of reclamation for the pur-
poses of an incipient agriculture, a far older race in-
habited the valley of the Nile. The written records of
Egyptian civilization go back four thousand years be
fore Christ, or earlier, and the Neolithic Age of Egypt
must go back to a period several thousand years before
that. But we can now go back much further still, to the
Paleolithic Age of Egypt. At a time when Europe was
still covered by the ice and snows of the Glacial Period,
and man fought as an equal, hardly yet as a superior,
with cave-bear and mammoth, the Paleolithic Egyptians
lived on the banks of the Nile. Their habitat was
doubtless the desert slopes, often, too, the plateaus
themselves; but that they lived entirely upon the
plateaus, high up above the Nile marsh, is improbable.
There, it is true, we find their flint implements, the

6 THE DISCOVERY OF PREHISTORIC EGYPT

great pear-shaped weapons of the types of Chelles, St. °
Acheul, and Le Moustier, types well known to all who
are acquainted with the flint implements of the ‘‘ Drift’’
in Europe. And it is there that the theory, generally
accepted hitherto, has placed the habitat of the makers
and users of these implements.

| The idea was that in Paleolithic days, contemporary
with the Glacial Age of Northern Europe and America,
the climate of Egypt was entirely different ‘from that
of later times and of to-day. Instead of dry desert, the
mountain plateaus bordering the Nile valley were sup-
posed to have been then covered with forest, through
which flowed countless streams to feed the river below.
It was suggested that remains of these streams were to
be seen in the side ravines, or wadis, of the Nile valley,
which run up from the low desert on the river level
into the hills on either hand. These wadis undoubtedly
show extensive traces of strong water action; they
curve and twist as the streams found their easiest way
to the level through the softer strata, they are heaped
up with great water-worn boulders, they are hollowed
out where waterfalls once fell. They have the appear-
ance of dry watercourses, exactly what any mountain
burns would be were the water-supply suddenly cut off
for ever, the climate altered from rainy to eternal sun-
glare, and every plant and tree blasted, never to grow
again. Acting on the supposition that this idea was
a correct one, most observers have concluded that the
climate of Egypt in remote periods was very differ-
ent from the dry, rainless one now obtaining. To

TESTIMONY OF THE WATERCOURSES 7

-

provide the water for the wadi streams, heavy rainfall
and forests are desiderated. They were easily supplied,
on the hypothesis. Forests clothed the mountain pla-
teaus, heavy rains fell, and the water rushed down to
the Nile, carving out the great watercourses which

THE BED OF AN ANCIENT WATERCOURSE IN THE WADIYEN, THEBES,

remain to this day, bearing testimony to the truth.
And the flints, which the Paleolithic inhabitants of the
plateau-forests made and used, still lie on the now tree-
less and sun-baked desert surface.

This is certainly a very weak conclusion. In fact,
it seriously damages the whole argument, the water-

8 THE DISCOVERY OF PREHISTORIC EGYPT

courses to the contrary notwithstanding. The pale-
oliths are there. They can be picked up by any visitor.
There they lie, great flints of the Drift types, just like
those found in the gravel-beds of England and Belgium,
on the desert surface where they were made. Un-
doubtedly where they were made, for the places where
they lie are the actual ancient flint workshops, where
the flints were chipped. Everywhere around are innu-
merable flint chips and perfect weapons, burnt black
and patinated by ages of sunlight. We are taking one
particular spot in the hills of Western Thebes as an
example, but there are plenty of others, such as the
Wadi esh-Shékh on the right bank of the Nile opposite
Maghagha, whence Mr. H. Seton-Karr has brought back
specimens of flint tools of all ages from the Paleolithic
to the Neolithic periods.

The Paleolithic flint workshops on the Theban hills
have been visited of late years by Mr. Seton-Karr, by
Prof. Schweinfurth, Mr. Allen Sturge, and Dr. Blanck-
enhorn, by Mr. Portch, Mr. Ayrton, and Mr. Hall. The
weapons illustrated here were found by Messrs. Hall
and Ayrton, and are now preserved in the British Mu-
seum. Among these flints shown we notice two fine
specimens of the pear-shaped type of St. Acheul,
with curious adze-shaped implements of primitive
type to left and right. Below, to the right, is a
_very primitive instrument of Chelléan type, being
merely a sharpened pebble. Above, to left and right,
are two specimens of the curious half-moon-shaped
instruments which are characteristic of the Theban flint

Paleolithic Implements of the Quaternary Period.
From the desert plateau and slopes west of Thebes.

as
ease

a ae
n ea

PALAOLITHIC RELICS 9

field, and are hardly known elsewhere. All have the
beautiful brown patina, which only ages of sunburn can
give. The ‘‘ poignard ”’ type to the left, at the bottom
of the plate, is broken off short.

In the smaller illustration we see some remarkable
types: two scrapers or ff TT Z
knives with strongly
marked ‘‘ bulb of per-
cussion’’ (the spot
where the flint-knapper
struck and from which
the flakes flew off), a
very regular cowp-de-
poing which looks al-
most like a large arrow-
head, and on the right
a much weathered and
patinated scraper which
must be of immemorial a
age. This came from PALBOLITHIC IMPLEMENTS.
the top plateau, not From Man, March, 1905.
from the slopes (or subsidiary plateaus at the head of
the wadis), as did the great St. Acheulian weapons. The
circular object is very remarkable: it is the half of the
ring of a ‘* morpholith ’’ (a round flinty accretion often
found in the Theban limestone) which has been split,
and the split (flat) side carefully bevelled. Several of
these interesting objects have been found in conjunction
with Paleolithic implements at Thebes. No doubt the
flints lie on the actual surface where they were made.

10 THE DISCOVERY OF PREHISTORIC EGYPT

No later water action has swept them away and cov-
ered them with gravel, no later human habitation has
hidden them with successive deposits of soil, no gradual
deposit of dust and rubbish has buried them deep.
They lie as they were left in the far-away Paleeolithic
Age, and they have lain there till taken away by the
modern explorer.

But this is not the case with all the Paleolithic flints
of Thebes. In the year 1882 Maj.-Gen. Pitt-Rivers
discovered Paleolithic flints in the deposit of diluvial
detritus which lies between the cultivation and the
mountains on the west bank of the Nile opposite Luxor.
Many of these are of the same type as those found on
the surface of the mountain plateau which lies at the
head of the great wadi of the Tombs of the Kings, while
the diluvial deposit is at its mouth. The stuff of which
the detritus is composed evidently came originally from
the high plateau, and was washed down, with the flints,
in ancient times.

This is quite conceivable, but how is it that the flints
left behind on the plateau remain on the original an-
cient surface? How is it conceivable that if (on the
old theory) these plateaus were in Paleolithic days
clothed with forest, the Paleolithic flints could even in
a single instance remain undisturbed from Paleolithic
times to the present day, when the forest in which they
were made and the forest soil on which they reposed
have entirely disappeared? If there were woods and
forests on the heights, it would seem impossible that |
we should find, as we do, Paleolithic implements lying

THE DESERT PLATEAUS id

in situ on the desert surface, around the actual manu-
factories where they were made. Yet if the constant
rainfall and the vegetation of the Libyan desert area
in Paleolithic days is all a myth (as it most probably
is), how came the embedded paleoliths, found by Gen.
Pitt-Rivers, in the bed of diluvial detritus which is
apparently débris from the plateau brought down by
the Paleolithic wadi streams?

Water erosion has certainly formed the Theban
wadis. But this water erosion was probably not that
which would be the result of perennial streams flowing
down from wooded heights, but of torrents like those
of to-day, which fill the wadis once in three years or
so after heavy rain, but repeated at much closer inter-
vals. We may in fact suppose just so much difference
in meteorological conditions as would make it possible
for sudden rain-storms to occur over the desert at far
more frequent intervals than at present. That would
account for the detritus bed at the mouth of the wad,
and its embedded flints, and at the same time maintain
the general probability of the idea that the desert pla-
teaus were desert in Paleolithic days as now, and that
early man only knapped his flints up there because he.
found the flint there. He himself lived on the slopes
and nearer the marsh.

This new view seems to be much sounder and more
probable than the old one, maintained by Flinders
Petrie and Blanckenhorn, according to which the high
plateau was the home of man in Paleolithic times, when
“‘ the rainfall, as shown by the valley erosion and water-

12 THE DISCOVERY OF PREHISTORIC EGYPT

falls, must have caused an abundant vegetation on the
plateau, where man could live and hunt his game.’’’
Were this so, it is patent that the Paleolithic flints could
not have been found on the desert surface as they are.
Mr. H. J. L. Beadnell, of the Geological Survey . of

UPPER DESERT PLATEAU, WHERE PALAZOLITHIC IMPLEMENTS ARE FOUND.
Thebes: 1,400 feet above the Nile.

Egypt, to whom we are indebted for the promulgation
of the more modern and probable view, says: ‘‘ Is it
certain that the high plateau was then clothed with
forests? What evidence is there to show that it differed
in any important respect from its present aspect? And
if, as I suggest, desert conditions obtained then as now,

1 Petrie, Nagada and Ballas, p. 49.

THE CHALCOLITHIC PERIOD 13

and man merely worked his flints along the edges of
the plateaus overlooking the Nile valley, I see no rea-
son why flint implements, dating even from Paleolithic
times, should not in favourable cases still be found in
the spots where they were left, surrounded by the
flakes struck off in manufacture. On the flat plateaus
the occasional rains which fall—once in three or four
years—can effect but little transport of material, and
merely lower the general level by dissolving the under-
lying limestone, so that the plateau surface is left with
a coating of nodules and blocks of insoluble flint and
chert. Flint implements might thus be expected to
remain in many localities for indefinite periods, but
they would certainly become more or less ‘ patinated,’
pitted on the surface, and rounded at the angles after
long exposure to heat, cold, and blown sand.’’ This is
exactly the case of the Palxolithic flint tools from the
desert plateau.

We do not know whether Paleolithic man in Egypt
was contemporary with the cave-man of Europe. We
have no means of gauging the age of the Paleolithic
Egyptian weapons, as we have for the Neolithic period.
The historical (dynastic) period of Egyptian annals
began with the unification of the kingdom under one
head somewhere about 4500 B.c. At that time copper
as well as stone weapons were used, so that we may
say that at the beginning of the historical age the
Egyptians were living in the ‘‘ Chaleolithic ’”’ period.
We can trace the use of copper back for a considerable
period anterior to the beginning of the Ist Dynasty,

14 THE DISCOVERY OF PREHISTORIC EGYPT

so that we shall probably not be far wrong if we do not
bring down the close of the purely Neolithic Age in
Egypt—the close of the Age of Stone, properly so called
—later than +5000 B.c. How far back in the remote
ages the transition period between the Paleolithic and
Neolithic Ages should be placed, it is utterly impossible
to say. The use of stone for weapons and implements
continued in Egypt as late as the time of the XIIth
Dynasty, about 2500-2000 B.c. But these XIIth Dy-
nasty stone implements show by their forms how late
they are in the history of the Stone Age. The axe
heads, for instance, are in form imitations of the copper
and bronze axe heads usual at that period; they are
stone imitations of metal, instead of the originals on
whose model the metal weapons were formed. The
flint implements of the XIIth Dynasty were a curious
survival from long past ages. After the time of the
XIIth Dynasty stone was no longer used for tools or
weapons, except for the sacred rite of making the first
incision in the dead bodies before beginning the opera-
tions of embalming; for this purpose, as Herodotus tells
us, an ‘‘ Ethiopian stone’’ was used. This was no
doubt a knife of flint or chert, like those of the Neo-
lithic ancestors of the Egyptians, and the continued use
of a stone knife for this one purpose only is a very
interesting instance of a ceremonial survival. We may
compare the wigs of British judges.

We have no specimen of a flint knife which can defi-
nitely be asserted to have belonged to an embalmer, but
of the archaistic flint weapons of the XIIth Dynasty

Flint Knife.
Photograph reproduced from M. de Morgan's ‘Recherches.

PREHISTORIC FLINTS 15

we have several specimens. They were found by Prof.
Petrie at the place named by him ‘‘ Kahun,”’ the site
of a XIIth Dynasty town built near the pyramid of
King Usertsen (or Senusret) II at Ilahun, at the mouth
of the canal leading from the Nile valley into the oasis-
province of the Fayyfim. These Kahun flints, and
others of probably the same period found by Mr. Seton-
Karr at the very ancient flint works in the Wadi esh-
Shékh, are of very coarse and poor workmanship as
compared with the stone-knapping triumphs of the late
Neolithic and early Chalecolithic periods. The delicacy
of the art had all been lost. But the best flint knives
of the early period—dating to just a little before the
time of the Ist Dynasty, when flint-working had at-
tained its apogee, and copper had just begun to be used
—are undoubtedly the most remarkable stone weapons
ever made in the world. The grace and utility of the
form, the delicacy of the fluted chipping on the side,
and the minute care with which the tiny serrations of
the cutting edge, serrations so small that often they can
hardly be seen with the naked eye, are made, can cer-
tainly not be parallelled elsewhere. The art of flint-
knapping reached its zenith in Ancient Egypt. The
‘specimen illustrated has a handle covered with gold
decorated with incised designs representing animals.
The prehistoric Egyptians may also fairly be said
to have attained greater perfection than other peoples
in the Neolithic stage of culture, in other arts besides
the making of stone tools and weapons. Their pottery
is of remarkable perfection. Now that the sites of the

16 THE DISCOVERY OF PREHISTORIC EGYPT

Egyptian prehistoric settlements have been so thor-
oughly explored by competent archeologists (and, un-
happily, as thoroughly pillaged by incompetent natives),
this prehistoric Egyptian pottery has become extremely
well known. In fact, it is so common that good speci-
mens may be bought anywhere in Egypt for a few
piastres. Most museums possess sets of this pottery,
of which great quantities have been brought back from
Egypt by Prof. Petrie and other explorers. It is of
very great interest, artistically as well as historically.
The potter’s wheel was not yet invented, and all the
vases, even those of the most perfect shape, were built
up by hand. The perfection of form attained without
the aid of the wheel is truly marvellous.

The commonest type of this pottery is a red polished
ware vase with black top, due to its having been baked
mouth downward in a fire, the ashes of which, according
to Prof. Petrie, deoxidized the hematite burnishing, and
so turned the red colour to black. ‘‘ In good examples
the hematite has not only been reduced to black mag-
netic oxide, but the black has the highest polish, as seen
on fine Greek vases. This is probably due to the forma-
tion of carbonyl gas in the smothered fire. This gas acts
as a solvent of magnetic oxide, and hence allows it to
assume a new surface, like the glassy surface of some
marbles subjected to solution in water.’’ This black and
red ware appears to be the most ancient prehistoric
Egyptian pottery known. Later in date are a red ware |
and a black ware with rude geometrical incised designs,
imitating basketwork, and with the incised lines filled

PREHISTORIC POTTERY 7a

in with white. Later again is a buff ware, either plain
or decorated with wavy lines, concentric circles, and
elaborate drawings of boats sailing on the Nile, os-
triches, fish, men and women, and so on. These designs
are in deep red. With this elaborate pottery the Neo-
lithic ceramic art of Egypt reached its highest point;
in the _ succeeding - — See
period (the begin-|
ning of the historic
age) there was a de-
celine in workman-

ship, exhibiting] }
clumsy forms and| §
bad colour, and it is |
not until the time of | |
the IVth Dynasty |
that good pottery (a |
fine polished red) is
once more found. |
Meanwhile the in- |
vention of glazed pot- |_
tery, which was un- PERE VAR VASE

known to the prehis- S pelinosd fer He de Morgan's Iiecherohes, ¥ol. i a
toric Egyptians, had been made (before the beginning
of the Ist Dynasty). The unglazed ware of the first three
dynasties was bad, but the new invention of light blue
glazed faience (not porcelain properly so called) seems
to have made great progress, and we possess fine speci-
mens at the beginning of the Ist Dynasty. The pre-
historic Egyptians were also proficient in other arts.

18 THE DISCOVERY OF PREHISTORIC EGYPT

They carved ivory and they worked gold, which is
known to have been almost the first metal worked by
man; certainly in Egypt it was utilized for ornament
even before copper was used for work. We may refer
to the illustration of a flint knife with gold handle,
already given.*

The date of the actual introduction of copper for
tools and weapons into Egypt is uncertain, but it seems
probable that copper was occasionally used at a very
early period. Copper weapons have been found in pre-
dynastic graves beside the finest buff pottery with elab-
orate red designs, so that we may say that when the
flint-working and pottery of the Neolithic Egyptians
had reached its zenith, the use of copper was already
known, and copper weapons were occasionally em-
ployed. We can thus speak of the ‘‘ Chalcolithic ’’
period in Egypt as having already begun at that time,
no doubt several centuries before the beginning of the
historical or dynastic age. Strictly speaking, the Egyp-
tians remained in the ‘‘ Chalcolithic ’’ period till the
end of the XIIth Dynasty, but in practice it is best
to speak of this period, when the word is used, as ex-
tending from the time of the finest flint weapons and
pottery of the prehistoric age (when the ‘‘ Neolithic ”’
period may be said to close) till about the IId or IIId
Dynasty. By that time the ‘ Bronze,’’ or, rather,
‘* Copper,’’ Age of Egypt had well begun, and already
stone was not in common use. |

The prehistoric pottery is of the greatest value to

1See illustration.

THE SYSTEM OF “SEQUENCE-DATING” 19

the archeologist, for with its help some idea may be
obtained of the succession of periods within the late
Neolithic-Chalcolithic Age. The enormous number of
prehistoric graves which have been examined enables
us to make an exhaustive comparison of the different
kinds of pottery found in them, so that we can arrange
them in order according to pottery they contained.
By this means we obtain an idea of the development
of different types of pottery, and the sequence of the
types. Thus it is that we can say with some degree of
confidence that the black and red ware is the most
ancient form, and that the buff with red designs is one
of the latest forms of prehistoric pottery. Other ob-
jects found in the graves can be classified as they occur
with different pottery types.

With the help of the pottery we can thus gain a
more or less reliable conspectus of the development of
the late ‘* Neolithic ’’ culture of Egypt. This system
_ of ‘* sequence-dating ’’ was introduced by Prof. Petrie,
and is certainly very useful. It must not, however, be
pressed too far or be regarded as an iron-bound system,
with which all subsequent discoveries must be made
to fit in by force. It is not to be supposed that all
prehistoric pottery developed its series of types in an
absolutely orderly manner without deviations or throws-
back. The work of man’s hands is variable and eccen-
tric, and does not develop or evolve in an undeviating
course as the work of nature does. It is a mistake,
very often made by anthropologists and archeologists,
who forget this elementary fact, to assume “‘ curves of

20 THE DISCOVERY OF PREHISTORIC EGYPT

development,’’ and so forth, or semi-savage culture, on
absolutely even and regular lines. Human culture has
not developed either evenly or regularly, as a matter
of fact. Therefore we cannot always be sure that,
because the Egyptian black and red pottery does not
occur in graves with buff and red, it is for this reason
absolutely earlier in date than the latter. Some of the
development-sequences may in reality be contemporary
with others instead of earlier, and allowance must al-
ways be made for aberrations and reversions to earlier
types.

This caveat having been entered, however, we may
provisionally accept Prof. Petrie’s system of sequence-
dating as giving the best classification of the prehistoric
antiquities according to development. So it may fairly
be said that, as far as we know, the black and red pot-
tery (‘‘ sequence-date 30—’’) is the most ancient Neo-
lithic Egyptian ware known; that the buff and red did
not begin to be used till about ‘‘ sequence-date 45; ”’
that bone and ivory carvings were commonest in the
earlier period (‘‘ sequence-dates 30-50’); that copper
was almost unknown till ‘‘ sequence-date 50,’’ and so
on. The arbitrary numbers used range from 30 to 80,
in order to allow for possible earlier and later additions,
which may be rendered necessary by the progress of
discovery. The numbers are of course as purely arbi-
trary and relative as those of the different thermomet-
rical systems, but they afford a convenient system of
arrangement. The products of the prehistoric Egyp-
tians are, so to speak, distributed on a conventional

M. DE MORGAN’S WORK 21

plan over a scale numbered from 30 to 80, 30 represent-
ing the beginning and 80 the close of the term, so far
as its close has as yet been ascertained. It is probable
that ‘‘ sequence-date 80 ’’ more or less accurately marks
the beginning of the dynastic or historical period.

This hypothetically chronological classification is, as
has been said, due to Prof. Petrie, and has been adopted
by Mr. Randall-Maclver and other students of prehis-
toric Egypt in their work.' To Prof. Petrie then is due
the credit of systematizing the study of Egyptian pre-
historic antiquities; but the further credit of having
discovered these antiquities themselves and settled their
date belongs not to him but to the distinguished French
archeologist, M. J. de Morgan, who was for several
years director of the museum at Giza, and is now chief
of the French archeological delegation in Persia, which
has made of late years so many important discoveries.
The proof of the prehistoric date of this class of antiqui-
ties was given, not by Prof. Petrie after his excavations
at Dendera in 1897-8, but by M. de Morgan in his
volume, Recherches sur les Origines de VEgypte: VAge
de la Prerre et les Métaux, published in 1895-6. In
this book the true chronological position of the pre-
historic antiquities was pointed out, and the existence
of an Egyptian Stone Age finally decided. M. de Mor-
gan’s work was based on careful study of the results.
of excavations carried on for several years by the Egyp-
tian government in various parts of Egypt, in the
course of which a large number of cemeteries of the

1El Amra and Abydos, Egypt Exploration Fund, 1902.

22 THE DISCOVERY OF PREHISTORIC EGYPT

primitive type had been discovered. It was soon evi-
dent to M. de Morgan that these primitive graves, with
their unusual pottery and flint implements, could be
nothing less than the tombs of the prehistoric Egyp-
tians, the Egyptians of the Stone Age.

Objects of the prehistoric period had been known
to the museums for many years previously, but owing
to the uncertainty of their provenance.and the absence
of knowledge of the existence of the primitive ceme-
teries, no scientific conclusions had been arrived at with
regard to them; and it was not till the publication of
M. de Morgan’s book that they were recognized and
classified as prehistoric. The necropoles investigated
by M. de Morgan and his assistants extended from
Kawamil in the north, about twenty miles north of
Abydos, to Edfu in the south. The chief cemeteries
between these two points were those of Bét Allam,
Saghel el-Baglieh, el--Amra, Nakada, Tikh, and Gebe-
lén. All the burials were of simple type, analogous to
those of the Neolithic races in the rest of the world.
In a shallow, oval grave, excavated often but a few
inches ‘below the surface of the soil, lay the body,
cramped up with the knees to the chin, sometimes in
a rough box of pottery, more often with only a mat to
cover it. Ready to the hand of the dead man were his
flint weapons and tools, and the usual red and black,
‘or buff and red, pots lay beside him; originally, no
doubt, they had been filled with the funeral meats, to
sustain the ghost in the next world. Occasionally a
simple copper weapon was found. With the body were

SOLACE FOR THE DEAD 23

also buried slate palettes for grinding the green eye-
paint which the Egyptians loved even at this early
period. These are often carved to suggest the forms
of animals, such as birds, bats, tortoises, goats, ete.;
on others are fantastic creatures with two heads.
Combs of bone, too, are found, ornamented in a simi-
lar way with birds’ or goats’ heads, often double. And
most interesting of all are the small bone and ivory
figures of men and women which are also found. These
usually have little blue beads for eyes, and are of the
quaintest and naivest appearance conceivable. Here
we have an elderly man with a long pointed beard,
there two women with inane smiles upon their counte-
nances, here another woman, of better work this time,
with a child slung across her shoulder. This figure,
which is in the British Museum, must be very late, as
prehistoric Egyptian antiquities go. It is almost as
good in style as the early Ist Dynasty objects. Such
were the objects which the simple piety of the early
Egyptian prompted him to bury with the bodies of his
dead, in order that they might find solace and content-
ment in the other world.

All the prehistoric cemeteries are of this type, with
_ the graves pressed closely together, so that they often
impinge upon one another. The nearness of the graves
to the surface is due to the exposed positions, at the
entrances to wadis, in which the primitive cemeteries
are usually found. The result is that they are always
swept by the winds, which prevent the desert sand from
accumulating over them, and so have preserved the

24 THE DISCOVERY OF PREHISTORIC EGYPT

original level of the ground. From their proximity to
the surface they are often found disturbed, more often
by the agency of jackals than that of man.

Contemporaneously with M. de Morgan’s explora-
tions, Prof. Flinders Petrie and Mr. J. Quibell had,
in the winter of 1894-5, excavated in the districts of
Taikh and Nakada, on the west bank of the Nile opposite
Koptos, a series of extensive cemeteries of the prim-
itive type, from which they obtained a large number
of antiquities, published in their volume Nagada and
Ballas. The plates giving representations of the an-
tiquities found were of the highest interest, but the
scientific value of the letter-press is vitiated by the
fact that the true historical position of the antiquities
was not perceived by their discoverers, who came to the
conclusion that these remains were those of a ‘‘ New
Race ’’ of Libyan invaders. This race, they supposed,
had entered Egypt after the close of the flourishing
period of the ‘‘ Old Kingdom ”’ at the end of the VIth
Dynasty, and had occupied part of the Nile valley from
that time till the period of the Xth Dynasty.

This conclusion was proved erroneous by M. de
Morgan almost as soon as made, and the French arche-
ologist’s identification of the primitive remains as pre-
dynastic was at once generally accepted. It was obvi-
ous that a hypothesis of the settlement of a stone-using
barbaric race in the midst of Egypt at so late a date
as the period immediately preceding the XIIth Dynasty,
a race which mixed in no way with the native Egyp-
tians themselves, and left no trace of their influence upon

EXCAVATION AT EL-’AMRA 25

the later Egyptians, was one which ‘demanded greater

faith than the simple explanation of M. de Morgan.
) The error of the British explorers was at once ad-
mitted by Mr. Quibell, in his volume on the excavations
of 1897 at el-Kab, published in 1898.1. Mr. Quibell at
once found full and adequate confirmation of M. de
Morgan’s discovery in his diggings at el-Kab. Prof.
Petrie admitted the correctness of M. de Morgan’s
views in the preface to his volume Diospolis Parva,
published three years later in 1901.2. The preface to
the first volume of M. de Morgan’s book contained
a generous recognition of the method and general
accuracy of Prof. Petrie’s excavations, which con-
trasted favourably, according to M. de Morgan, with
the excavations of others, generally carried on without
scientific control, and with the sole aim of obtaining
antiquities or literary texts. That M. de Morgan’s own
work was carried out as scientifically and as carefully is
evident from the fact that his conclusions as to the
chronological position of the prehistoric antiquities
have been shown to be correct. To describe M. de
Morgan’s discovery as a ‘‘ happy guess,’’ as has been
done, is therefore beside the mark.

Another most important British excavation was that
carried on by Messrs. Randall-MacIver and Wilkin at
el-’-Amra. The imposing lion-headed promontory of
el-’Amra stands out into the plain on the west bank

1El-Kab. Egyptian Research Account, 1897, p. 11.
2 Diospolis Parva. Egypt Exploration Fund, 1901, p. 2.
* Recherches: Age dela Pierre, p. xiii.

26 THE DISCOVERY OF PREHISTORIC EGYPT

of the Nile about five miles south of Abydos. At the
foot of this hill M. de Morgan found a very extensive
prehistoric necropolis, which he examined, but did not
excavate to any great extent, and the work of thor-
oughly excavating it was performed by Messrs. Ran-
dall-MacIver and Wilkin for the Egypt Exploration
Fund. The results have thrown very great light upon
the prehistoric culture of Egypt, and burials of all pre-
historic types, some of them previously unobserved,
were found. Among the most interesting are burials
in pots, which have also been found by Mr. Garstang
in a predynastic necropolis at Ragagna, north of Aby-
dos. One of the more remarkable observations made at
el-’-Amra was the progressive development of the tombs
from the simplest pot-burial to a small brick chamber,
the embryo of the brick tombs of the Ist Dynasty.
Among the objects recovered from this site may be
mentioned a pottery model of oxen, a box in the shape
of a model hut, and a slate ‘‘ palette ’’ with what is
perhaps the oldest Egyptian hieroglyph known, a rep-
resentation of the fetish-sign of the god Min, in relief.
All these are preserved in the British Museum. The
skulls of the bodies found were carefully preserved for
craniometric examination.

In 1901 an extensive prehistoric cemetery was being
excavated by Messrs. Reisner and Lythgoe at Nag’
ed-Dér, opposite Girga, and at el-Ahaiwa, further north,
another prehistoric necropolis has been excavated by
these gentlemen, working for the University of Cali-
fornia. The cemetery of Nag’ ed-Dér is of the usual

THE NAG ED-DER CEMETERY al

prehistoric type, with its multitudes of small oval
graves, excavated just a little way below the surface.
Graves of this kind are the most primitive of all. Those
at el-’Amra are usually more developed, often, as has°
been noted, rising to the height of regular brick tombs.
They are evidently later, nearer to the time of the Ist

CAMP OF THE EXPEDITION OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT NAG’ ED-DER, 1901.

Dynasty. The position of the Nag’ ed-Dér cemetery
is also characteristic. It lies on the usual low ridge
at the entrance to a desert wadi, which is itself one of
the most picturesque. in this part of Egypt, with its
chaos of great boulders and fallen rocks. An illustra-
tion of the camp of Mr. Reisner’s expedition at Nag’
ed-Dér is given above. The excavations of the Uni-

28 THE DISCOVERY OF PREHISTORIC EGYPT

versity of California are carried out with the greatest
possible care and are financed with the greatest possible
liberality. Mr. Reisner has therefore been able to keep
an absolutely complete photographic record of every-
thing, even down to the successive stages in the open-
ing of a tomb, which will be of the greatest use to sci-
ence when published.

For a detailed study of the antiquities of the pre-
historic period the publications of Prof. Petrie, Mr.
Quibell, and Mr. Randall-MacIver are more useful than
that of M. de Morgan, who does not give enough details.
Every atom of evidence is given in the publications of
the British explorers, whereas it is a characteristic of
French work to give brilliant conclusions, beautifully
illustrated, without much of the evidence on which the
conclusions are based. This kind of work does not
appeal to the Anglo-Saxon mind, which takes nothing
on trust, even from the most renowned experts, and
always wants to know the why and wherefore. The
complete publication of evidence which marks the Brit-
ish work will no doubt be met with, if possible in even
more complete detail, in the American work of Messrs.
Reisner, Lythgoe, and Mace (the last-named is an Eng-
lishman) for the University of California, when pub-
lished. The question of speedy versus delayed publi-
cation is a very vexing one. Prof. Petrie prefers to
publish as speedily as possible; six months after the
season’s work in Egypt is done, the full publication
with photographs of everything appears. Mr. Reisner
and the French explorers prefer to publish nothing until

THE RANGE OF EXPLORATION 29

they have exhaustively studied the whole of the evi-
dence, and can extract nothing more from it. This |
would be admirable if the French published their dis-
coveries fully, but they do not. Even M. de Morgan has
not approached the fulness of detail which characterizes
British work and which will characterize Mr. Reisner’s
publication when it appears. The only drawback to
this method is that general interest in the particular
excavations described tends to pass away before the
full description appears.

Prof. Petrie has explored other prehistoric sites at
Abadiya, and Mr. Quibell at el-Kab. M. de Morgan and
his assistants have examined a large number of sites,
ranging from the Delta to el-Kab. Further research
has shown that some of the sites identified by. M. de
Morgan as prehistoric are in reality of much later date,
for example, Kahun, where the late flints of XIIth
Dynasty date were found. He notes that ‘‘ large num-
bers of Neolithic flint weapons are found in the desert
on the borders of the Fayytim, and at Helwan, south
of Cairo,’’? and that all the important necropoles and
kitchen-middens of the predynastic people are to be
found in the districts of Abydos and Thebes, from
el-Kawamil in the North to el-Kab in the South. It is
of course too soon to assert with confidence that there
are no prehistoric remains in any other part of Egypt,
especially in the long tract between the Fayyim and
the district of Abydos, but up to the present time none
have been found in this region.

This geographical distribution of the prehistoric

30 THE DISCOVERY OF PREHISTORIC EGYPT

remains fits in curiously with the ancient legend con-
cerning the origin of the ancestors of the Egyptians in
Upper Egypt, and supports the much discussed theory
that they came originally to the Nile valley from the
shores of the Red Sea by way of the Wadi Hammamat,
which debouches on to the Nile in the vicinity of
Koptos and Kus, opposite Ballas and Taikh. The sup-
position seems a very probable one, and it may well be
that the earliest Egyptians entered the valley of the Nile
by the route suggested and then spread northwards
and southwards in the valley. The fact that their re-
mains are not found north of el-Kawaémil nor south of
el-Kab might perhaps be explained by the supposition
that, when they had extended thus far north and south
from their original place of arrival, they passed from
the primitive Neolithic condition to the more highly
developed copper-using culture of the period which
immediately preceded the establishment of the mon-
archy. The Neolithic weapons of the Fayyfim and Hel-
wan would then be the remains of a different people,
which inhabited the Delta and Middle Egypt in very
early times. This people may have been of Mediter-
ranean stock, akin to the primitive inhabitants of Pales-
tine, Greece, Italy, and Spain; and they no doubt were
identical with the inhabitants of Lower Egypt who
were overthrown and conquered by Kha-sekhem and the
other Southern founders of the monarchy (who belonged
to the race which had come from the Red Sea by the
Wadi Hammamat), and so were the ancestors of the
later natives of Lower Egypt. Whether the Southern-

ORIGIN OF NEOLITHIC EGYPTIANS 31

ers, whose primitive remains we find from el-Kawamil
to el-Kab, were of the same race as the Northerners
whom they conquered, cannot be decided. The skull-
form of the Southerners agrees with that of the Medi-
terranean races. But we have no necropoles of the
Northerners to tell us much of their peculiarities. We
have nothing but their flint arrowheads.

But it.should be observed that, in spite of the pres-
ent absence of all primitive remains (whether mere
flints, or actual graves with bodies and relics) of the
primeval population between the Fayytim and el-Kawa-
mil, there is no proof that the primitive race of Upper
Egypt was not coterminous and identical with that of
the lower country. It might therefore be urged that
the whole Neolithic population was ‘‘ Mediterranean ”’
by its skull-form and body-structure, and specifically
‘* Nilotic ’’ (indigenous Egyptian) in its culture-type.
This is quite possible, but we have again to account for
the legends of distant origin on the Red Sea coast, the
probability that one element of the Egyptian popula-
tion was of extraneous origin and came from the east
into the Nile valley near Koptos, and finally the his-
torical fact of an advance of the early dynastic Egyp-
- tians from the South to the conquest of the North. The
latter fact might of course be explained as a civil war
analogous to that between Thebes and Asytt in the
time of the [Xth Dynasty, but against this explanation
is to be set the fact that the contemporary monuments
of the Southerners exhibit the men of the North as of
foreign and non-Egyptian ethnic type, resembling Lib-

32 THE DISCOVERY OF PREHISTORIC EGYPT

yans. It is possible that they were akin to the Libyans;
and this would square very well with the first theory,
but it may also be made to fit in with a development
of the second, which has been generally accepted.
According to this view, the whole primitive Neo-
lithic population of North and South was Nilotic, indig-
enous in origin, and akin to the ‘‘ Mediterraneans ”’ of
Prof. Sergi and the other ethnologists. It. was not
this population, the stone-users whose necropoles have
been found by Messrs. de Morgan, Petrie, and MaclIver,
that entered the Nile valley by the Wadi Hammamat.
This was another race of different ethnic origin, which
came from the Red Sea toward the end of the Neolithic
period, and, being of higher civilization than the native
Nilotes, assumed the lordship over them, gave a great
impetus to the development of their culture, and started
at once the institution of monarchy, the knowledge of
letters, and the use of metals. The chiefs of this supe-
rior tribe founded the monarchy, conquered the North,
unified the kingdom, and began Egyptian history.
From many indications it would seem probable that
these conquerors were of Babylonian origin, or that the
culture they brought with them (possibly from Arabia)
was ultimately of Babylonian origin. They themselves
would seem to have been Semites, or rather proto-
Semites, who came from Arabia to Africa by way of
the straits of Bab el-Mandeb, and proceeded up the
coast to about the neighbourhood of Kusér, whence the
Wadi Hammamat offered them an open road to the
valley of the Nile. By this route they may have entered

TWO RACES IN EARLY DYNASTIC PERIOD 33

Egypt, bringing with them a civilization, which, like
that of the other Semites, had been profoundly influ-
enced and modified by that of the Sumerian inhabitants
of Babylonia. This Semitic-Sumerian culture, mingling
with that of the Nilotes themselves, produced the civ-
ilization of Ancient Egypt as we know it.

This is a very plausible hypothesis, and has a great
deal of evidence in its favour. It seems certain that
in the early dynastic period two races lived in Egypt,
which differed considerably in type, and also, appar-
ently, in burial customs. The later Egyptians always
buried the dead lying on their backs, extended at full
length. During the period of the Middle Kingdom
(XIth-X1TIth Dynasties) the head was usually turned
over on to ‘the left side, in order that the dead man
might look through the two great eyes painted on that
side of the coffin. Afterward the rigidly extended posi-
tion was always adopted. The Neolithic Egyptians,
however, buried the dead lying wholly on the left side
and in a contracted position, with the knees drawn up
to the chin. The bodies were not embalmed, and the
extended position and mummification were never used.
Under the IVth Dynasty we find in the necropolis of
Médiim (north of the Fayytim) the two positions used
simultaneously, and the extended bodies are mummified.
The contracted bodies are skeletons, as in the case of
most of the predynastic bodies. When these are found
with flesh, skin, and hair intact, their preservation is
due to the dryness of the soil and the preservative salts
it contains, not to intentional embalming, which was

34 THE DISCOVERY OF PREHISTORIC EGYPT

evidently introduced by those who employed the ex-
tended position in burial. The contracted position is
found as late as the Vth Dynasty at Dashasha, south
of the Fayytm, but after that date it is no longer
found.

The conclusion is obvious that the contracted posi-
tion without mummification, which the Neolithic people
used, was supplanted in the early dynastic period by
the extended position with mummification, and by the
time of the VIth Dynasty it was entirely superseded.
This points to the supersession of the burial customs
of the indigenous Neolithic race by those of another
race which conquered and dominated the indigenes.
And, since the extended burials of the [Vth Dynasty
are evidently those of the higher nobles, while the con-
tracted ones are those of inferior people, it is probable
that the customs of extended burial and embalming
were introduced by a foreign race which founded the
Egyptian monarchical state, with its hierarchy of nobles
and officials, and in fact started Egyptian civilization
on its way. The conquerors of the North were thus
not the descendants of the Neolithic people of the South,
but their conquerors; in fact, they dominated the indi-
genes both of North and South, who will then appear
(since we find the custom of contracted burial in the
North at Dashasha and Médtim) to have originally be-
longed to the same race.

The conquering race is that which is supposed to
have been of Semitic or proto-Semitic origin, and to
have brought elements of Sumerian culture to savage

EARLY INFLUENCE OF BABYLONIA 35

Egypt. The reasons advanced for this supposition are
the following :— |

(1) Just as the Egyptian race was evidently com-
pounded of two elements, of conquered ‘‘ Mediterrane-
ans ’’ and conquering 2, so the Egyptian language is
evidently compounded of two elements, the one Nilotic,
perhaps related in some degree to the Berber dialects
of North Africa, the other not x, but evidently Semitic.

(2) Certain elements of the early dynastic civiliza-
tion, which do not appear in that of the earlier pre-
dynastic period, resemble well-known elements of the
civilization of Babylonia. We may instance the use of
the ecylinder-seal, which died out in Egypt in the time
of the X VIIIth Dynasty, but was always used in Baby-
lonia from the earliest to the latest times. The early
Egyptian mace-head is of exactly the same type as the
early Babylonian one. In the British Museum is an
Egyptian mace-head of red breccia, which is identical
in shape and size with one from Babylonia (also in the
museum) bearing the name of Shargani-shar-ali (i. e.
Sargon, King of Agade), one of the earliest Chaldean
monarchs, who must have lived about the same time as
the Egyptian kings of the [[d—ITId Dynasties, to which
period the Egyptian mace-head may also be approx-
imately assigned. The Egyptian art of the earliest
dynasties bears again a remarkable resemblance to that
of early Babylonia. It is not till the time of the IId
Dynasty that Egyptian art begins to take upon itself
the regular form which we know so well, and not till
that of the IVth that this form was finally crystallized.

36 THE DISCOVERY OF .PREHISTORIC EGYPT

Under the Ist Dynasty we find the figure of man or,
to take other instances, that of a lion, or a hawk, or a
snake, often treated in a style very different from that
in which we are accustomed to see a man, a lion, a
hawk, or a snake depicted in works of the later period.
And the striking thing is that these early representa-
tions, which differ so much from what we find in later
Egyptian art, curiously resemble the works of early
Babylonian art, of the time of the patesis of Shirpurla
or the Kings Shargani-shar-ali and Naram-Sin. One of
the best known relics of the early art of Babylonia is
the famous ‘‘ Stele of Vultures ’’ now in Paris. On this
we see the enemies of Hannadu, one of the early rulers
of Shirpurla, cast out to be devoured by the vultures.
On an Egyptian relief of slate, evidently originally dedi-
cated in a temple as a record of some historical event,
and dating from the beginning of the Ist Dynasty (prac-
tically contemporary, according to our latest knowledge,
with Eannadu), we have an almost exactly similar scene
of captives being cast out into the desert, and devoured
by lions and vultures. The two reliefs are curiously
alike in their clumsy, naive style of art. A further
point is that the official represented on the stele, who
appears to be thrusting one of the bound captives out
to die, wears a long fringed garment of Babylonish cut,
quite different from the clothes of the later Egyptians.

(3) There are evidently two distinct and different
main strata in the fabric of Egyptian religion. On the
one hand we find a mass of myth and religious belief
of very primitive, almost savage, cast, combining a

EGYPTIAN RELIGION | 37

worship of the actual dead in their tombs—which were
supposed to communicate and thus form a veritable
* underworld,’’ or, rather, ‘‘ under-Egypt ’’—with ven-
eration of magic animals, such as jackals, cats, hawks,
and crocodiles. On the other hand, we have a sun and
sky worship of a more elevated nature, which does not
seem to have amalgamated with the earlier fetishism
and corpse-worship until a comparatively late period.
The main seats of the sun-worship were at Heliopolis
in the Delta and at Edfu in Upper Egypt. Heliopolis
seems always to have been a centre of light and leading
in Egypt, and it is, as is well known, the On of the
Bible, at whose university the Jewish lawgiver Moses
is related to have been educated ‘‘ in all the wisdom of
the Egyptians.’’ The philosophical theories of the
priests of the Sun-gods, Ra-Harmachis and Tum, at
Heliopolis seem to have been the source from which
- Sprang the monotheistic heresy of the Disk-Worship-
pers (in the time of the XVIIIth Dynasty), who, under
the guidance of the reforming King Akhunaten, wor-
shipped only the disk of the sun as the source of all
life, the door in heaven, so to speak, through which the
hidden One Deity poured forth heat and light, the origin
of life upon the earth. Very early in Egyptian history
the Heliopolitans gained the upper hand, and the Ra-
worship (under the Vth Dynasty, the apogee of the Old
Kingdom) came to the front, and for the first time the
kings took the afterwards time-honoured royal title of
‘* Son of the Sun.’’ It appears then as a more or less
foreign importation into the Nile valley, and bears most

38 THE DISCOVERY OF PREHISTORIC EGYPT

undoubtedly a Semitic impress. Its two chief seats
were situated, the one, Heliopolis, in the North on the
eastern edge of the Delta,—just where an early Semitic
settlement from over the desert might be expected to
be found,—the other, Edfu, in the Upper Egyptian terri-
tory south of the Thebaid, Koptos, and the Wadi Ham-
mamat, and close to the chief settlement of the earliest
kings and the most ancient capital of Upper Egypt.
(4) The custom of burying at full length was evi-
dently introduced into Egypt by the second, or # race.
The Neolithic Egyptians buried in the cramped position.
The early Babylonians buried at full length, as far as
we know. On the same ‘“‘ Stele of Vultures,’’ which has
already been mentioned, we see the burying at full
length of dead warriors. There is no trace of any early
burial in Babylonia in the cramped position. The tombs
at Warka (Erech) with cramped bodies in pottery cof-
fins are of very late date. A further point arises with
regard to embalming. The Neolithic Egyptians did not
embalm the dead. Usually their cramped bodies are
found as skeletons. When they are mummified, it is
merely owing to the preservative action of the salt in
the soil, not to any process of embalming. The second,
or « race, however, evidently introduced the custom
of embalming as well as that of burial at full length
and the use of coffins. The Neolithic Egyptian used no
box or coffin, the nearest approach to this being a pot,
which was inverted over the coiled up body. Usually
only a mat was put over the body. Now it is evident

1See illustration.

Rte

Wid

PORTION OF THE “‘STELE OF VULTURES’? FOUND AT TELLOH.

Sculptured with a scene representing the burial of the dead after battle. From the photograph by
Messrs. Mansell & Co,

BABYLONIAN BURIAL CUSTOMS 39

that Babylonians and Assyrians, who buried the dead
at full length in chests, had some knowledge of embalm-
ing. An Assyrian king tells us how he buried his royal
father :—

“ Within the grave, the secret place,
In kingly oil, I gently laid him.
The grave-stone marketh his resting-place.
With mighty bronze I sealed its entrance,
And I protected it with an incantation.”

The ‘‘ kingly oil’’ was evidently used with the idea of
preserving the body from decay. Salt also was used
to preserve the dead, and Herodotus says that the Baby-
lonians buried in honey, which was also used by the
Egyptians. No doubt the Babylonian method was less
perfect than the Egyptian, but the comparison is an
interesting one, when taken in connection with the other
points of resemblance mentioned above.

We find, then, that an analysis of the Egyptian lan-
guage reveals a Semitic element in it; that the early
dynastic culture had certain characteristics which were
unknown to the Neolithic Egyptians but are closely
parallelled in early Babylonia; that there were two
elements in the Egyptian religion, one of which seems
to have originally belonged to the Neolithic people,
while the other has a Semitic appearance; and that
there were two sets of burial customs in early Egypt,
one, that of the Neolithic people, the other evidently
that of a conquering race, which eventually prevailed
over the former; these later rites were analogous to

40 THE DISCOVERY OF PREHISTORIC EGYPT

those of the Babylonians and Assyrians, though differ-
ing from them in points of detail. The conclusion is
that the x or conquering race was Semitic and brought
to Egypt the Semitic elements in the Egyptian religion
and a culture originally derived from that of the Sume-
rian inhabitants of Babylonia, the non-Semitic parent
of all Semitic civilizations. |

The question now arises, how did this Semitic peo-
ple reach Egypt? We have the choice of two points of
entry: First, Heliopolis in the North, where the Semitic
sun-worship took root, and, second, the Wadi Hamma-
mat in the South, north of Edfu, the southern centre of
sun-worship, and Hierakonpolis (Nekheb-Nekhen), the
capital of the Upper Egyptian kingdom which existed
before the foundation of the monarchy. The legends
which seem to bring the ancestors of the Egyptians
from the Red Sea coast have already been mentioned.
They are closely connected with the worship of the
Sky and Sun god Horus of Edfu. Hathor, his nurse,
the ‘‘ House of Horus,’’ the centre of whose worship
was at Dendera, immediately opposite the mouth of the
Wadi Hammamat, was said to have come from Ta-neter,
‘¢ The Holy Land,” 7. e. Abyssinia or the Red Sea coast,
with the company or paut of the gods. Now the Egyp-
tians always seem to have had some idea that they were
connected racially with the inhabitants of the Land of
Punt or Puenet, the modern Abyssinia and Somaliland.
In the time of the XVIIIth Dynasty they depicted the
inhabitants of Punt as greatly resembling themselves
in form, feature, and dress, and as wearing the little

EARLY INHABITANTS 41

turned-up beard which was worn by the Egyptians of
the earliest times, but even as early as the [Vth Dy-
nasty was reserved for the gods. Further, the word
Punt is always written without the hieroglyph deter-
minative of a foreign country, thus showing that the
Egyptians did not regard the Punites as foreigners.
This certainly looks as if the Punites were a portion of
the great migration from Arabia, left behind on the
African shore when the rest of the wandering people
pressed on northwards to the Wadi Hammamat and
the Nile. It may be that the modern Gallas and Abys-
sinians are descendants of these Punites.

Now the Sky-god of Edfu is in legend a conquering
hero who advances down the Nile valley, with his
Mesniu, or ‘‘ Smiths,” to overthrow the people of the
North, whom he defeats in a great battle near Dendera.
This may be a reminiscence of the first fights of the -
invaders with the Neolithic inhabitants. The other
form of Horus, ‘‘ Horus, son of Isis,’’ has also a body
of retainers, the Shemsu-Heru, or ‘‘ Followers of Ho-
rus,’’ who are spoken of in late texts as the rulers of
Egypt before the monarchy. They evidently corre-
spond to the dynasties of Manes, Necées, or ‘‘ Ghosts,’’
of Manetho, and are probably intended for the early
kings of Hierakonpolis.

The mention of the Followers of Horus as ‘‘Smiths’’
is very interesting, for it would appear to show that
the Semitic conquerors were notable as metal-users,
that, in fact, their conquest was that old story in the
dawn of the world’s history, the utter overthrow and

42 THE DISCOVERY OF PREHISTORIC EGYPT

' subjection of the stone-users by the metal-users, the
primeval tragedy of the supersession of flint by copper.
This may be, but if the ‘‘Smiths’’ were the Semitic con-
querors who founded the kingdom, it would appear that
the use of copper was known in Egypt to some extent
before their arrival, for we find it in the graves of the
late Neolithic Egyptians, very sparsely from ‘‘ sequence-
date 30” to “‘ 45,”’ but afterwards more commonly. It
was evidently becoming known. The supposition, how-
ever, that the ‘‘ Smiths ’’ were the Semitic conquerors,
and that they won their way by the aid of their superior
weapons of metal, may be provisionally accepted.

In favour of the view which would bring the con-
querors by way of the Wadi Hammamat, an interesting
discovery may be quoted. Immediately opposite Den-
dera, where, according to the legend, the battle between
the Mesniu and the aborigines took place, lies Koptos,
at the mouth of the Wadi Hammamat. Here, in 1894,
underneath the pavement of the ancient temple, Prof.
Petrie found remains which he then diagnosed as be-
longing to the most ancient epoch of Egyptian history.
Among them were some extremely archaic statues of
the god Min, on which were curious scratched drawings
of bears, crioceras-shells, elephants walking over hills,
etec., of the most primitive description. With them were
lions’ heads and birds of a style then unknown, but
which we now know to belong to the period of the
beginning of the Ist Dynasty. But the statues of Min
are older. The crioceras-shells belong to the Red Sea.
Are we to see in these statues the holy images of the

A SEMITIC WAVE A3

conquerors from the Red Sea who reached the Nile val-
ley by way of the Wadi Hammamat, and set up the
first memorials of their presence at Koptos? It may
be so, or the Min statues may be older than the con-
querors, and belong to the Neolithic race, since Min
and his fetish (which we find on the slate palette from
el-’-Amra, already mentioned) seem to belong to the
indigenous Nilotes. In any case we have in these
statues, two of which are in the Ashmolean Museum
at Oxford, probably the most ancient cult-images in the
world.

This theory, which would make all the Neolithic
inhabitants of Egypt one people, who were conquered
by a Semitic race, bringing a culture of Sumerian origin
to Egypt by way of the Wadi Hammamat, is that gen-
erally accepted at the present time. It may, however,
eventually prove necessary to modify it. For reasons
given above, it may well be that the Neolithic popu-
lation was itself not indigenous, and that it reached the
Nile valley by way of the Wadi Hammamat, spreading
north and south from the mouth of the wad. It may
also be considered probable that a Semitic wave invaded
Egypt by way of the Isthmus of Suez, where the early
sun-cultus of Heliopolis probably marks a primeval
Semitic settlement. In that case it would seem that
the Mesniu or ‘‘ Smiths,’’ who introduced the use of
metal, would have to be referred to the originally Neo-
lithic pre-Semitic people, who certainly were acquainted
with the use of copper, though not to any great extent.
But this is not a necessary supposition. The Mesniu

Aa THE DISCOVERY OF PREHISTORIC EGYPT

are closely connected with the Sky-god Horus, who was
possibly of Semitic origin, and another Semitic wave,
quite distinct from that which entered Egypt by way
of the Isthmus, may very well also have reached Egypt
by the Wadi Hammamat, or, equally possibly, from the
far south, coming down to the Nile from the Abyssinian
mountains. The legend of the coming of Hathor from
Ta-neter may refer to some such wandering, and we
know that the Egyptians of the Old Kingdom communi-
cated with the Land of Punt, not by way of the Red
Sea coast as Hatshepsut did, but by way of the Upper
Nile. This would tally well with the march of the
Mesniu northwards from Edfu to their battle with the
forces of Set at Dendera.

In any case, at the dawn of connected Egyptian his-
_ tory, we find two main centres of civilization in Egypt,
Heliopolis and Buto in the Delta in the North, and
Edfu and Hierakonpolis in the South. Here were estab-
lished at the beginning of the Chalcolithic stage of cul-
ture, we may say, two kingdoms, of Lower and Upper
Egypt, which were eventually united by the superior
arms of the kings of Upper Egypt, who imposed their
rule upon the North but at the same time removed their
capital thither. The dualism of Buto and Hierakonpolis
really lasted throughout Egyptian history. The king
was always called ‘‘ Lord of the Two Lands,’’ and wore
the crowns of Upper and Lower Egypt; the snakes
of Buto and Nekhebet (the goddess of Nekheb, opposite
Nekhen or Hierakonpolis) always typified the united
kingdom. This dualism of course often led to actual

IMPULSES TO CULTURE DEVELOPMENT 45

division and reversion to the predynastic order of
things, as, for instance, in the time of the XXIst
Dynasty.

It might well seem that both the impulses to culture
development in the North and South came from Semitic
inspiration, and that it was to the Semitic invaders in
North and South that the founding of the two kingdoms
was due. This may be true to some extent, but it is at
the same time very probable that the first development
of political culture at Hierakonpolis was really of pre-
Semitic origin. The kingdom of Buto, since its capital
is situated so near to the seacoast, may have owed its
origin to oversea Mediterranean connections. There is
much in the political constitution of later Egypt which
seems to have been of indigenous and pre-Semitic
origin. Especially does this seem to be so in the case
of the division and organization of the country into
nomes. It is obvious that so soon as agriculture began
to be practised on a large scale, boundaries would be
formed, and in the unique conditions of Egypt, where
all boundaries disappear beneath the inundation every
year, it is evident that the fixing of division-lines as
permanently as possible by means of landmarks was
early essayed. We can therefore with confidence as-
sign the formation of the nomes to very early times.
Now the names of the nomes and the symbols or
emblems by which they were distinguished are of very
great interest in this connection. They are nearly all.
figures of the magic animals of the primitive religion,
and fetish-emblems of the older deities. The names are,

46 THE DISCOVERY OF PREHISTORIC EGYPT

in fact, those of the territories of the Neolithic Egyp-
tian tribes, and their emblems are those of the protect-
ing tribal demons. The political divisions of the coun-
try seem, then, to be of extremely ancient origin, and
if the nomes go back to a time before the Semitic in-
vasions, so may also the kingdoms of the South and
North.

Of these predynastic kingdoms we know very little,
except from legendary sources. The Northerners who
were conquered by Aha, Narmer, and Khasekhemui do
not look very much like Egyptians, but rather resemble
Semites or Libyans. On the ‘‘ Stele of Palermo,” a |
chronicle of early kings inscribed in the period of the
Vth Dynasty, we have a list of early kings of the
North, — Seka, Desau, Tiu, Tesh, Nihab, Uatjantj,
Mekhe. The names are primitive in form. We know
nothing more about them. Last year Mr. C. T. Currelly
attempted to excavate at Buto, in order to find traces
of the predynastic kingdom, but owing to the infiltra-
tion of water his efforts were unsuccessful. It is im-
probable that anything is now left of the most ancient
period at that site, as the conditions in the Delta are
so very different from those obtaining in Upper Egypt.
There, at Hierakonpolis, and at el-Kab on the opposite
bank of the Nile, the sites of the ancient cities Nekhen
and Nekheb, the excavators have been very successful.
The work was carried out by Messrs. Quibell and Green,
in the years 1891-9. Prehistoric burials were found
on the hills near by, but the larger portion of the
antiquities were recovered from the temple-ruins, and

THE MOST ANCIENT TEMPLE AT

date back to the beginning of the Ist Dynasty, exactly
the time when the kings of Hierakonpolis first con-
quered the kingdom of Buto and founded the united
Egyptian monarchy.

The ancient temple, which was probably one of the
earliest seats of Egyptian civilization, was situated on
a mound, now known as el-Kom el-ahmar, ‘‘ the Red
Hill,’ from its colour. The chief feature of the most
ancient temple seems to have been a circular mound,
revetted by a wall of sandstone blocks, which was ap-
parently erected about the end of the predynastic
period. Upon this a shrine was probably erected. This
was the ancient shrine of Nekhen, the cradle of the
Egyptian monarchy. Close by it were found some of
the most valuable relics of the earliest Pharaonic age,
the great ceremonial mace-heads and vases of Narmer
and ‘‘ the Scorpion,’’ the shields or ‘‘ palettes ’’ of the
same Narmer, the vases and stele of Khasekhemui, and,
of later date, the splendid copper colossal group of King
Pepi I and his son, which is now at Cairo. Most of
the Ist Dynasty objects are preserved in the Ashmo-
lean Museum at Oxford, which is one of the best centres
for the study of early Egyptian antiquities. Narmer
and Khasekhemui are, as we shall see, two of the first
monarchs of all Egypt. These sculptured and inscribed
mace-heads, shields, ete., are monuments dedicated by
them in the ancestral shrine at Hierakonpolis as records
of their deeds. Both kings seem to have waged war
against the Northerners, the Anu of Heliopolis and the
Delta, and on these votive monuments from Hierakon-

48 THE DISCOVERY OF PREHISTORIC EGYPT

polis we find hieroglyphed records of the defeat of the
Anu, who have very definitely Semitic physiognomies.

On one shield or palette we see Narmer clubbing
a man of Semitic appearance, who is called the ‘‘ Only
One of the Marsh’’ (Delta), while below two other
Semites fly, seeking ‘‘ fortress-protection.’’ Above is a
figure of a hawk, symbolizing the Upper Egyptian king,
holding a rope which is passed through the nose of a
Semitic head, while behind is a sign which may be read
as ‘‘ the North,’’ so that the whole symbolizes the lead-
ing away of the North into captivity by the king of
the South. It is significant, in view of what has been
said above with regard to the probable Semitic origin
of the Heliopolitan Northerners, to find the people
typical of the North-land represented by the South-
erners as Semites. Equally Semitic is the overthrown
Northerner on the other side of this well-known monu-
ment which we are describing; he is being trampled
under the hoofs and gored by the horns of a bull; who,
like the hawk, symbolizes the king. The royal bull has
broken down the wall of a fortified enclosure, in which
is the hut or tent of the Semite, and the bricks lie about
promiscuously.

In connection with the Semitic origin of the North-
erners, the form of the fortified enclosures on both
sides of this monument (that to whose protection the
two Semites on one side fly, and that out of which the
kingly bull has dragged the chief on the other) is no-
ticeable. As usual in Egyptian writing, the hieroglyph
of these buildings takes the form of a plan. The plan

SYMBOLIC REPRESENTATIONS 49

shows a crenelated enclosure, resembling the walls of
a great Babylonian palace or temple, such as have
been found at Telloh, Warka, or Mukayyar. The same
design is found in Egypt at the Shuret ez-Zebib,
an Old Kingdom fortress at Abydos, in the tomb of
King Aha at Nakada, and in many walls of mastaba-
tombs of the early time. This is another argument in
favour of an early connection between Egypt and Baby-
lonia. We illustrate a fragment of another votive
shield or palette of the same kind, now in the museum
of the Louvre, which probably came originally from
Hierakonpolis. It is of exactly similar workmanship
to that of Narmer, and is no doubt a fragment of an-
other monument of that king. On it we see the same
subject of the overthrowing of a Northerner (of Semitic
aspect) by the royal bull. On one side, below, is a
fortified enclosure with crenelated walls of the type
we have described, and within it a lion and a vase;
below this another fort, and a bird within it. These
signs may express the names of the two forts, but,
owing to the fact that at this early period Egyptian
orthography was not yet fixed, we cannot read them.
On the other side we see a row of animated nome-
standards of Upper Egypt, with the symbols of the
god Min of Koptos, the hawk of Horus of Edfu, the
ibis of Thot of Eshmunén, and the jackals of Anubis
of Abydos, which drag a rope; had we the rest of the
monument, we should see, bound at the end of the rope,
some prisoner, king, or animal symbolic of the North.

On another slate shield, which we also reproduce,

50 THE DISCOVERY OF PREHISTORIC EGYPT

we see a symbolical representation of the capture of
seven Northern cities, whose names seem to mean the
** Two Men,”’ the ‘‘ Heron,’’ the ‘‘ Owl,’’ the ‘‘ Palm,’’
and the ‘‘ Ghost ”’ Cities.
‘‘Ghost City’ is at-
tacked by a lion, ‘‘ Owl
City ’’ by a hawk, ‘‘ Palm
City’? by two hawk
nome-standards, and an-
other, whose name we
cannot guess at, is being
opened up by a scorpion.
The operating animals
evidently represent
nomes and tribes of the
Upper Egyptians. Here
again we see the same
erenelated walls of the
Northern towns, and
there is no doubt that
this slate fragment also,
which is preserved in
OBVERSE OF A SLATE RELIEF. the Cairo Museum, is a

With symbolical representation of the King of
Upper Egypt, in the form of a bull, overthrowing monument of the con-

a Northern enemy. Below are representations of
fortresses with archaic hieroglyphs giving their

names, Reproduced from de Morgan, Recherches quests of Narmer. It is

executed in the same

archaic style as those from Hierakonpolis. The ani-

mals on the other side no doubt represent part of the
spoil of the North.

Returning to the great shield or palette found by

SLATE RELIEFS 51

Mr. Quibell, we see the king coming out, followed by
his sandal-bearer, the Hen-neter or ‘‘ God’s Servant,’’?
to view the dead bodies of the slain Northerners which

he arranged in rows,

decapitated, and with

their heads between their
feet. The king’ is pre-
ceded by a procession of
nome-standards. Above
the dead men are sym-
bolic representations of
a hawk perched on a
harpoon over a boat, and
a hawk and a_ door,
which doubtless again
refer to the fights of the
royal hawk of Upper
Egypt on the Nile and
at the gate of the North.
The designs on the mace-
heads refer to the same
conquest of the North.

The monuments of |

Khasekhemui, a later
king, show us that he

REVERSE OF A SLATE RELIEF.

With the same symbolical representation. Ist
Dynasty. Reproduced from de Morgan, Re-
cherches, vol, i.

conquered the North also and slew 47,209 ‘“‘ Northern
Enemies.’’ The contorted attitudes of the dead North-

?In his commentary (Hierakonpolis, i. p. 9) on this scene, Prof. Petrie
supposes that the seven-pointed star sign means « king,” and compares the eight-
pointed star “used for king in Babylonia.” The eight-pointed star of the

52 THE DISCOVERY OF PREHISTORIC EGYPT

erners were greatly admired and sketched at the time,
and were reproduced on the pedestal of the king’s
statue found by Mr. Quibell, which is now at Oxford.
It was an age of cheerful savage energy, like most

OBVERSE OF A SLATE RELIEF,

With symbolical representations of the Egyptian nomes. Re-
produced from de Morgan, /echerches, vol. i.

times when kingdoms and peoples are in the making.
About 4000 B. c. is the date of these various monuments.

Khasekhemui probably lived later than Narmer, and
we may suppose that his conquest was in reality a

cuneiform script does not mean “king,” but “god.” The star then ought to
mean “god,” and the title “servant of a god,” and this supposition may be
correct. Hen-neter, “god’s servant,” was the appellation of a peculiar kind
of priest in later days, and was then spelt with the ordinary sign for a god, the
picture of an axe. But in the archaic period, with which we are dealing, a star
like the Babylonian sign may very well have been used for “ god,” and the title
of Narmer’s sandal-bearer may read Hen-neter. He was the slave of the living
god Narmer. All Egyptian kings were regarded as deities, more or less.

KHASEKHEMUI AND NARMER 53

re-conquest. He may have lived as late as the time of
the Iid Dynasty, whereas Narmer must be placed at
the beginning of the Ist, and his conquest was probably
that which first united the two kingdoms of the South
and North. As we shall see in the next chapter, he is
probably one of the originals of the legendary ‘‘ Mena,”’
who was regarded from the time of the XVIIIth Dy-

‘A

REVERSE OF A SLATE RELIEF, REPRESENTING ANIMALS.
Ist Dynasty. Reproduced from de Morgan, Recherches, vol. i.

nasty onwards as the founder of the kingdom, and was
first made known to Europe by Herodotus, under the
name of ‘‘ Menes.’? Narmer is therefore the last of
the ancient kings of Hierakonpolis, the last of Mane-
tho’s ‘‘ Spirits.’”” We may possibly have recovered the
names of one or two of the kings anterior to Narmer
in the excavations at Abydos (see Chapter IT), but this
is uncertain. To all intents and purposes we have only

54 THE DISCOVERY OF PREHISTORIC EGYPT

legendary knowledge of the Southern kingdom until its
close, when Narmer the mighty went forth to strike
down the Anu of the North, an exploit which he re-
corded in votive monuments at Hierakonpolis, and
which was commemorated henceforward throughout
Kgyptian history in the yearly ‘‘ Feast of the Smiting
of the Anu.’’ Then was Egypt for the first time united,
and the fortress of the “ White Wall,’ the ‘‘ Good
Abode ”’ of Memphis, was built to dominate the lower
country. The Ist Dynasty was founded and Egyptian
history began. |

CHAPTER II
ABYDOS AND THE FIRST THREE DYNASTIES

[Nt the recent discoveries had been made, which

have thrown so much light upon the early history
of Egypt, the traditional order and names of the kings
of the first three Egyptian dynasties were, in default of
more accurate information, retained by all writers on
the history of the period. The names were taken from
the official lists of kings at Abydos and elsewhere, and
were divided into dynasties according to the system of
Manetho, whose names agree more or less with those
of the lists and were evidently derived from them ulti-
mately. With regard to the fourth and later dynasties
it was clear that the king-lists were correct, as their
evidence agreed entirely with that of the contemporary
monuments. But no means existed of checking the lists
of the first three dynasties, as no contemporary monu-
ments other than a [Vth Dynasty mention of a IId
Dynasty king, Send, had been found. The lists dated
from the time of the XVIIIth and XIXth Dynasties,

so that it was very possible that with regard to the
5B

56 ABYDOS AND THE FIRST THREE DYNASTIES

earliest dynasties they might not be very correct. This
conclusion gained additional weight from the fact that
no monuments of these earliest kings were ever dis-
covered; it therefore seemed probable that they were
purely legendary figures, in whose time (if they ever
did exist) Egypt was still a semi-barbarous nation.
The jejune stories told about them by Manetho seemed
to confirm this idea. Mena, the reputed founder of the
monarchy, was generally regarded as a historical figure,
owing to the persistence of his name in all ancient
literary accounts of the beginnings of Egyptian history;
for it was but natural to suppose that the name of the
man who unified Egypt and founded Memphis would
endure in the mouths of the people. But with regard
to his successors no such supposition seemed probable,
until the time of Sneferu and the pyramid-builders.

This was the critical view. Another school of his- .
torians accepted all the kings of the lists as historical
en bloc, simply because the Egyptians had registered
their names as kings. To them Teta, Ateth, and Ata
were as historical as Mena.

Modern discovery has altered our view, and truth
is seen to lie between the opposing schools, as usual.
The kings after Mena do not seem to be such entirely
unhistorical figures as the extreme critics thought; the
names of several of them, e.g. Merpeba, of the Ist
Dynasty, are correctly given in the later lists, and those
of others were simply misread, e.g. that of Semti of
the same dynasty, misread ‘‘ Hesepti’’ by the list-
makers. On the other hand, Mena himself has become

DYNASTIC LISTS 57

a somewhat doubtful quantity. The real names of most
of the early monarchs of Egypt have been recovered
for us by the latest excavations, and we can now see
when the list-makers of the XI Xth Dynasty were right
and when they were wrong, and can distinguish what is
legendary in their work from what is really historical.
It is true that they very often appear to have been
wrong, but, on the other hand, they were sometimes
unexpectedly near the mark, and the general number
and arrangement of their kings seems correct; so that
we can still go to them for assistance in the arrange-
ment of the names which are communicated to us by
the newly discovered monuments. Manetho’s help, too,
need never be despised because he was a copyist of
copyists; we can still use him to direct our investiga-
tions, and his arrangement of dynasties must still
remain the framework of our chronological scheme,
though he does not seem to have been always correct
as to the places in which the dynasties originated.
More than the names of the kings have the new dis-
coveries communicated to us. They have shed a flood
of light on the beginnings of Egyptian civilization and
art, supplementing the recently ascertained facts con-
cerning the prehistoric age which have been described
in the preceding chapter. The impulse to these discov-
eries was given by the work of M. de Morgan, who
excavated sites of the early dynastic as well as of the
predynastic age. Among these was a great mastaba-
tomb at Nakada, which proved to be that of a very early
king who bore the name of Aha, ‘‘ the Fighter.’’ The

58 ABYDOS AND THE FIRST THREE DYNASTIES

walls of this tomb are crenelated like those of the early
Babylonian palaces and the forts of the Northerners,
already referred to. M. de Morgan early perceived the
difference between the Neolithic antiquities and those of
the later archaic period of Egyptian civilization, to
which the tomb at Nakada belonged. In the second
volume of his great work on the primitive antiquities
of Egypt (L’Age des Métaux et lé Tombeau Royale de
Négadeh), he described the antiquities of the Ist Dy-
nasty which had been found at the time he wrote.
Antiquities of the same primitive period and even of
an earlier date had been discovered by Prof. Flinders
Petrie, as has already been said, at Koptos, at the
mouth of the Wadi Hammamat. But though Prof.
Petrie correctly diagnosed the age of the great statues
of the god Min which he found, he was led, by his’
misdating of the ‘‘ New Race ”’ antiquities from Ballas
and Tiikh, also to misdate several of the primitive
antiquities,—the lions and hawks, for instance, found at
Koptos, he placed in the period between the VIIth and
Xth Dynasties; whereas they can now, in the light of
further discoveries at Abydos, be seen to date to the
earlier part of the Ist Dynasty, the time of Narmer and
Aha.

It is these discoveries at Abydos, coupled with those
(already described) of Mr. Quibell at Hierakonpolis,
which have told us most of what we know with regard
to the history of the first three dynasties. At Abydos
Prof. Petrie was not himself the first in the field,
the site having already been partially explored by a

DISCOVERIES AT ABYDOS 59

French Egyptologist, M. Amélineau. The excavations
of M. Amélineau were, however, perhaps not conducted
strictly on scientific lines, and his results have been
insufficiently published with very few photographs, so
that with the best will in the world we are unable to
give M. Amélineau the full credit which is, no doubt,
due to him for his work. The system of Prof. Petrie’s
publications has been often, and with justice, criticized,
but he at least tells us every year what he has been
doing, and gives us photographs of everything he has
found. For this reason the epoch-making discoveries
at Abydos have been coupled chiefly with the name of
Prof. Petrie, while that of M. Amélineau is rarely heard
in connection with them. As a matter of fact, however,
M. Amélineau first excavated the necropolis of the early
kings at Abydos, and discovered most of the tombs
afterwards worked over by Prof. Petrie and Mr. Mace.
Yet most of the important scientific results are due to
the later explorers, who were the first to attempt a
classification of them, though we must add that this
classification has not been entirely accepted by the sci-
entific world.

The necropolis of the earliest kings of Egypt is
situated in the great bay in the hills which lies behind
Abydos, to the southwest of the main necropolis. Here,
at holy Abydos, where every pious Egyptian wished to
rest after death, the bodies of the most ancient kings
were buried. It is said by Manetho that the original
seat of their dominion was This, a town in the vicinity
of Abydos, now represented by the modern Girga, which

60 ABYDOS AND THE FIRST THREE DYNASTIES

lies a few miles distant from its site (el-Birba). This
may be a fact, but we have as yet obtained no confirma-
tion of it. It may well be that the attribution of a
Thinite origin to the Ist and Hd Dynasties was due
simply to the fact that the kings of these dynasties
were buried at Abydos, which lay within the Thinite
nome. Manetho knew that they were buried at Abydos,
and so jumped to the conclusion that they lived there

PROF. PETRIE’S CAMP AT ABYDOS, 1901.

also, and called them ‘‘ Thinites.’’ Their real place of
origin must have been Hierakonpolis, where the pre-
dynastic kingdom of the South had its seat. The IIId
Dynasty was no doubt of Memphite origin, as Manetho
says. It is certain that the seat of the government of
the [Vth Dynasty was at Memphis, where the pyramid-
building kings were buried, and we know that the
sepulchres of two [Id Dynasty kings, at least, were
situated in the necropolis of Memphis (Sakkara-
Médim). So that probably the seat of government

ABYDOS THE ROYAL BURIAL-PLACE 61

was transferred from Hierakonpolis to Memphis by
the first king of the IIId Dynasty. Thenceforward the
kings were buried in the Memphite necropolis.

The two great necropoles of Memphis and Abydos
were originally the seats of the worship of the two
Egyptian gods of the dead, Seker and Khentamenti,
both of whom were afterwards identified with the Busi-
rite god Osiris. Abydos was also the centre of the wor-
ship of Anubis, an animal-deity of the dead, the jackal
who prowls round the tombs at night. Anubis and
Osiris-Khentamenti, ‘‘ He who is in the West,’’ were
associated in the minds of the Egyptians as the pro-
tecting deities of Abydos. The worship of these gods
as the chief Southern deities of the dead, and the pre-
eminence of the necropolis of Abydos in the South, no
doubt date back before the time of the Ist Dynasty,
so that it would not surprise us were burials of kings
of the predynastic Hierakonpolite kingdom discovered
at Abydos. Prof. Petrie indeed claims to have discov-
ered actual royal relics of that period at Abydos, but
this seems to be one of the least certain of his conclu-
sions. We cannot definitely state that the names ‘‘ Ro,”’
‘“Ka,”’ and ‘‘Sma’’ (if they are names at all, which
is doubtful) belong to early kings of Hierakonpolis who
were buried at Abydos. It may be so, but further con-
firmation is desirable before we accept it as a fact; and
as yet such confirmation has not been forthcoming. The
oldest kings, who were certainly buried at Abydos, seem
to have been the first rulers of the united kingdom of
the North and South, Aha and his successors. Narmer

62 ABYDOS AND THE FIRST THREE DYNASTIES

is not represented. It may be that he was not buried
at Abydos, but in the necropolis of Hierakonpolis. This
would point to the kings of the South not having been
buried at Abydos until after the unification of the
kingdom.

That Aha possessed a tomb at Abydos as well as
another at Nakada seems peculiar, but it is a phenom-
enon not unknown in Egypt. Several kings, whose bod-
les were actually buried elsewhere, had second tombs
at Abydos, in order that they might possess last resting-
places near the tomb of Osiris, although they might not
prefer to use them. Usertsen (or Senusret) III is a
case in point. He was really buried in a pyramid at
Illahun, up in the North, but he had a great rock tomb
cut for him in the cliffs at Abydos, which he never occu-
pied, and probably had never intended to occupy. We
find exactly the same thing far back at the beginning
of Egyptian history, when Aha possessed not only a
great mastaba-tomb at Nakada, but also a tomb-cham-
ber in the great necropolis of Abydos. It may be that
other kings of the earliest period also had second sepul-
chres elsewhere. It is noteworthy that in none of the
early tombs at Abydos were found any bodies which
might be considered those of the kings themselves.
M. Amélineau discovered bodies of attendants or slaves
(who were in all probability purposely strangled and
buried around the royal chamber in order that they
should attend the king in the next world), but no roy-
alties. Prof. Petrie found the arm of a female mummy,
who may have been of royal blood, though there is

GREAT TOMB OF AHA 63

nothing to show that she was. And the quaint plait
and fringe of false hair, which were also found, need
not have belonged to a royal mummy. It is therefore
quite possible that these tombs at Abydos were not the
actual last resting-places of the earliest kings, who may
really have been buried at Hierakonpolis or elsewhere,
as Aha was. Messrs. Newberry and Garstang, in their
Short History of Egypt, suppose that Aha was actually
buried at Abydos, and that the great tomb with objects
bearing his name, found by M. de Morgan at Nakada,
is really not his, but belonged to a royal princess named
Neit-hetep, whose name is found in conjunction with
his at Abydos and Nakada. But the argument is equally
valid turned round the other way: the Nakada tomb
might just as well be Aha’s and the Abydos one Neit-
hetep’s. Neit-hetep, who is supposed by Messrs. New-
berry and Garstang to have been Narmer’s daughter
and Aha’s wife, was evidently closely connected with
Aha, and she may have been buried with him at Nakada
and commemorated with him at Abydos.’ It is prob-
able that the XIXth Dynasty list-makers and Manetho
considered the Abydos tombs to have been the real
graves of the kings, but it is by no means impossible
that they were wrong.

This view of the royal tombs at Abydos tallies to
a great extent with that of M. Naville, who has ener-
getically maintained the view that M. Amélineau and
Prof. Petrie have not discovered the real tombs of the

1A princess named Bener-ab («+ Sweet-heart’’), who may have been Aha’s
daughter, was actually buried beside his tomb at Abydos.

64 ABYDOS AND THE FIRST THREE DYNASTIES

early kings, but only their contemporary commemora-
tive *‘ tombs ’’ at Abydos. The only real tomb of the
Ist Dynasty, therefore, as yet discovered is that of Aha
at Nakada, found by M. de Morgan. The fact that
attendant slaves were buried around the Abydos tombs
is no bar to the view that the tombs were only the monu-
ments, not the real graves, of the kings. The royal
ghosts would naturally visit their commemorative cham-
bers at Abydos, in order to be in the company of the
great Osiris, and ghostly servants would be as necessary
to their Majesties at Abydos as elsewhere.

It must not be thought that this revised opinion of
the Abydos tombs detracts in the slightest degree from
the importance of the discovery of M. Amélineau and
its subsequent and more detailed investigation by Prof.
Petrie. These monuments are as valuable for historical
purposes as the real tombs themselves. The actual
bodies of these primeval kings themselves we are never
likely to find. The tomb of Aha at Nakada had been
completely rifled in ancient times.

The commemorative tombs of the kings of the Ist
and IId Dynasties at Abydos lie southwest of the great
necropolis, far within the bay in the hills. Their present
aspect is that of a wilderness of sand hillocks, covered
with masses of fragments of red pottery, from which
the site has obtained the modern Arab name of Umm
el-Ga’ab, ‘‘ Mother of Pots.’’ It is impossible to move
a step in any direction without crushing some of these
potsherds under the heel. They are chiefly the remains
of the countless little vases of rough red pottery, which

THE TOMB OF KING DEN 65

were dedicated here as ex-votos by the pious, between
the XIXth and XXVIth Dynasties, to the memory of
the ancient kings and of the great god Osiris, whose
tomb, as we shall see, was supposed to have been situ-
ated here also. Intermingled with these later fragments
are pieces of the
original Ist Dy-
nasty vases, which
were filled with
wine and _ provi-
sions and were
placed in the tombs,
for the refreshment
and delectation of
the royal ghosts
when they should
visit their houses at
Abydos. These
were thrown out
and broken when
the tombs were vio-
lated. Here and THE TOMB OF KING DEN AT ABYDOS.
there one sees a dip sae oh

in the sand, out of which rise four walls of great bricks,
forming a rectangular chamber, half-filled with sand.
This is one of the royal tomb-chambers of the Ist
Dynasty. That of King Den is illustrated above. A
straight staircase descends into it from the ground-level
above. In several of the tombs the original flooring of
wooden beams is still preserved. Den’s is the most

66 ABYDOS AND THE FIRST THREE DYNASTIES

magnificent of all, for it has a floor of granite blocks;
we know of no other instance of stone being used for
building in this early age. Almost every tomb has been
burnt at some period unknown. The brick walls are
burnt red, and many of the alabaster vases are almost
calcined. This was probably the work of some unknown
enemy.

The wide complicated tombs have around the main
chamber a series of smaller rooms, which were used to
store what was considered necessary for the use of the
royal ghost. Of these necessaries the most interesting
to us are the slaves, who were, as there is little reason
to doubt, purposely killed and buried round the royal
chamber so that their spirits should be on the spot when
the dead king came to Abydos; thus they would be
always ready to serve him with the food and other things
which had been stored in the tomb with them and placed
under their charge. There were stacks of great vases
of wine, corn, and other food; these were covered up
with masses of fat to preserve the contents, and they
were corked with a pottery stopper, which was protected
by a conical clay sealing, stamped with the impress of
the royal cylinder-seal. There were bins of corn, joints
of oxen, pottery dishes, copper pans, and other things
which might be useful for the ghostly cuisine of the
tomb. There were numberless small objects, used, no
doubt, by the dead monarch during life, which he would
be pleased to see again in the next world,—carved ivory
boxes, little slabs for grinding eye-paint, golden buttons,
model tools, model vases with gold tops, ivory and pot-

CONTENTS OF THE TOMBS 67

tery figurines, and other objets d’art; the golden royal
seal of judgment of King Den in its ivory casket, and
so forth. There were memorials of the royal victories in
peace and war, little ivory plaques with inscriptions
commemorating the founding of new buildings, the insti-
tution of new religious festivals in honour of the gods,

CONICAL VASE - STOPPERS.

From Abydos. Ist Dynasty: about 4000 B. 0. pears reproduced from M. de Morgan’s
the bringing of the captives of the royal bow and spear
to the palace, the discomfiture of the peoples of the
North-land. All these things, which have done so much
to reconstitute for us the history of the earliest period
of the Egyptian monarchy, were placed under the care
of the dead slaves whose bodies were buried round

68 ABYDOS AND THE FIRST THREE DYNASTIES

the empty tomb-chamber of their royal master in
Abydos.

The killing and entombment of the royal servants
is of the highest anthropological interest, for it throws
a vivid light upon the manners of the time. It shows
the primeval Egyptians as a semi-barbaric people of
childishly simple ways of thought. The king was dead.
For all his kingship he was a man, and no man was
immortal in this world. But yet how could one really
die? Shadows, dreams, all kinds. of phenomena which
the primitive mind could not explain, induced the belief
that, though the outer man might rot, there was an inner
man which could not die and still lived on. The idea
of total death was unthinkable. And where should this
inner man still live on but in the tomb to which the
outer man was consigned? And here, doubtless it was
believed, in the house to which the body was consigned,
the ghost lived on. And as each ghost had his house
with the body, so no doubt all ghosts could communicate
with one another from tomb to tomb; and so there grew >
up the belief in a tomb-world, a subterranean Egypt of
tombs, in which the dead Egyptians still lived and had
their being. Later on the boat of the sun, in which the
god of light crossed the heavens by day, was thought
to pass through this dead world between his setting and
his rising, accompanied by the souls of the righteous.
But of this belief we find no trace yet in the ideas of
the Ist Dynasty. All we can see is that the sahus, or
bodies df the dead, were supposed to reside in awful
majesty in the tomb, while the ghosts could pass from

GHOSTLY KINGS AND SLAVES 69

tomb to tomb through the mazes of the underworld.
Over this dread realm of dead men presided a dead god,
Osiris of Abydos; and so the necropolis of Abydos was
the necropolis of the underworld, to which all ghosts
who were not its rightful citizens would come from
afar to pay their court to their ruler. Thus the man
of substance would have a monumental tablet put up
to himself in this necropolis as a sort of pied-d-terre,
even if he could not be buried there; for the king, who,
for reasons chiefly connected with local patriotism, was
buried near the city of his earthly abode, a second tomb
would be erected, a stately mansion in the city of Osiris,
in which his ghost could reside when it pleased him to
come to Abydos.

Now none could live without food, and men living
under the earth needed it as much as men living on the
earth. The royal tomb was thus provided with an enor-
mous amount of earthly food for the use of the royal
ghost, and with other things as well, as we have seen.
The same provision had also to be made for the royal
resting-place at Abydos. And in both cases royal slaves
were needed to take care of all this provision, and to
_ serve the ghost of the king, whether in his real tomb at
Nakada, or elsewhere, or in his second tomb at Abydos.
Ghosts only could serve ghosts, so that of the slaves
ghosts had to be made. That was easily done; they died
when their master died and followed him to the tomb.
No doubt it seemed perfectly natural to all concerned,
to the slaves as much as to anybody else. But it shows
the child’s idea of the value of life. An animate thing

70 ABYDOS AND THE FIRST THREE DYNASTIES

was hardly distinguished at this period from an inani-
mate thing. The most ancient Egyptians buried slaves
with their kings as naturally as they buried jars of wine
and bins of corn with them. Both were buried with a
definite object. The slaves had to die before they were
buried, but then so had the king himself. They all had
to die sometime or other. And the actual killing of
them was no worse than killing a dog, no worse even
than ‘‘ killing ’’ golden buttons and ivory boxes. For,
when the buttons and boxes were buried with the king,
they were just as much dead as the slaves. Of the
sanctity of human life as distinct from other life, there
was probably no idea at all. The royal ghost needed
ghostly servants, and they were provided as a matter
of course. ’

But as civilization progressed, the ideas of the Egyp-
tians changed on these points, and in the later ages of
the ancient world they were probably the most humane
of the peoples, far more so than the Greeks, in fact.
The cultured Hellenes murdered their prisoners of war
without hesitation. Who has not been troubled in mind
by the execution of Nikias and Demosthenes after the
surrender of the Athenian army at Syracuse? When
we compare this with Grant’s refusal even to take Lee’s
sword at Appomattox, we see how we have progressed
in these matters; while Gylippus and the Syracusans
were as much children as the Ist Dynasty Egyptians.
But the Egyptians of Gylippus’s time had probably ad-
vanced much further than the Greeks in the direction
of rational manhood. When Amasis had his rival Apries

PROGRESS IN PRINCIPLES OF HUMANITY 71

in his power, he did not put him to death, but kept him
as his coadjutor on the throne. Apries fled from him,
allied himself with Greek pirates, and advanced against
his generous rival. After his defeat and murder at
Momemphis, Amasis gave him a splendid burial. When
we compare this generosity to a beaten foe with the
savagery of the Assyrians, for instance, we see how far
the later Egyptians had progressed in the paths of
humanity.

The ancient custom of killing slaves was first dis-
continued at the death of the lesser chieftains, but we
find a possible survival of it in the case of a king, even
as late as the time of the XIth Dynasty; for at Thebes,
in the precinct of the funerary temple of King Neb-
hapet-Ra Mentuhetep and round the central pyramid
which commemorated his memory, were buried a number
of the ladies of his harim. They were all buried at one
and the same time, and there can be little doubt that
they were all killed and buried round the king, in order
to be with him in the next world. Now with each of
these ladies, who had been turned into ghosts, was
buried a little waxen human figure placed in a little
model coffin. This was to replace her own slave. She
who went to accompany the king in the next world had
to have her own attendant also. But, not being royal,
a real slave was not killed for her; she only took with
her a waxen figure, which by means of charms and
incantations would, when she called upon it, turn into
a real slave, and say, ‘‘ Here am I,’’ and do whatever
work might be required of her. The actual killing and

72 ABYDOS AND THE FIRST THREE DYNASTIES

burial of the slaves had in all cases except that of the
king been long ‘‘ commuted,’’ so to speak, into a burial
with the dead person of ushabtis, or ‘‘ Answerers,”’’ little
figures like those described above, made more usually
of stone, and inscribed with the name of the deceased.
They were called ‘‘ Answerers ’’ because they answered
the call of their dead master or mistress, and by magic
power became ghostly servants. Later on they were
made of wood and glazed faience, as well as stone. By
this means the greater humanity of a later age sought
a relief from the primitive disregard of the death of
others.

Anthropologically interesting as are the results of
the excavations at Umm el-Ga’ab, they are no less his-
torically important. There is no need here to weary
the reader with the details of scientific controversy; it
will suffice to set before him as succinctly and clearly
as possible the net results of the work which has been
done.

Messrs. Amélineau and Petrie have found the sec-
ondary tombs and have identified the names of the fol-
lowing primeval kings of Egypt. We arrange them in
their apparent historical order.

1. Aha Men (?). : 8. Qa Sen.

2. Narmer (or Betjumer) Sma (?). 9. Khasekhem (Khasekhemui)
3. Tjer (or Khent). Besh.

4. Tja Ati. 10. Hetepsekhemui.

5. Den Semti. 11. Raneb.

6. Atjab Merpeba. 12. Neneter.

7. Semerkha Nekht. 13. Sekhemab Perabsen.

IDENTIFICATION OF KINGS 73

Two or three other names are ascribed by Prof.
Petrie to the Hierakonpolite dynasty of Upper Egypt,
which, as it occurs before the time of Mena and the
Ist Dynasty, he calls ‘‘ Dynasty O.’’ Dynasty O, how-
ever, is no dynasty, and in any case we should prefer
to call the ‘‘ predynastic’’ dynasty ‘‘ Dynasty —I.’’
The names of ‘‘ Dynasty minus One,’’ however, remain
problematical, and for the present it would seem safer
to suspend judgment as to the place of the supposed
royal names ‘‘ Ro ”’ and ‘‘ Ka ’’ (Men-ka?), which Prof.
Petrie supposes to have been those of two of the kings
of Upper Egypt who reigned before Mena. The king
‘* Sma ”’ (‘‘ Uniter ’’) is possibly identical with Aha or
Narmer, more probably the latter. It is not necessary
to detail the process by which Egyptologists have sought
to identify these thirteen kings with the successors of
Mena in the lists of kings and the Ist and Id Dynas-
ties of Manetho. The work has been very successful,
though not perhaps quite so completely accomplished
as Prof. Petrie himself inclines to believe. The first
identification was made by Prof. Sethe, of Gottingen,
who pointed out that the names Semti and Merpeba on
a vase-fragment found by M. Amélineau were in reality
those of the kings Hesepti and Merbap of the lists, the
Ousaphais and Miebis of Manetho. The perfectly cer-
tain identifications are these:—

5. Den Semti = Hesepti, Ousaphais, Ist Dynasty.

6. Atjab Merpeba = Merbap, Miebis, Ist Dynasty.

7. Semerkha Nekht— Shemsu or Semsem (?), Semempres, Ist Dynasty.
8. Qa Sen = Qebh, Bienekhes, Ist Dynasty. .

74 ABYDOS AND THE FIRST THREE DYNASTIES

9. Khasekhemui Besh = Betju-mer (?), Boethos, Id Dynasty.
12 Neneter = Bineneter, Binothris, Id Dynasty.

Six of the Abydos kings have thus been identified
with names in the lists and in Manetho; that is to say,
we now know the real names of six of the earliest Egyp-
tian monarchs, whose appellations are given us under
mutilated forms by the later list-makers. Prof. Petrie
further identifies (4) Tja Ati with Ateth, (3) Tjer with
Teta, and (1) Aha with Mena. Mena, Teta, Ateth, Ata,
Hesepti, Merbap, Shemsu (?), and Qebh are the names
of the Ist Dynasty as given in the lists. The equivalent
of Ata Prof. Petrie finds in the name ‘‘ Merneit,’’ which
is found at Umm el-Ga’ab. But there is no proof what-
ever that Merneit was a king; he was much more prob-
ably a prince or other great personage of the reign of
Den, who was buried with the kings. Prof. Petrie ac-
cepts the identification of the personal name of Aha as
‘¢ Men,’’ and so makes him the only equivalent of Mena.
But this reading of the name is still doubtful. Arguing
that Aha must be Mena, and having all the rest of the
kings of the Ist Dynasty identified with the names in
the lists, Prof. Petrie is compelled to exclude Narmer
from the dynasty, and to relegate him to ‘‘ Dynasty O,”’
before the time of Mena. It is quite possible, however,
that Narmer was the successor, not the predecessor, of
Mena. He was certainly either the one or the other,
as the style of art in his time was exactly the same as
that in the time of Aha. The ‘‘ Scorpion,’’ too, whose
name is found at Hierakonpolis, certainly dates to the

KINGS OF THE FIRST DYNASTY 75

same time as Narmer and Aha, for the style of his work
is the same. And it may well be that he is not to be
counted as a separate king, belonging to ‘‘ Dynasty O ”’
(or ‘‘ Dynasty —I’’) at all, but as identical with
Narmer, just as ‘‘Sma’’ may also be. We thus find
that the two kings who left the most developed remains
at Hierakonpolis are the two whose monuments at Aby-
dos are the oldest of all on that site. That is to say,
the kings whose monuments record the conquest of the
North belong to the period of transition from the old
Hierakonpolite dominion of Upper Egypt to the new
kingdom of all Egypt. They, in fact, represent the
‘* Mena ’”’ or Menes of tradition. It may be that Aha
bore the personal name of Men, which would thus be
the original of Mena, but this is uncertain. In any case
both Aha and Narmer must be assigned to the Ist Dy-
nasty, with the result that we know of more kings
belonging to the dynasty than appear in the lists.

Nor is this improbable. Manetho’s list is evidently
based upon old Egyptian lists derived from the authori-
ties upon which the king-lists of Abydos and Sakkara
were based. These old lists were made under the XIXth
Dynasty, when an interest in the oldest kings seems to
have been awakened, and the ruling monarchs erected
temples at Abydos in their honour. This phenomenon
can only have been due to a discovery of Umm el-Ga’ab
and its treasures, the tombs of which were recognized
as the burial-places (real or secondary) of the kings
before the pyramid-builders. Seti I. and his son Ramses
then worshipped the kings of Umm el-Ga’ab, with their

76 ABYDOS AND THE FIRST THREE DYNASTIES

names set before them in the order, number, and spelling
in which the scribes considered they ought to be in-
scribed. It is highly :probable that the number known
at that time was not quite correct. We know that the
spelling of the names was very much garbled (to take
one example only, the signs for Sen were read as one
sign Yebh), so that one or two kings may have been
omitted or displaced. This may be the case with Nar-
mer, or, aS his name ought possibly to be read, Betju-
mer. His monuments show by their style that he
belongs to the very beginning of the Ist Dynasty. No
name in the Ist Dynasty list corresponds to his. But
one of the lists gives for the first king of the Id
Dynasty (the successor of ‘‘ Qebh’’—Sen) a name
which may also be read Betjumer, spelt syllabically
this time, not ideographically. On this account Prof.
Naville wishes to regard the Hierakonpolite monuments
of Narmer as belonging to the IId Dynasty, but, as we
have seen, they are among the most archaic known,
and certainly must belong to the beginning of the Ist
Dynasty. It is therefore probable that Khasekhemui
Besh and Narmer (Betjumer?) were confused by this
list-maker, and the name Betjumer was given to the
first king of the IId Dynasty, who was probably in
reality Khasekhemui. The resemblance of Betju to
Besh may have contributed to this confusion.

So Narmer (or Betjumer) found his way out of his
proper place at the beginning of the Ist Dynasty. |
Whether Aha was also called ‘‘ Men ” or not, it seems
evident that he and Narmer were jointly the originals

SOME HISTORICAL RESULTS ce

of the legendary Mena. Narmer, who possibly also bore
the name of Sma, ‘‘ the Uniter,’’ conquered the North.
Aha, ‘*‘ the Fighter,’’ also ruled both South and North
at the same period. Khasekhemui, too, conquered the
North, but the style of his monuments shows such an
advance upon that of the days of Aha and Narmer that
it seems best to make him the successor of Sen (or
‘* Qebh ’’), and, explaining the transference of the name
Betjumer to the beginning of the IId Dynasty as due
to a confusion with Khasekhemui’s personal name Besh,
to make Khasekhemui the founder of the IJd Dynasty.
The beginning of a new dynasty may well have been
marked by a reassertion of the new royal power over
Lower Egypt, which may have lapsed somewhat under
the rule of the later kings of the Ist Dynasty.

Semti is certainly the ‘‘ Hesepti’’ of the lists, and
Tja Ati is probably ‘‘ Ateth.’’ ‘‘ Ata’’ is thus uniden-
tified. Prof. Petrie makes him = Merneit, but, as has
already been said, there is no proof that the tomb of
Merneit is that of a king. ‘‘ Teta’’ may be Tjer or
Khent, but of this there is no proof. It is most prob-
able that the names “‘ Teta,’’ ‘‘ Ateth,’’ and ‘‘ Ata ”’ are
all founded on Ati, the personal name of Tja. The king
Tjer is then not represented in the lists, and ‘‘ Mena ”’
is a compound of the two oldest Abydos kings, Narmer
(Betjumer) Sma (?) and Aha Men (2). |

These are the bare historical results that have been
attained with regard to the names, identity, and order
of the kings. The smaller memorials that have been
found with them, especially the ivory plaques, have told

78 ABYDOS AND THE FIRST THREE DYNASTIES

us of events that took place during their reigns; but,
with the exception of the constantly recurring refer-
ences to the conquest of the North, there is little that
can be considered of historical interest or importance.
We will take one as an example. This is the tablet
No. 32,650 of the British Museum, illustrated by Prof.
Petrie, Royal Tombs 1 (Kgypt Exploration Fund), pl.
xi, 14, xv, 16. This is the record of a single year, the
first in the reign of Semti, King of Upper and Lower
Egypt. On it we see a picture of a king performing
a religious dance before the god Osiris, who is seated
in a shrine plaeed on a dais. This religious dance was
performed by all the kings in later times. Below we
find hieroglyphic (ideographic) reeords of a river expe-
dition to fight the Northerners and of the capture of a
fortified town called An. The capture of the town is
indicated by a broken line of fortification, half-encircling
the name, and the hoe with which the emblematic hawks
on the slate reliefs already described * are armed; this
signifies the opening and breaking down of the wall.
On the other half of the tablet we find the viceroy
of Lower Egypt, Hemaka, mentioned; also ‘‘ the Hawk
(i. e. the king) seizes the seat of the Libyans,’’ and some
unintelligible record of a jeweller of the palace and a
king’s carpenter. On a similar tablet (of Sen) we find
the words ‘‘ the king’s carpenter made this record.’’
All these little tablets are then the records of single
years of a king’s life, and others like them, preserved
no doubt in royal archives, formed the base of regular
1See p. 51.

THE STELE OF PALERMO © (6:

annals, which were occasionally carved upon stone. We
have an example of one of these in the ‘‘ Stele of Pa-
lermo,’’ a fragment of black granite, inscribed with the
annals of the kings up to the time of the Vth Dynasty, |
when the monument itself was made. It is a matter
for intense regret that the greater portion of this price-
less historical monument has disappeared, leaving us
but a piece out of the centre, with part of the records
of only six kings before Snefru. Of these six the name,
of only one, Neneter, of the IId Dynasty, whose name
is also found at Abydos, is mentioned. The only impor-
tant historical event of Neneter’s reign seems to have
occurred in his thirteenth year, when the towns or pal-
aces of Ha (“‘ North ’’) and Shem-Ra@ (‘‘ The Sun pro-
ceeds ’’) were founded. Nothing but the institution and
celebration of religious festivals is recorded in the six-
teen yearly entries preserved to us out of a reign of
thirty-five years. The annual height of the Nile is given,
and the occasions of numbering the people are recorded
(every second year): nothing else. Manetho tells us that
in the reign of Binothris, who is Neneter, it was decreed
that women could hold royal honours and _ privileges.
This first concession of women’s rights is not mentioned
on the strictly official ‘‘ Palermo Stele.’’

More regrettable than aught else is the absence from
the ‘* Palermo Stele ”’ of that part of the original monu-
ment which gave the annals of the earliest kings. At
any rate, in the lines of annals which still exist above
that which contains the chronicle of the reign of Neneter
no entry can be definitely identified as belonging to the

80 ABYDOS AND THE FIRST THREE DYNASTIES

reigns of Aha or Narmer. In a line below there is a
mention of the ‘‘ birth of Khasekhemui,”’ apparently a
festival in honour of the birth of that king celebrated
in the same way as the reputed birthday of a god. This
shows the great honour in which Khasekhemui was held,
and perhaps it was he who really finally settled the
question of the unification of North and South and con-
solidated the work of the earlier kings. |

As far as we can tell, then, Aha and Narmer were the
first conquerors of the North, the unifiers of the king-
dom, and the originals of the legendary Mena. In their
time the kingdom’s centre of gravity was still in the
South, and Narmer (who is probably identical with ‘‘ the
Scorpion ’’) dedicated the memorials of his deeds in the
temple of Hierakonpolis. It may be that the legend of
the founding of Memphis in the time of ‘‘ Menes ”’ is
nearly correct (as we shall see, historically, the founda-
tion may have’ been due to Merpeba), but we have the
authority of Manetho for the fact that the first two
dynasties were ‘‘ Thinite ’’ (that is, Upper Egyptian),
and that Memphis did not become the capital till the
time of the IIId Dynasty. With this statement the evi-
dence of the monuments fully agrees. The earliest royal
tombs in the pyramid-field of Memphis date from the
time of the IIId Dynasty, so that it is evident that the
kings had then taken up their abode in the Northern
capital. We find that soon after the time of Khase-
khemui the king Perabsen was especially connected with
Lower Egypt. His personal name is unknown to us
(though he may be the ‘‘ Uatjnes ’’ of the lists), but

UNIFIERS OF THE KINGDOM i 81

we do know that he had two banner-names, Sekhem-ab
and Perabsen. The first is his hawk or Horus-name, the
second his Set-name; that is to say, while he bore the
first name as King of Upper Egypt under the special
patronage of Horus, the hawk-god of the Upper Coun-
try, he bore the second as King of Lower Egypt, under
the patronage of Set, the deity of the Delta, whose fetish
animal appears above this name instead of the hawk.
This shows how definitely Perabsen wished to appear
as legitimate King of Lower as well as Upper Egypt.
In later times the Theban kings of the XIIth Dynasty,
when they devoted themselves to winning the allegiance
of the Northerners by living near Memphis rather than
at, Thebes, seem to have been imitating the successors
of Khasekhemui.

Moreover, we now find various evidences of increas-
ing connection with the North. A princess named Ne-
maat-hap, who seems to have been the mother of Sa-
nekht, the first king of the I1Id Dynasty, bears the name
of the sacred Apis of Memphis, her name signifying
‘* Possessing the right of Apis.’? According to Manetho,
the kings of the IIId Dynasty are the first Memphites,
and this seems to be quite correct. With Ne-maat-hap
the royal right seems to have been transferred to a
Memphite house. But the Memphites still had asso-
ciations with Upper Egypt: two of them, Tjeser Khet-
neter and Sa-nekht, were buried near Abydos, in the
desert at Bét Khalléf, where their tombs were discov-
ered and excavated by Mr. Garstang in 1900. The tomb
of Tjeser, which is illustrated on page 82, is a great

$2 ABYDOS AND THE FIRST THREE DYNASTIES

brick-built mastaba, forty feet high and measuring 300 ©
feet by 150 feet. The actual tomb-chambers are exca-
vated in the rock, twenty feet below the ground-level
and sixty feet below the top of the mastaba. They had
been violated in ancient times, but a number of clay
jar-sealings, alabaster vases, and bowls belonging to
the tomb furniture were found by the discoverer. Sa-
nekht’s tomb is similar. In it was found the preserved

THE TOMB OF KING TJESER AT BET KHALLAF.
About 3700 B. ©.

skeleton of its owner, who was a giant seven feet high.
It is remarkable that Manetho chronicles among the
kings of the early period a king named Sesokhris, who
was five cubits high. This may have been Sa-nekht.
Tjeser had two tombs, one, the above-mentioned,
near Abydos, the other at Sakkara, in the Memphite
pyramid-field. This is the famous Step-Pyramid. Since
Sa-nekht seems really to have been buried at Bét Khal-
laf, probably Tjeser was, too, and the Step-Pyramid may
have been his secondary or sham tomb, erected in the
necropolis of Memphis as a compliment to Seker, the

ROYAL POWER TRANSFERRED TO MEMPHIS 83

Northern god of the dead, just as Aha had his secondary
tomb at Abydos in compliment to Khentamenti. Sne-
feru, also, the last king of the I1Id Dynasty, seems to
have had two tombs. One of these was the great Pyra-
mid of Médtiim, which was explored by Prof. Petrie in
1891, the other was at Dashtir. Near by was the inter-
esting necropolis already mentioned, in which was dis-
covered evidence of the continuance of the cramped posi-
tion of burial and of the absence of mummification
among a certain section of the population even as late
as the time of the [Vth Dynasty. This has been taken
to imply that the fusion of the primitive Neolithic and
invading sub-Semitic races had not been effected at that
time. |

With the IVth Dynasty the connection of the royal
house with the South seems to have finally ceased. The
governmental centre of gravity was finally transferred
to Memphis, and the kings were thenceforth for several
centuries buried in the great pyramids which still stand
in serried order along the western desert border of
Egypt, from the Delta to the province of the Fayyfim.
With the latest discoveries in this Memphite pyramid-
field we shall deal in the next chapter.

The transference of the royal power to Memphis
under the IIId Dynasty naturally led to a great increase
of Egyptian activity in the Northern lands. We read in
Manetho of a great Libyan war in the reign of Neche-
rophes, and both Sa-nekht and Tjeser seem to have
finally established Egyptian authority in the Sinaitic
peninsula, where their rock-inscriptions have been found.

84 ABYDOS AND THE FIRST THREE DYNASTIES

In 1904 Prof. Petrie was despatched to Sinai by the
Egypt Exploration Fund, in order finally to record the
inscriptions of the early kings in the Wadi Maghara,
which had been lately very much damaged by the opera-
tions of the turquoise-miners. It seems almost incredi-
ble that ignorance and vandalism should still be so ram-
pant in the twentieth century that the most important
historical monuments are not safe from desecration in
order to obtain a few turquoises, but it is so. Prof. Pe- .
trie’s expedition did not start a day too soon, and at the
suggestion of Sir William Garstin, the adviser to the
Ministry of the Interior, the majority of the inscrip-
tions have been removed to the Cairo Museum for
safety and preservation. Among the new inscriptions
discovered is one of Sa-nekht, which is now in the Brit-
ish Museum. Tjeser and Sa-nekht were not the first
Egyptian kings to visit Sinai. Already, in the days of
the Ist Dynasty, Semerkha had entered that land and
inscribed his name upon the rocks. But the regular
annexation, so to speak, of Sinai to Egypt took place
under the Memphites of the I1Id Dynasty.

With the I1Id Dynasty we have reached the age of
the pyramid-builders. The most typical pyramids are
those of the three great kings of the [Vth Dynasty,
Khufu, Khafra, and Menkaura, at Giza near Cairo.
But, as we have seen, the last king of the I1Id Dynasty,
Snefru, also had one pyramid, if not two; and the most
ancient of these buildings known to us, the Step-Pyra-
mid of Sakkara, was erected by Tjeser at the beginning
of that dynasty. The evolution of the royal tombs from

EVOLUTION OF ROYAL TOMBS 85

the time of the Ist Dynasty to that of the [Vth is very
interesting to trace. At the period of transition from
the predynastic to the dynastic age we have the great
mastaba of Aha at NakAda, and the simplest chamber-
tombs at Abydos. All these were of brick; no stone
was used in their construction. Then we find the cham-
ber-tomb of Den Semti at Abydos with a granite floor,
the walls being still of brick. Above each of the Abydos
tombs was probably a low mound, and in front a small
chapel, from which a flight of steps descended into the
simple chamber. On one of the little plaques already
mentioned, which were found in these tombs, we have
an archaic inscription, entirely written in ideographs,
which seems to read, ‘‘ The Big-Heads (7. e. the chiefs)
come to the tomb.’’ The ideograph for ‘‘ tomb ’’ seems
to be a rude picture of the funerary chapel, but from
it we can derive little information as to its construction.
Towards the end of the Ist Dynasty, and during the Ld,
the royal tombs became much more complicated, being
surrounded with numerous chambers for the dead slaves,
etc. Khasekhemui’s tomb has thirty-three such cham-
bers, and there is one large chamber of stone. We
know of no other instance of the use. of stone work
for building at this period except in the royal tombs.
No doubt the mason’s art was still so difficult that it
was reserved for royal use only.

Under the IIId Dynasty we find the last brick mas-
tabas built for royalty, at Bét Khallaf, and the first
pyramids, in the Memphite necropolis. In the mastaba
of Tjeser at Bét Khallaf stone was used for the great

86 ABYDOS AND THE FIRST THREE DYNASTIES

portecullises which were intended to bar the way to pos-
sible plunderers through the passages of the tomb. The
Step-Pyramid at Sakkara is, so to speak, a series of
mastabas of stone, imposed one above the other; it never
had the continuous casing of stone which is the mark
of a true pyramid. The pyramid of Snefru at Médim
is more developed. It also originated in a mastaba,
enlarged, and with another mastaba-like erection on the
top of it; but it was given a continuous sloping casing
of fine limestone from bottom to top, and so is a true
pyramid. A discussion of recent theories as to the build-
ing of the later pyramids of the [Vth Dynasty will be
found in the next chapter.

In the time of the Ist Dynasty the royal tomb was
known by the name of ‘‘ Protection-around-the-Hawk,
1.e. the king ’’ (Sa-ha-heru); but under the IIId and
IVth Dynasties regular names, such as ‘‘ the Firm,”’
‘* the Glorious,’’ ‘‘ the Appearing,”’ etc., were given to
each pyramid.

We must not omit to note an interesting point in
connection with the royal tombs at Abydos. In that
of King Khent or Tjer (the reading of the ideograph is
doubtful) M. Amélineau found a large bed or bier of
granite, with a figure of the god Osiris lying in state
sculptured in high relief upon it. This led him to jump
to the conclusion that he had found the tomb of the god
Osiris himself, and that a skull he found close by was
the veritable cranium of the primeval folk-hero, who,
according to the euhemerist theory, was the deified orig-
inal of the god. The true explanation is given by Dr.

False Door of the Tomb of Teta.

An official of the [Vth Dynasty; about 3600 B.C. From Giza. British Museum. Photograph by
Messrs. Mansell & Co.

eS

43
a

THE TOMB OF OSIRIS 87

Wallis Budge in his History of Egypt, i, p. 19. It is
a fact that the tomb of Tjer was regarded by the Egyp-
tians of the XIXth Dynasty as the veritable tomb of
Osiris. They thought they had discovered it, just as
M. Amélineau did. When the ancient royal tombs of
Umm el-Ga’ab were rediscovered and identified at the
beginning of the XIXth Dynasty, and Seti I built the
great temple of Abydos to the divine ancestors in honour
of the discovery, embellishing it with a relief of himself
and his son Ramses making offerings to the names of
his predecessors (the ‘‘ Tablet of Abydos ’’), the name
of King Khent or Tjer (which is perhaps the really cor-
rect original form) was read by the royal scribes as
‘« Khent ’’ and hastily identified with the first part of
the name of the god Khent-amenti Osiris, the lord of
Abydos. The tomb was thus regarded as the tomb of
Osiris himself, and it was furnished with a great stone
figure of the god lying on his bier, attended by the two
hawks of Isis and Nephthys; ever after the site was
visited by crowds of pilgrims, who left at Umm el-Ga’ab
the thousands of little votive vases whose fragments
have given the place its name of the ‘‘ Mother of Pots.”’ ’
This is the explanation of the discovery of the ‘‘ Tomb
of Osiris.’”” We have not found what M. Amélineau
seems rather naively to have thought possible, a con-
firmation of the ancient view that Osiris was originally
a man who ruled over Egypt and was deified after his
death; but we have found that the Egyptians them-
selves were more or less euhemerists, and did think so.
1See p. 64.

88 ABYDOS AND THE FIRST THREE DYNASTIES

It may seem remarkable that all this new knowledge
of ancient Egypt is derived from tombs and has to do
with the resting-places of the kings when dead, rather
than with their palaces or temples when living. Of
temples at this early period we have no trace. The old-
est temple in Egypt is perhaps the little chapel in front
of the pyramid of Snefru at Médiim. We first hear of
temples to the gods under the [Vth Dynasty, but of the
actual buildings of that period we have recovered noth-
ing but one or two inscribed blocks of stone. Prof.
Petrie has traced out the plan of the oldest temple of
Osiris at Abydos, which may be of the time of Khufu,
from scanty evidences which give us but little informa-
tion. It is certain, however, that this temple, which is
clearly one of the oldest in Egypt, goes back at least
to his time. Its site is the mound called Kom es-Sultan,
‘The Mound of the King,”’ close to the village of el-
Kherba, and on the borders of the cultivation northeast
of the royal tombs at Umm el-Ga’ab.

Of royal palaces we have more definite information.
North of the Kom es-Sultan are two great fortress-en-
closures of brick: the one is known as Shiinet ez-Zebib,
‘‘the Storehouse of Dried Grapes;’’ the other is occu-
pied by the Coptic monastery of Dér Anba Musas. Both
are certainly fortress-palaces of the earliest period of the
Egyptian monarchy. We know from the small record-
plaques of this period that the kings were constantly
founding or repairing places of this kind, which were
always great rectangular enclosures with crenelated
brick walls like those of early Babylonian buildings.

ROYAL FORTRESS - CITIES 89

We have seen that the Northern Egyptian possessed
similar fortress-cities which were captured by Narmer.*
These were the seats of the royal residence in various
parts of the country. Behind their walls was the king’s
house, and no doubt also a town of nobles and retainers,
while the peasants lived on the arable land without.
The Shinet ez-Zebib and its companion fortress were

THE SHUNET EZ-ZEBIB: THE FORTRESS-TOWN OF THE
Iid DYNASTY AT ABYDOS.

About 3900 B. c.

evidently the royal cities of the Ist and I1d Dynasties at
Abydos. The former has been excavated by Mr. E. R.
Ayrton for the Egypt Exploration Fund, under the
supervision of Prof. Petrie. He found jar-sealings of
Khasekhemui and Perabsen. In later times the place
was utilized as a burial-place for ibis-mummies (it had
already been abandoned as a city before the time of the
- XIIth Dynasty), and from this fact it received the name
of Shenet deb-hib, or ‘‘Storehouse of Ibis Burials.’’ The
Arab invaders adapted this name to their own language
1See p. 50.

90 ABYDOS AND THE FIRST THREE DYNASTIES

in the nearest form which would have any meaning, as
Shinet ez-Zebib, ‘‘ the Storehouse of Dried Grapes.’’
The Arab word shina (“‘ Barn ”’ or ‘‘ Storehouse ’’) was,
it should be noted, taken over from the Coptic sheune,
which is the old-Egyptian shenet. The identity of
sheune or shina with the German ‘‘ Scheune”’ is a
quaint and curious coincidence. In the illustration of
the Shiinet ez-Zebib the curved line of crenelated wall,
following the contour of the hill, should be noted, as it
is a remarkable example of the building of this early
period.

It will have been seen from the foregoing description
of what far-reaching importance the discoveries at Aby-
dos have been. A new chapter of the history of the
human race has been opened, which contains information
previously undreamt of, information which Egyptolo-
gists had never dared to hope would be recovered.
The sand of Egypt indeed conceals inexhaustible treas-
ures, and no one knows what the morrow’s work may
bring forth.

Ex Africé semper aliquid novi!

CHAPTER III
MEMPHIS AND THE PYRAMIDS

MEMPHIS, the “‘ beautiful abode,” the ‘‘ City of the

White Wall,” is said to have been founded by the
legendary Menes, who in order to build it diverted the
stream of the Nile by means of a great dyke constructed
near the modern village of Koshésh, south of the village
of Mitrahéna, which marks the central point of the
ancient metropolis of Northern Egypt. It may be that
the city was founded by Aha or Narmer, the historical
originals of Mena or Menes; but we have another theory
with regard to its foundation, that it was originally built
by King Merpeba Atjab, whose tomb was also discov-
ered at Abydos near those of Aha and Narmer. Mer-
peba is the oldest king whose name is absolutely identi-
fied with one occurring in the XTXth Dynasty king-lists
and in Manetho. He is certainly the ‘“‘ Merbap ”’ or
‘* Merbepa ”’ (‘‘ Merbapen ’’) of the lists and the Miebis
of Manetho. In both the lists and in Manetho he stands
fifth in order from Mena, and he was therefore the sixth

king of the Ist Dynasty. The lists, Manetho, and the
91

92 MEMPHIS AND THE PYRAMIDS

small monuments in his own tomb agree in making him
the immediate successor of Semti Den (Ousaphais), and
from the style of these latter it is evident that he comes
after Tja, Tjer, Narmer, and Aha. That is to say, the
contemporary evidence makes him the fifth king from
Aha, the first original of ‘‘ Menes.”’

Now after the piety of Seti I had led him to erect
a great temple at Abydos in memory of the ancient
kings, whose sepulchres had probably been brought to
light shortly before, and to compile and set up in the
temple a list of his predecessors, a certain pious snob-
bery or snobbish piety impelled a worthy named Tunure,
who lived at Memphis, to put up in his own tomb at
Sakkara a tablet of kings like the royal one at Abydos. _
If Osiris-Khentamenti at Abydos had his tablet of
kings, so should Osiris-Seker at Sakkara. But Tunure
does not begin his list with Mena; his initial king is”
Merpeba. For him Merpeba was the first monarch to
be commemorated at Sakkara. Does not this look very
much as if the strictly historical Merpeba, not the rather
legendary and confused Mena, was regarded as the first
Memphite king? It may well be that it was in the reign
of Merpeba, not in that of Aha or Narmer, that Memphis
was founded.

The XIXth Dynasty lists of course say nothing about
Mena or Merpeba having founded Memphis; they only
give the names of the kings, nothing more. The earliest
authority for the ascription of Memphis to ‘‘ Menes ”’
is Herodotus, who was followed in this ascription, as
in many other matters, by Manetho; but it must be

THE FOUNDER OF MEMPHIS 93

remembered that Manetho was writing for the edifica-
tion of a Greek king (Ptolemy Philadelphus) and his
Greek court at Alexandria, and had therefore to evince
a respect for the great Greek classic which he may not
always have really felt. Herodotus is not, of course,
accused of any wilful misstatement in this or in any
other matter in which his accuracy is suspected. He
merely wrote down what he was told by the Egyptians
themselves, and Merpeba was sufficiently near in time
to Aha to be easily confounded with him by the scribes
of the Persian period, who no doubt ascribed everything
to ‘‘ Mena ”’ that was done by the kings of the Ist and
IId Dynasties. Therefore it may be considered quite
probable that the ‘‘ Menes ’’ who founded Memphis was
Merpeba, the fifth or sixth king of the Ist Dynasty,
who Tunure, a thousand years before the time of
Herodotus and his informants, placed at the head of
the Memphite ‘ List of Sakkara.”’ ;
| The reconquest of the North by Khasekhemui doubt-
less led to a further strengthening of Memphis; and it
is quite possible that the deeds of this king also con-
tributed to make up the sum total of those ascribed to
the Herodotean and Manethonian Menes.

It may be that a town of the Northerners existed
here before the time of the Southern Conquest, for
Phtah, the local god of Memphis, has a very marked
character of his own, quite different from that of Khen-
tamenti, the Osiris of Abydos. He is always represented
as a little bow-legged hydrocephalous dwarf very like
the Pheenician Kabeiroi. It may be that here is another

94 MEMPHIS AND THE PYRAMIDS

connection between the Northern Egyptians and the
Semites. The name ‘‘ Phtah,”’ the ‘‘ Opener,’’ is defi-
nitely Semitic. We may then regard the dwarf Phtah
as originally a non-EKgyptian god of the Northerners,
probably Semitic in origin, and his town also as ante-
dating the conquest. But it evidently was to the
Southerners that Memphis owed its importance and its
eventual promotion to the position of capital of the
united kingdom. Then the dwarf Phtah saw himself
rivalled by another Phtah of Southern Egyptian origin,
who had been installed at Memphis by the Southerners.
This Phtah was a sort of modified edition of Osiris, in
mummy-form and holding crook and whip, but with a
refined edition of the Kabeiric head of the indigenous
Phtah. The actual god of ‘‘ the White Wall ’’ was un-
doubtedly confused with the dead god of the necropolis,
whose name was Seker or Sekri (Sokari), ‘‘ the Cof-
fined.’’ The original form of this deity was a mummied
hawk upon a coffin, and it is very probable that he was
imported from the South, like the second Phtah, at the
time of the conquest, when the great Northern necropolis
began to grow up as a duplicate of that at Abydos.
Later on we find Seker confused with the ancient dwarf-
god, and it is the latter who was afterwards chiefly
revered as Phtah-Socharis-Osiris, the protector of the
necropolis, the mummied Phtah being the generally rec-
ognized ruler of the City of the White Wall.

It is from the name of Seker that the modern Sak-
kara takes its title. Sakkara marks the central point of
the great Memphite necropolis, as it is the nearest point

ROYAL TOMBS AT SAKKARA 95

of the western desert to Memphis. Northwards the
necropolis extended to Giza and Abti Roash, southwards,
to Dashtir; even the necropoles of Lisht and Médiim
may be regarded as appanages of Sakkara. At Sakkara
itself Tjeser of the I1Id Dynasty had a pyramid, which,
as we have seen, was probably not his real tomb (which
was the great mastaba at Bet Khallaf), but a secondary
or sham tomb corresponding to the ‘‘ tombs ”’ of the
earliest kings at Umm el-Ga’ab in the necropolis of
Abydos. Many later kings, however, especially of the
Vith Dynasty, were actually buried at Sakkara. Their
tombs have all been thoroughly described by their dis-
coverer, Prof. Maspero, in his history. The last king
of the IiId Dynasty, Snefru, was buried away down
south at Médiim, in splendid isolation, but he may
also have had a second pyramid at Sakkaéra or Abi
Roash.

The kings of the [Vth Dynasty were the greatest of
the pyramid builders, and to them belong the huge edi-
fices of Giza. The Vth Dynasty favoured Abusir, be-
tween Giza and Sakkara; the. VIth, as we have said,
preferred Sakkara itself. With them the end of the Old
Kingdom and of Memphite dominion was reached; the
sceptre fell from the hands of the Memphite kings and
was taken up by the princes of Herakleopolis (Ahnasyet
el-Medina, near Beni Suéf, south of the Fayyiim) and
Thebes. Where the Herakleopclite kings were buried
we do not know; probably somewhere in the local
necropolis of the Gebel es-Sedment, between Ahnasya
and the Fayyiim. The first Thebans (the XIth Dy-

96 MEMPHIS AND THE PYRAMIDS

nasty) were certainly buried at Thebes, but when the
Herakleopolites had finally disappeared, and all Egypt
was again united under one strong sceptre, the Theban
kings seem to have been drawn northwards. They re-
moved to the seat of the dominion of those whom they
had supplanted, and they settled in the neighbourhood of
Herakleopolis, near the fertile province of the Fayytim,
and between it and Memphis. Here, in the royal for-
tress-palace of Itht-taui, ‘‘ Controlling the Two Lands,”’
the kings of the XIIth Dynasty lived, and they were
buried in the necropoles of Dashtr, Lisht, and Llahun
(Hawara), in pyramids like those of the old Memphite
kings. These facts, of the situation of Itht-taui, of their
burial in the southern annex of the old necropolis of
Memphis, and of the form of their tombs (the true
Upper Egyptian and Theban form was a rock-cut gal-
lery and chamber driven deep into the hill), show how
solicitous were the Amenemhats and Senusrets of the
suffrages of Lower Egypt, how anxious they were to
conciliate the ancient royal pride of Memphis.

Where the kings of the XIIIth Dynasty and the
Hyksos or ‘‘ Shepherds ’’ were buried, we do not know.
The kings of the restored Theban empire were all in-
terred at Thebes. There are, in fact, no known royal
sepulchres between the Fayytim and Abydos. The great
kings were mostly buried in the neighbourhood of Mem-
phis, Abydos, and Thebes. The sepulchres of the ‘‘ Mid-
dle Empire ’’—the XIth to XIIIth Dynasties—in the
neighbourhood of the Fayyim may fairly be grouped
with those of the same period at Dashiir, which belongs

IMPORTANT SITES EXCAVATED 97

to the necropolis of Memphis, since it is only a mile or
two south of Sakkara.

It is chiefly with regard to the sepulchres of the
kings that the most momentous discoveries of recent
years have been made—at Thebes, and at Sakkara,
Abusir, Dashtr, and Lisht, as at Abydos. For this rea-
son we deal in succession with the finds in the necropoles
of Abydos, Memphis, and Thebes respectively. And
with the sepulchres of the ‘‘ Old Kingdom,”’ in the Mem-
phite necropolis proper, we have naturally grouped those
of the ‘‘ Middle Kingdom ”’ at Dash, Lisht, Tahun,
and Hawara.

Some of these modern discoveries have been com-
mented on and illustrated by Prof. Maspero in his great
history. But the discoveries that have been made since
this publication have been very important,—those at
Abusir, indeed, of first-rate importance, though not so
momentous as those of the tombs of the Ist and Id
Dynasties at Abydos, already described. At Abaii Roash
and at Giza, at the northern end of the Memphite
necropolis, several expeditions have had considerable
success, notably those of the American Dr. Reisner,
assisted by Mr. Mace, who.excavated the royal tombs
at Umm el-Ga’ab for Prof. Petrie, those of the German
Drs. Steindorff and Borchardt,—the latter working for
the Deutsch-Orient Gesellschaft,—and those of other
American excavators. Until the full publication of the
results of these excavations appears, very little can be
said about them. Many mastaba-tombs have, it is under-
stood, been found, with interesting remains. Nothing of

98 MEMPHIS AND THE PYRAMIDS

great historical importance seems to have been discov-
ered, however. It is otherwise when we come to the
discoveries of Messrs. Borchardt and Schafer at Abusir,
south of Giza and north of Sakkara. At this place
results of first-rate historical importance have been
attained. ; ;
The main group of pyramids at Abusir consists of
the tombs of the kings Sahura, Neferarikara, and Ne-
user-Ra, of the Vth Dynasty. The pyramids themselves
are smaller than those of Giza, but larger than those of
Sakkara. In general appearance and effect they resem-
ble those of Giza, but they are not so imposing, as the
desert here is low. Those of Giza, Sakkara, and Dashtr
owe much of their impressiveness to the fact that they
are placed at some height above the cultivated land.
The excavation and planning of these pyramids were
carried out by Messrs. Borchardt and Schafer at the
expense of Baron von Bissing, the well-known Egyp-
tologist of Munich, and of the Deutsch-Orient Gesell-
schaft of Berlin. The antiquities found have been
divided between the museums of Berlin and Cairo.
One of the most noteworthy discoveries was that of
the funerary temple of Ne-user-Ra, which stood at the
base of his pyramid. The plan is interesting, and the
granite lotus-bud columns found are the most ancient
yet discovered in Egypt. Much of the paving and the
wainscoting of the walls was of fine black marble, beau-
tifully polished. An interesting find was a basin and
drain with lion’s-head mouth, to carry away the blood
of the sacrifices. Some sculptures in relief were dis-

DEVELOPMENT OF EGYPTIAN ART 99

covered, including a gigantic representation of the king
and the goddess Isis, which shows that in the early days
of the Vth Dynasty the king and the gods were already
depicted in exactly the same costume as they wore in
the days of the Ramses and the Ptolemies. The hieratic
art of Egypt had, in fact, now taken on itself the final
outward appearance which it retained to the very
end. There is no more of the archaism and absence
of conventionality, which marks the art of the earliest
dynasties.

We can trace by successive steps the swift devel-
~ opment of Egyptian art from the rude archaism of the
Ist Dynasty to its final consummation under the Vth,
when the conventions became fixed. In the time of
Khasekhemui, at the beginning of the Ild Dynasty, the
archaic character of the art has already begun to wear
off. Under the same dynasty we still have styles of
unconventional naiveté, such as the famous Statue
‘“No. 1” of the Cairo Museum,* bearing the names of
Kings Hetepahaui, Neb-ra, and Neneter. But with the
IVth Dynasty we no longer look for unconventionality.
Prof. Petrie discovered at Abydos a small ivory statuette
of Khufu or Cheops, the builder of the Great Pyramid
of Giza. The portrait is a good one and carefully exe-

cuted. It was not till the time of the X VIIIth Dynasty,
- indeed, that the Egyptians ceased to portray their kings
as they really were, and gave them a purely conven-
tional type of face. This convention, against which the
heretical King Amenhetep IV (Akhunaten) rebelled,

1See illustration, p. 100.

100 MEMPHIS AND THE PYRAMIDS

in order to have himself portrayed in all his real ungain-
liness and ugliness, did not exist till long after the time
of the [Vth and Vth Dynasties. The kings of the XIIth

STATUE NO. 1 OF THE CAIRO MUSEUM.

About 3900 B.c, Photograph reproduced from M. de Morgan’s
Recherches, vol. i.

Dynasty especially were most careful that their statues
should be accurate portraits; indeed, the portraits of
Usertsen (Senusret) III vary from a young face to an
old one, showing that the king was faithfully depicted
at different periods of his life.

ART OF PORTRAITURE 101

But the general conventions of dress and deportment
were finally fixed under the Vth Dynasty. After this
time we no longer have such absolutely faithful and
original presentments as the other little ivory statuette
found by Prof. Petrie at Abydos (now in the British
Museum), which shows us an aged monarch of the Ist
Dynasty. It is obvious that the features are absolutely
true to life, and the figure wears an unconventionally
party-coloured and bordered robe of a kind which kings
of a later day may have worn in actual life, but which
they would assuredly never be depicted as wearing by
the artists of their day. To the end of Egyptian history,
the kings, even the Roman emperors, were represented
on the monuments clothed in the official costume of their
ancestors of the [Vth and Vth Dynasties, in the same
manner as we see Khufu wearing his robe in the little
figure from Abydos, and Ne-user-Ra on the great relief
from Abusir. There are one or two exceptions, such
as the representations of the original genius Akhunaten
at Tell el-Amarna and the beautiful statue of Ramses IL
at Turin, in which we see these kings wearing the real
costume of their time, but such exceptions are very
rare.

The art of Abusir is therefore of great interest, since
it marks the end of the development of the priestly art.
Secular art might develop as it liked, though the crys-
tallizing influence of the ecclesiastical canon is always
evident here also. But henceforward it was an impiety,
which only an Akhunaten could commit, to depict a
king or a god on the walls of a temple otherwise (except

102 MEMPHIS AND THE PYRAMIDS

so far as the portrait was concerned) than as he had
been depicted in the time of the Vth Dynasty.

Other buildings have been excavated by the Germans
at Abusir, notably the usual town of mastaba-tombs
belonging to the chief dignitaries of the reign, which
is always found at the foot of a royal pyramid of this
period. Another building of the highest interest, be-
longing to the same age, was also excavated, and its
true character was determined. This is a building at
a place called er-Righa or Abii Ghuraib, ‘‘ Father of
Crows,’’ between Abusir and Giza. It was formerly
supposed to be a pyramid, but the German excavations
have shown that it is really a temple of the Sun-god
Ra of Heliopolis, specially venerated by the kings of the
Vth Dynasty, who were of Heliopolitan origin. The
great pyramid-builders of the [Vth Dynasty seem to
have been the last true Memphites. At the end of the
reign of Shepseskaf, the last monarch of the dynasty,
the sceptre passed to a Heliopolitan family. The fol-
lowing VIth Dynasty may again have been Memphite,
but this is uncertain. The capital continued to be
Memphis, and from the beginning of the I[Id Dynasty
to the end of the Old Kingdom and the rise of Herakle-
opolis and Thebes, Memphis remained the chief city of
Higypt.

The Heliopolitans were naturally the servants of
the Sun-god above all other gods, and they were the
first to call themselves ‘‘ Sons of the Sun,” a title re-
tained by the Pharaohs throughout all subsequent his-
tory. It was Ne-user-Ra who built the Sun-temple of

THE SUN-GOD OF HELIOPOLIS 103

Abii Ghuraib, on the edge of the desert, north of his
pyramid and those of his two immediate predecessors
at Abusir. As now laid bare by the excavations of 1900,
it is seen to consist of an artificial mound, with a great
court in front to the eastward. On the mound was
erected a truncated obelisk, the stone emblem of the
Sun-god. The worshippers in the court below looked
towards the Sun’s stone erected upon its mound in the
west, the quarter of the sun’s setting; for the Sun-god
of Heliopolis was primarily the setting sun, Tum-Ra,
not Ra Harmachis, the rising sun, whose emblem is the
Great Sphinx at Giza, which looks towards the east.
The sacred emblem of the Heliopolitan Sun-god reminds
us forcibly of the Semitic bethels or baetyli, the sacred
stones of Palestine, and may give yet another hint of
the Semitic origin of the Heliopolitan cult. In the court
of the temple is a huge circular altar of fine alabaster,
several feet across, on which slain oxen were offered
to the Sun, and behind this, at the eastern end of the
court, are six great basins of the same stone, over which
the beasts were slain, with drains running out of them
by which their blood was carried away. This temple
is a most interesting monument of the civilization of
the ‘‘ Old Kingdom ”’ at the time of the Vth Dynasty.
‘At Sakkara itself, which lies a short distance south
of Abusir, no new royal tombs have, as has been said,
been discovered of late years. But a great deal of work
has been done among the private mastaba-tombs by the
officers of the Service des Antiquités, which reserves to
itself the right of excavation here and at Dashir. The

104 MEMPHIS AND THE PYRAMIDS

mastaba of the sage and writer Kagemna (or rather
Gemnika, ‘‘ I-have-found-a-ghost,’’ which sounds very
hike an American Indian appellation) is very fine.
‘* T-have-found-a-ghost ’’ lived in the reign of the king
Tatkara Assa, the ‘‘ Tancheres ’”’ of Manetho, and he
wrote maxims like his great contemporary Phtahhetep
(‘* Offered to Phtah’’), who was also buried at Sakkara.
The officials of the Service des Antiquités who cleaned
the tomb unluckily misread his name Ka-bi-n (an impos-
sible form which could only mean, literally translated,
‘* Ghost-soul-of ’’ or ‘‘ Ghost-soul-to-me ’’), and they
have placed it in this form over the entrance to his tomb.
This mastaba, like those, already known, of Mereruka
(sometimes misnamed ‘‘ Mera’’) and the famous Ti,
both also at Sakkara, contains a large number of cham-
bers, ornamented with reliefs. In the vicinity M. Gré-
baut, then Director of the Service of Antiquities, dis-
covered a very interesting Street of Tombs, a regular
Via Sacra, with rows of tombs of the dignitaries of the
ViIth Dynasty on either side of it. They are generally
very much like one another; the workmanship of the
reliefs is fine, and the portrait of the owner of the tomb
is always in evidence.

Several of the smaller mastabas have lately been dis-
posed of to the various museums, as they are lable to
damage if they remain where they stand; moreover,
they are not of great value to the Museum of Cairo,
but are of considerable value to various museums which
do not already possess complete specimens of this class
of tombs. <A fine one, belonging to the chief Uerarina,

THE MASTABAS 105

is now exhibited in the Assyrian Basement of the British
Museum; another is in the Museum of Leyden; a third
at Berlin, and so on. Most of these are simple tombs
of one chamber. In the centre of the rear wall we
always see the stele or gravestone proper, built into the
fabric of the tomb. Before this stood the low table of
offerings with a bowl for oblations, and on either side
a tall incense-altar. From the altar the divine smoke
(senetr) arose when the hen-ka, or priest of the ghost
(literally, ‘‘ Ghost’s Servant ’’), performed his duty of
venerating the spirits of the deceased, while the Kher-
heb, or cantor, enveloped in the mystic folds of the
leopard-skin and with bronze incense-burner in hand,
sang the holy litanies and spells which should propitiate
the ghost and enable him to win his way to ultimate
perfection in the next world.

The stele is always in the form of a door with pyloni-
form cornice. On either side is a figure of the deceased,
and at the sides are carved prayers to Anubis, and at a
later date to Osiris, who are implored to give the fune-
rary meats and “ everything good and pure on which
the god there (as the dead man in the tomb has been
constituted) lives; ’’ often we find that the biography
and list of honorary titles and dignities of the deceased
have been added.

Sakkara was used as a place of burial in the latest
as well as in the earliest time. The Egyptians of the
XXVIth Dynasty, wearied of the long decadence and
devastating wars which had followed the glorious epoch
of the conquering Pharaohs of the X VIIIth and XIXth

106 MEMPHIS AND THE PYRAMIDS

Dynasties, turned for a new and refreshing inspiration
to the works of the most ancient kings, when Egypt
was a simple self-contained country, holding no inter-
course with outside lands, bearing no outside burdens
for the sake of pomp and glory, and knowing nothing
of the decay and decadence which follows in the train of
earthly power and grandeur. They deliberately turned
their backs on the worn-out and discredited imperial
trappings of the Thothmes and Ramses, and they took
the supposed primitive simplicity of the Snefrus, the
Khufus, and the Ne-user-Ras for a model and ensampler
to their lives. It was an age of conscious and intended
archaism, and in pursuit of the archaistic ideal the Mem-
phites of the Saite age had themselves buried in the
ancient necropolis of Sakkara, side by side with their
ancestors of the time of the Vth and VIth Dynasties.
Several of these tombs have lately been discovered and
opened, and fitted with modern improvements. One or
two of them, of the Persian period, have wells (leading
to the sepulchral chamber) of enormous depth, down
which the modern tourist is enabled to descend by a
spiral iron staircase. The Serapeum itself is lit with
electricity, and in the Tombs of the Kings at Thebes
nothing disturbs the silence but the steady thumping
pulsation of the dynamo-engine which lights the ancient
sepulchres of the Pharaohs. Thus do modern ideas and
inventions help us to see and so to understand better
the works of ancient Egypt. But it is perhaps a little
too much like the Yankee at the Court of King Arthur.

The interiors of the later tombs are often decorated

“PHARAOH’S BENCH” 107

with reliefs which imitate those of the early period, but
with a kind of delicate grace which at once marks them
for what they are, so that it is impossible to confound
them with the genuine ancient originals from which they
were adapted.

Riding from Sakkara southwards to Dashir, we pass
on the way the gigantic stone mastaba known as the
Mastabat el-Fara’in, ‘‘ Pharaoh’s Bench.’’ This was
considered to be the tomb of the Vth Dynasty king,
Unas, until his pyramid was found by Prof. Maspero
at Sakkara. From its form it might be thought to
belong to a monarch of the I1Id Dynasty, but the great
size of the stone blocks of which it is built seems to
point rather to the XIIth. All attempts to penetrate
its secret by actual excavation have been unavailing.

Further south across the desert we see from the
Mastabat el-Fara’tin four distinct pyramids, symmetri-
cally arranged in two lines, two in each line. The two
to the right are great stone erections of the usual type,
like those of Giza and Abusir, and the southernmost of
them has a peculiar broken-backed appearance, due to
the alteration of the angle of inclination of its sides
during construction. Further, it is covered almost to
the ground by the original casing of polished white lime-
stone blocks, so that it gives a very good idea of the
original appearance of the other pyramids, which have
lost their casing. These two pyramids very probably
belong to kings of the IIId Dynasty, as does the Step-
Pyramid of Sakkara. They strongly resemble the Giza
type, and the northernmost of the two looks very like

108 MEMPHIS AND THE PYRAMIDS

an understudy of the Great Pyramid. It seems to mark
the step in the development of the royal pyramid which
was immediately followed by the Great Pyramid. But
no excavations have yet proved the accuracy of this
view. Both pyramids have been entered, but nothing
has been found in them. It is very probable that one
of them is the second pyramid of Snefru.

The other two pyramids, those nearest the cultiva-
tion, are of very different appearance. They are half-
ruined, they are black in colour, and their whole effect
is quite different from that of the stone pyramids. For
they are built of brick, not of stone. They are pyramids,
it is true, but of a different material and of a different
date from those which we have been describing. They
are built above the sepulchres of kings of the XIIth
Dynasty, the Theban house which transferred its resi-
dence northwards to the neighbourhood of the ancient
Northern capital. We have, in fact, reached the end
of the Old Kingdom at Sakkara; at Dashir begin the
sepulchres of the Middle Kingdom. Pyramids are still
built, but they are not always of stone; brick is used,
usually with stone in the interior. The general effect
of these brick pyramids, when new, must have been
indistinguishable from that of the stone ones, and even
now, when it has become half-ruined, such a great brick
pyramid as that of Usertsen (Senusret) III at Dashtir
is not without impressiveness. After all, there is no
reason why a brick building should be less admirable
than a stone one. And in its own way the construction
_of such colossal masses of bricks as the two eastern

BRICK PYRAMIDS , 109

pyramids of Dashir must have been as arduous, even
as difficult, as that of building a moderate-sized stone
pyramid. The photograph of the brick pyramids of
Dashir on this page shows well the great size of these

ra

EXTERIOR OF THE SOUTHERN BRICK PYRAMID OF DASHUR:
XIITH DYNASTY.

Excavated by M. de Morgan, 1895. This is the secondary tomb ;
of Amenemhat III; about 2200 B. c.

masses of brickwork, which are as impressive as any
of the great brick structures of Babylonia and Assyria.
The XIIth Dynasty use of brick for the royal tombs
was a return to the custom of earlier days, for from
the time of Aha to that Tjeser, from the Ist Dynasty
to the I1Id, brick had been used for the building of the

110 MEMPHIS AND THE PYRAMIDS

royal mastaba-tombs, out of which the pyramids had
developed.

At this point, where we take leave of the great pyra-
mids of the Old Kingdom, we may notice the latest the-
ory as to the building of these monuments, which has
of late years been enunciated by Dr. Borchardt, and is
now generally accepted. The | great Prussian explorer
Lepsius, when he examined the pyramids in the ’forties,
came to the conclusion that each king, when he ascended
the throne, planned a small pyramid for himself. This
was built in a few years’ time, and if his reign were
short, or if he were unable to enlarge the pyramid for
other reasons, it sufficed for his tomb. If, however, his
reign seemed likely to be one of some length, after the
first plan was completed he enlarged his pyramid by
building another and a larger one around it and over
it. Then again, when this addition was finished, and
the king still reigned and was in possession of great
resources, yet another coating, so to speak, was put on
to the pyramid, and so on till colossal structures like
the First and Second Pyramid of Giza, which, we know,
belonged to kings who were unusually long-lived, were
completed. And finally the aged monarch died, and was
buried in the huge tomb which his long life and his great
power had enabled him to erect. This view appeared
eminently reasonable at the time, and it seemed almost
as though we ought to be able to tell whether a king
had reigned long or not by the size of his pyramid, and

even to obtain a rough idea of the length of his reign ~

by counting the successive coats or accretions which it

METHOD OF CONSTRUCTING PYRAMIDS Lat

had received, much as we tell the age of a tree by the
rings in its bole. A pyramid seemed to have been con-
structed something after the manner of an onion or a
Chinese puzzle-box.

Prof. Petrie, however, who examined the Giza pyra-
mids in 1881, and carefully measured them all up and
finally settled their :
trigonometrical rela-
tion, came to the
conclusion that Lep-
sius’s theory was en-
tirely erroneous, and
that every pyramid
was built and now
stands as it was orig-
inally planned. Dr.
Borchardt, however,
who is an architect by profession, has examined the
pyramids again, and has come to the conclusion that
Prof. Petrie’s statement is not correct, and that there
is an element of truth in Lepsius’s hypothesis. He has
shown that several of the pyramids, notably the First
and Second at Giza, show unmistakable signs of a
modified, altered, and enlarged plan; in fact, long-lived
kings like Khufu seem to have added considerably to
their pyramids and even to have entirely remodelled
them on a larger scale. This has certainly been the
case with the Great Pyramid. We can, then, accept
Lepsius’s theory as modified by Dr. Borchardt.

Another interesting point has arisen in connection

THE PYRAMIDS OF GIZA DURING THE INUNDATION.

112 MEMPHIS AND THE PYRAMIDS

with the Great Pyramid. Considerable difference of
opinion has always existed between Egyptologists and
the professors of European archeology with regard to
the antiquity of the knowledge of iron in Egypt. The
majority of the Egyptologists have always maintained,
on the authority of the inscriptions, that iron was
known to the ancient Egyptians from the earliest
period. They argued that the word for a certain metal
in old Egyptian was the same as the Coptic word for
‘‘jron.’’ They stated that in the most ancient religious
texts the Egyptians spoke of the firmament of heaven
as made of this metal, and they came to the conclusion
that it was because this metal was blue in colour, the
hue of iron or steel; and they further pointed out that
some of the weapons in the tomb-paintings were painted
blue and others red, some being of iron, that is to say,
others of copper or bronze. Finally they brought for-
ward as incontrovertible evidence an actual fragment
of worked iron, which had been found between two
of the inner blocks, down one of the air-shafts, in the
Great Pyramid. Here was an actual piece of iron of
the time of the [Vth Dynasty, about 3500 B. c.

This conclusion was never accepted by the students
of the development of the use of metal in prehistoric
Europe, when they came to know of it. No doubt their
incredulity was partly due to want of appreciation of the
Egyptological evidence, partly to disinclination to ac-
cept a conclusion which did not at all agree with the

knowledge they had derived from their own study of
| prehistoric Europe. In Southern Europe it was quite

THE EARLY USE OF IRON 113

certain that iron did not come into use till about
1000 B.c.; in Central Europe, where the discoveries
at Hallstatt in the Salzkammergut exhibit the transi-
tion from the Age of Bronze to that of Iron, about
800 B.c. The exclusively Iron Age culture of La Téne
cannot be dated earlier than the eighth century, if as
early as that. How then was it possible that, if iron
had been known to the Egyptians as early as 3500 B. ¢.,
its knowledge should not have been communicated to
the Europeans until over two thousand years later?
No; iron could not have been really known to the
Egyptians much before 1000 B.c., and the Egyptologi-
cal evidence was all wrong. This line of argument
was taken by the distinguished Swedish archeologist,
Prof. Oscar Montelius, of Upsala, whose previous ex-
perience in dealing with the antiquities of Northern
HKurope, great as it was, was hardly sufficient to enable
him to pronounce with authority on a point affecting
far-away African Egypt. And when dealing with Greek
prehistoric antiquities Prof. Montelius’s views have
hardly met with that ready agreement which all ac-
knowledge to be his due when he is giving us the results
of his ripe knowledge of Northern antiquities. He has,
in fact, forgotten, as most ‘ prehistoric ”’ archeologists
do forget, that the antiquities of Scandinavia, Greece,
Egypt, the Semites, the bronze-workers of Benin, the
miners of Zimbabwe, and the Ohio mound-builders are
not to be treated all together as a whole, and that hard
and fast lines of development cannot be laid down for
them, based on the experience of Scandinavia.

114 MEMPHIS AND THE PYRAMIDS

We may perhaps trace this misleading habit of
thought to the influence of the professors of natural
science over the students of Stone Age and Bronze Age
antiquities. Because nature moves by steady progres-
sion and develops on even lines—nihil facit per sal-
tum—it seems to have been assumed that the works of
man’s hands have developed in the same way, in a reg-
ular and even scheme all over the world. On this sup-
position it would be impossible for the great discovery
of the use of iron to have been known in Egypt as early
as 3500 B.c., for this knowledge to have remained dor-
mant there for two thousand years, and then to have
been suddenly communicated about 1000 B. c. to Greece,
spreading with lightning-like rapidity over Europe and
displacing the use of bronze everywhere. Yet, as
a matter of fact, the work of man does develop in
exactly this haphazard way, by fits and starts and sud-
den leaps of progress after millennia of stagnation.
Throwsback to barbarism are just as frequent. The
analogy of natural evolution is completely inapplicable
and misleading.

Prof. Montelius, however, following the ‘‘ evolution-
ary ’’ line of thought, believed that because iron was
not known in Europe till about 1000 B.c. it could not
have been known in Egypt much earlier; and in an
important article which appeared in the Swedish eth-
nological journal Ymer in 1883, entitled Bronsaldern +
Egypten (‘‘ The Bronze Age in Egypt ’’), he essayed
to prove the contrary arguments of the Egyptologists
wrong. His main points were that the colour of the

A BURIED PROTEST 115

weapons in the frescoes was of no importance, as it was
purely conventional and arbitrary, and .that the evi-
dence of the piece of iron from the Great Pyramid was
insufficiently authenticated, and therefore valueless, in
the absence of other definite archzological evidence in
the shape of iron of supposed early date. To this article
the Swedish Egyptologist, Dr. Piehl, replied in the same
periodical, in an article entitled Bronsaldern 1 Egypten,
in which he traversed Prof. Montelius’s conclusions
from the Egyptological point of view, and adduced other
instances of the use of iron in Egypt, all, it is true, later
than the time of the [Vth Dynasty. But this protest
received little notice, owing to the fact that it remained
buried in a Swedish periodical, while Prof. Montelius’s
original article was translated into French, and so be-
came well-known.

For the time Prof. Montelius’s conclusions were gen-
erally accepted, and when the discoveries of the prehis-
toric antiquities were made by M. de Morgan, it seemed
more probable than ever that Egypt had gone through
a regular progressive development from the Age of
Stone through those of copper and bronze to that of
iron, which was reached about 1100 or 1000 B.c. The
evidence of the iron fragment from the Great Pyramid
was put on one side, in spite of the circumstantial
account of its discovery which had been given by its
finders. Even Prof. Petrie, who in 1881 had accepted
the pyramid fragment as undoubtedly contemporary
with that building, and had gone so far as to adduce
additional evidence for its authenticity, gave way, and

116 MEMPHIS AND THE PYRAMIDS

accepted Montelius’s view, which held its own until
in 1902 it was directly controverted by a discovery of
Prof. Petrie at Abydos. This discovery consisted of
an undoubted fragment of iron found in conjunction
with bronze tools of VIth Dynasty date; and it settled
the matter... The VIth Dynasty date of this piece of
iron, which was more probably worked than not (since
it was buried with tools), was held to be undoubted
by its discoverer and by everybody else, and, if this
were undoubted, the [Vth Dynasty date of the Great
Pyramid fragment was also fully established. The dis-
coverers of the earlier fragment had no doubt whatever
as to its being contemporary with the pyramid, and
were supported in this by Prof. Petrie in 1881. There-
fore it is now known to be the fact that iron was used
by the Egyptians as early as 3500 B. o.?

It would thus appear that though the Egyptians can-
not be said to have used iron generally and so to have
entered the ‘‘ Iron Age ”’ before about 1300 B. co. (reign
of Ramses II), yet iron was well known to them and
had been used more than occasionally by them for tools
and building purposes as early as the time of the IVth
Dynasty, about 3500 B.c. Certainly dated examples of
its use occur under the [Vth, VIth, and XIIIth Dynas-
ties. Why this knowledge was not communicated to.

1See H. R. Hall’s note on «The Early Use of Iron in Egypt,” in Man
(the organ of the Anthropological Society of London), iii (1903), No. 86.

2 Prof. Montelius objected to these conclusions in a review of the British
Museum “ Guide to the Antiquities of the Bronze Age,” which was published in
Man, 1905 (Jan.), No7. For an answer to these objections, see Hall, ibid.,
No. 40.

THE ERECTION OF THE PYRAMIDS 117

Europe before about 1000 B.c. we cannot say, nor are
Egyptologists called upon to find the reason. So the
Great Pyramid has played an interesting part in the
settlement of a very important question.

It was supposed by Prof. Petrie that the piece of
iron from the Great Pyramid had been part of some
arrangement employed for raising the stones into posi-
tion. Herodotus speaks of the machines, which were
used to raise the stones, as made of little pieces of wood.
The generally accepted explanation of his meaning used
to be that a small crane or similar wooden machine was
used for hoisting the stone by means of pulley and
rope; but M. Legrain, the director of the works of
restoration in the Great Temple of Karnak, has ex-
plained it differently. Among the ‘‘ foundation depos-
its’? of the XVIIIth Dynasty at Dér el-Bahari and
elsewhere, beside the little plaques with the king’s name
and the model hoes and vases, was usually found an
enigmatic wooden object like a small cradle, with two
sides made of semicircular pieces of wood, joined along
the curved portion by round wooden bars. M. Legrain
has now explained this as a model of the machine used
to raise heavy stones from tier to tier of a pyramid or
other building, and illustrations of the method of its use
may be found in Choisy’s Art de Batir chez les anciens
Egyptiens. There is little doubt that this primitive
machine is that to which Herodotus refers as having
been used in the erection of the pyramids.

The later historian, Diodorus, also tells us that great
mounds or ramps of earth were used as well, and that

118 MEMPHIS AND THE PYRAMIDS

the stones were dragged up these to the requisite height.
There is no doubt that this statement also is correct.
We know that the Egyptians did build in this very way,
and the system has been revived by M. Legrain for his
work at Karnak, where still exist the remains of the
actual mounds and ramps by which the great western
pylon was erected in Ptolemaic times. Work carried
on in this way is slow and expensive, but it is eminently
suited to the country and understood by the people. If
they wish to put a great stone architrave weighing many
tons across the top of two columns, they do not hoist
it up into position; they rear a great ramp or embank-
ment of earth against the two pillars, half-burying them
in the process, then drag the architrave up the ramp
by means of ropes and men, and put it into position.
Then the ramp is cleared away. This is the ancient
system which is now followed at Karnak, and it is the
system by which, with the further aid of the wooden ma-
chines, the Great Pyramid and its compeers were erected
in the days of the [Vth Dynasty. Plus cela change, plus
c’est la méme chose.

The brick pyramids of the XIIth Dynasty were
erected in the same way, for the Egyptians had no
knowledge of the modern combination of wooden scaf-
folding and ladders. There was originally a small stone
pyramid of the same dynasty at Dashir, half-way be-
tween the two brick ones, but this has now almost dis-
appeared. It belonged to the king Amenemhat I, while
the others belonged, the northern to Usertsen (Sen-
usret) III, the southern to Amenemhat III. Both these

IDENTIFICATION OF PYRAMIDS 119

latter monarchs had other tombs elsewhere,—Usertsen
a great rock-cut gallery and chamber in the cliff at
Abydos, Amenemhat a pyramid not very far to the
south, at Hawara, close to the Fayytim. It is uncertain
whether the Hawara pyramid or that of Dashtir was the
real burial-place of the king, as at neither place is his
name found alone. At Hawara it is found in conjunc-
tion with that of his daughter, the queen-regnant Se-
bekneferura (Skemiophris), at Dashir with that of a
king Auabra Hor, who was buried in a small tomb near
that of the king, and adjoining the tombs of the king’s
children. Who King Hor was we do not quite know.
His name is not given in the lists, and was unknown
until M. de Morgan’s discoveries at Dashtir. It is most
probable that he was a prince who was given royal
honours during the lifetime of Amenemhat III, whom
he predeceased.’ In the beautiful wooden statue of him
found in his tomb, which is now in the Cairo Museum,
he is represented as quite a youth. Amenemhat HI
was certainly succeeded by Amenemhat IV, and it is
impossible to intercalate Hor between them.

The identification of the owners of the three western
pyramids of Dashiir is due to M. de Morgan and his
assistants, Messrs. Legrain and Jéquier, who excavated
them from 1894 till 1896. The northern pyramid, that
of Usertsen (Senusret) ITT, is not so well preserved as
the southern. It is more worn away, and does not pre-
sent so imposing an appearance. In both pyramids
the outer casing of white stone has entirely disap-

1 See below, p. 121. Possibly he was a son of Amenemhat HI.

120 MEMPHIS AND THE PYRAMIDS

peared, leaving only the bare black bricks. Each stood
in the midst of a great necropolis of dignitaries of the
period, as was usually the case. Many of the mastabas
were excavated by M. de Morgan. Some are of older
periods than the XIIth Dynasty, one belonging to a
priest of King Snefru, Aha-f-ka (‘‘ Ghost-fighter ’’),
who bore the additional titles of ‘‘ director of prophets
and general of infantry.’’ There were pluralists even
in those days. And the distinction between the privy
councillor (Geheimrat) and real privy councillor (Wirk-
licher-Geheimrat) was quite familiar; for we find it
actually made, many an old Egyptian officially priding
himself in his tomb on having been a real privy coun-
cillor! The Egyptian bureaucracy was already ancient
and had its survivals and its anomalies even as early
as the time of the pyramid-builders.

In front of the pyramid of Usertsen (Senusret) II
at one time stood the usual funerary temple, but it has
been totally destroyed. By the side of the pyramid
were buried some of the princesses of the royal family,
in a series of tombs opening out of a subterranean
gallery, and in this gallery were found the wonderful
jewels of the princesses Sit-hathor and Merit, which are
among the greatest treasures of the Cairo Museum.
Those who have not seen them can obtain a perfect
idea of their appearance from the beautiful water-
colour paintings of them by M. Legrain, which are
published in M. de Morgan’s work on the ‘ Fouilles 4
Dahchour ”’? (Vienna, 1895). Altogether one hundred
and seven objects were recovered, consisting of all

PYRAMIDAL TREASURES 121

kinds of jewelry in gold and coloured stones. Among
the most beautiful are the great ‘‘ pectorals,’’ or breast-
ornaments, in the shape of pylons, with the names of,
Usertsen II, Usertsen III, and Amenemhat III; the
names are surrounded by hawks standing on the sign
for gold, gryphons, figures of the king striking down
enemies, ete., all ‘in cloisonné work, with beautiful
stones such as lapis lazuli, green felspar, and carnelian
taking the place of coloured enamels. The massive
chains of golden beads and cowries are also very re-
markable. These treasures had been buried in boxes
in the floor of the subterranean gallery, and had luck-
ily escaped the notice of plunderers,.and so by a
fortunate chance have survived to tell us what
the Egyptian jewellers could do in the days of the
XIIth Dynasty. Here also were found two great Nile
barges, full-sized boats, with their oars and other gear
complete. They also may be seen in the Museum of
Cairo. It can only be supposed that they had served
as the biers of the royal mummies, and had been
brought up in state on sledges. The actual royal cham-
ber was not found, although a subterranean gallery was
driven beneath the centre of the pyramid.

The southern brick pyramid was constructed in the
same way as the northern one. At the side of it were
also found the tombs of members of the royal house,
including that of the king Hor, already mentioned, with
its interesting contents. The remains of the mummy
of this ephemeral monarch, known only from his tomb,
were also found. The entrails of the king were placed

122 MEMPHIS AND THE PYRAMIDS

in the usual ‘‘ canopic jars,’’ which were sealed with -
the seal of Amenemhat III; it is thus that we know
that Hor died before him. In many of the inscriptions
of this king, on his coffin and stele, a peculiarly affected
manner of writing the hieroglyphs is found,—the birds
are without their legs, the snake has no tail, the bee
no head. Birds are found without their legs in other
inscriptions of this period; it was a temporary fashion
and soon discarded.

In the tomb of a princess named Nubhetep, near at
hand, were found more jewels of the same style as those
of Sit-hathor and Merit. The pyramid itself contained
the usual passéges and chambers, which were reached
with much difficulty and considerable tunnelling by
M. de Morgan. In fact, the search for the royal death-
chambers lasted from December 5, 1894, till March 17,
1895, when the excavators’ gallery finally struck one
of the ancient passages, which were found to be unusu-
ally extensive, contrasting in this respect with the
northern pyramid. The royal tomb-chamber had, of
course, been emptied of what it contained. It must be
remembered that, in any case, it is probable that the
king was not actually buried here, but in the pyramid
of Hawara.

The pyramid of Amenemhat II, which lies between
the two brick pyramids, was built entirely of stone.
Nothing of it remains above ground, but the investiga-
tion of the subterranean portions showed that it was
remarkable for the massiveness of its stones and the
care with which the masonry was executed. The same

A REMARKABLE FIND 123

characteristics are found in the dependent tombs of the
princesses Ha and Khnumet, in which more jewelry was
found. This splendid stonework is characteristic of the
Middle Kingdom; we find it also in the temple of Men-.
tuhetep III at Thebes.

Some distance south of Dashir is Médiim, where the
pyramid of Sneferu reigns in solitude, and beyond this
again is Lisht, where in the years 1894-6 MM. Gautier
and Jéquier excavated the pyramid of Usertsen (Sen-
usret) I. The most remarkable find was a cache of the
seated statues of the king in white limestone, in abso-
lutely perfect condition. They were found lying on
their sides, just as they had been hidden. Six figures
of the king in the form of Osiris, with the face painted
red, were also found. Such figures seem to have been
regularly set up in front of a royal sepulchre; several
were found in front of the funerary temple of Mentu-
hetep III, Thebes, which we shall describe later. <A
fine altar of gray granite, with representations in relief
of the nomes bringing offerings, was also recovered.
The pyramid of Lisht itself is not built of bricks, like
those of Dashir, but of stone. It was not, however,
erected in so solid a fashion as those of earlier days
at Giza or Abusir, and nothing is left of it now but
a heap of débris. The XIIth Dynasty architects built
walls of magnificent masonry, as we have seen, and
there is no doubt that the stone casing of their pyramids
was originally very fine, but the interior is of brick or
rubble; the wonderful system of building employed by
kings of the IVth Dynasty at Giza was not practised.

124 MEMPHIS AND THE PYRAMIDS

South of Lisht is Illahun, and at the entrance to the
province of the Fayyiim, and west of this, nearer the
Fayytm, is Hawara, where Prof. Petrie excavated the
pyramids of Usertsen (Senusret) IL and Amenem-
hat Ill. His discoveries have already been described
by Prof. Maspero in his history, so that it will suffice
here merely to compare them with the results of M. de
Morgan’s later work at Dashir and that of MM. Gau-
tier and Jéquier at Lisht, to note recent conclusions in
connection with them, and to describe the newest dis-
coveries in the same region.

Both pyramids are of brick, lined with stone, like
those of Dashtr, with some differences of internal con-
struction, since stone walls exist in the interior. The
central chambers and passages leading to them were
discovered; and in both cases the passages are pecul-
iarly complex, with dumb chambers, great stone port-
cullises, etc., in order to mislead and block the way
to possible plunderers. The extraordinary sepulchral
chamber of the Hawara pyramid, which, though it is
over twenty-two feet long by ten feet wide over all,
is hewn out of one solid block of hard yellow quartzite,
gives some idea of the remarkable facility of dealing
with huge stones and the love of utilizing them which
is especially characteristic of the XIIth Dynasty. The
pyramid of Hawara was provided with a funerary tem-
ple the like of which had never been known in Egypt
before and was never known afterwards. It was a huge
building far larger than the pyramid itself, and built
of fine limestone and crystalline white quartzite, in a

THE EGYPTIAN LABYRINTH 125

style eminently characteristic of the XIIth Dynasty.
In actual superficies this temple covered an extent of
ground within which the temples of Karnak, Luxor,
and the Ramesseum, at Thebes, could have stood, but
has now almost entirely disappeared, having been used
as a quarry for two thousand years. In Roman times
this destroying process had already begun, but even
then the building was still magnificent, and had been
noted with wonder by all the Greek visitors to Egypt
from the time of Herodotus downwards. Even before
his day it had received the name of the ‘‘ Labyrinth,”’
on account of its supposed resemblance to the original
labyrinth in Crete.

That the Hawara temple was the Egyptian labyrinth
was pointed out by Lepsius in the ’forties of the last
eentury. Within the last two or three years attention
has again been drawn to it by Mr. Arthur Evans’s dis-
eovery of the Cretan labyrinth itself in the shape of
the Minoan or early Mycenzan palace of Knossos, near
Candia in Crete. It is impossible to enter here into all
the arguments by which it has been proved that the
Knossian palace is the veritable labyrinth of the Mino-
taur legend, nor would it be strictly germane to our
subject were we to do so; but it may suffice to say
here that the word AaSvpwOos has been proved to be of
Greek—or rather of pre-Hellenic—origin, and would
mean in Karian ‘‘ Place of the Double-Axe,”’ like La-
braunda in Karia, where Zeus was depicted with a
double axe (labrys) in his hand. The non-Aryan,
‘ Asianic,’’ group of languages, to which certainly

126 MEMPHIS AND THE PYRAMIDS

Lycian and probably Karian belong, has been shown
by the German philologer Kretschmer to have spread
over Greece into Italy in the period before the Aryan
Greeks entered Hellas, and to have left undoubted
traces of its presence in Greek place-names and in the
Greek language itself. Before the true Hellenes
reached Crete, an Asianic dialect must have been
spoken there, and to this language the word ‘‘ laby-
rinth ’’ must originally have belonged. The classical
labyrinth was ‘‘ in the Knossian territory.’’ The palace
of Knossos was emphatically the chief seat of the wor-
ship of a god whose emblem was the double-axe; it
was the Knossian ‘‘ Place of the Double-Axe,’’ the
Cretan ‘‘ Labyrinth.”’’

It used to be supposed that the Cretan labyrinth
had taken its name from the Egyptian one, and the
word itself was supposed to be of Egyptian origin.
An Egyptian etymology was found for it as ‘‘ Ro-pi-
ro-henet,’’ ** Temple-mouth-canal,’’ which might be in-
terpreted, with some violence to Egyptian construction,
as ‘* The temple at the mouth of the canal,”’ ¢. e. the
Bahr Yusuf, which enters the Fayytim at Hawara. But
unluckily this word would have been pronounced by the
natives of the vicinity as ‘‘ Elphilahune,’’ which is not
very much like rAaBipwOos. ‘‘ Ro-pi-ro-henet ’’ is, in fact,
a mere figment of the philological imagination, and
cannot be proved ever to have existed. The element
Ro-henet, ‘‘ canal-mouth ”’ (according to the local pro-
nunciation of the Fayyim and Middle Egypt, called
La-hune), is genuine; it is the origin of the modern

A CRETAN PARALLEL 127

Tllahun (el-Lahin), which is situated at the ‘‘ canal-
mouth.’’ However, now that we know that the word
labyrinth can be explained satisfactorily with the help
of Karian, as evidently of Greek (pre-Aryan) origin,
and as evidently the original name of the Knossian
labyrinth, it is obvious that there is no need to seek
a far-fetched explanation of the word in Egypt, and
to suppose that the Greeks called the Cretan labyrinth
after the Egyptian one.

The contrary is evidently the case. Greek visitors
to Egypt found a resemblance between the great Egyp-
tian building, with its numerous halls and corridors,
vast in extent, and the Knossian palace. Even if very
little of the latter was visible in the classical period,
as seems possible, yet the site seems always to have been
kept holy and free from later building till Roman times,
and we know that the tradition of the mazy halls and
corridors of the labyrinth was always clear, and was
evidently based on a vivid reminiscence. Actually, one
of the most prominent characteristics of the Knossian
palace is its mazy and labyrinthine system of passages
and chambers. The parallel between the two buildings,
which originally caused the Greek visitors to give the
pyramid-temple of Hawara the name of ‘ labyrinth,”’
has been traced still further. The white limestone walls
and the shining portals of ‘* Parian marble,’’ described
by Strabo as characteristic of the Egyptian labyrinth,
have been compared with the shining white selenite or
gypsum used at Knossos, and certain general resem-
blances between the Greek architecture of the Minoan

128 MEMPHIS AND THE PYRAMIDS

age and the almost contemporary Egyptian architecture
of the XIIth Dynasty have been pointed out. Such
resemblances may go to swell the amount of evidence
already known, which tells us that there was a close
connection between Egyptian and Minoan art and civ-
ilization, established at least as early as 2500 B. c.

For it must be remembered that within the last few
years we have learned from the excavations in Crete a
new chapter of ancient history, which, it might almost
seem, shows us Greece and Egypt in regular communica-
tion from nearly the beginnings of Egyptian history.
As the excavations which have told us this were carried
on in Crete, not in Egypt, to describe them does not lie
within the scope of this book, though a short sketch of
their results, so far as they affect Egyptian history in
later days, is given in Chapter VII. Here it may suffice
to say that, as far as the early period is concerned,
Egypt and Crete were certainly in communication in
the time of the XIIth Dynasty, and quite possibly in
that of the VIth or still earlier. We have IIId Dynasty
Egyptian vases from Knossos, which were certainly not
imported in later days, for no ancient nation had anti-
quarian tastes till the time of the Saites in Egypt and
of the Romans still later. In fact, this communication
seems to go so far back in time that we are gradually
being led to perceive the possibility that the Minoan
culture of Greece was in its origin an offshoot from that

1See H. R. Hall, Journal of Hellenic Studies, 1905 (Pt. ii). The Temple of
the Sphinx at Giza may also be compared with those of Hawara and Knossos.
It seems most probable that the Temple of the Sphinx is a XIIth Dynasty
building.

MEDITERRANEANS AND THE NILOTES 129

of primeval Egypt, probably in early Neolithic times.
That is to say, the Neolithic Greeks and Neolithic Egyp-
tians were both members of the same ‘‘ Mediterranean ”’
stock, which quite possibly may have had its origin in
Africa, and a portion of which may have crossed the
sea to Hurope in very early times, taking with it the
seeds of culture which in Egypt developed in the Egyp-
tian way, in Greece in the Greek way. Actual communi-
cation and connection may not have been maintained
at first, and probably they were not. Prof. Petrie thinks
otherwise, and would see in the boats painted on the
predynastic Egyptian vases (see Chapter I) the identical
galleys by which, in late Neolithic times, commerce be-
tween Crete and Egypt was carried on across the Medi-
terranean. It is certain, however, that these boats are
ordinary little river craft, the usual Nile felékas and
gyassas of the time; they are depicted together with
emblems of the desert and cultivated land,—ostriches,
antelopes, hills, and palm-trees,—and the thoroughly
inland and Upper Egyptian character of the whole
design springs to the eye. There can be no doubt what-
ever that the predynastic boats were not seagoing
galleys.

It was probably not till the time of the pyramid-
builders that connection between the Greek Mediter-
raneans and the Nilotes was re-established. Thence-
forward it increased, and in the time of the XIIth
Dynasty, when the labyrinth of Amenemhat III was
built, there seems to have been some kind of more or
less regular communication between the two countries.

130 MEMPHIS AND THE PYRAMIDS

It is certain that artistic ideas were exchanged between
them at this period. How communication was carried
on we do not know, but it was probably rather by way
of Cyprus and the Syrian coast than directly across the
open sea. We shall revert to this point when we come
to describe the connection between Crete and Egypt in
the time of the XVIIIth Dynasty, when Cretan ambas-
sadors visited the Egyptian court and were depicted in
tomb paintings at Thebes. Between the time of the
XIIth Dynasty and that of the XVIII th this connection
seems to have been very considerably strengthened; for
at Knossos have been found an Egyptian statuette of
an Egyptian named Abnub, who from his name must
have lived about the end of the XIIIth Dynasty, and
the top of an alabastron with the royal name of Khian,
one of the Hyksos kings.

Quite close to Hawara, at Tllahun, in the ruins of the
town which was built by Usertsen’s workmen when they
were building his pyramid, Prof. Petrie found fragments
of pottery of types which we now know well from exca-
vations in Crete and Cyprus, though they were then
unknown. They are fragments of the polychrome Cre-
tan ware called, after the name of the place where it
was first found in Crete, Kamares ware, and of a black
ware ornamented with small punctures, which are often
filled up with white. This latter ware has been found
elsewhere associated with XIIIth Dynasty antiquities.
The former is known to belong in Crete to the “‘ early
Minoan ”’ period, long anterior to the ‘‘ late Minoan ”’
or ‘‘ Palace ’’ period, which was contemporary with the

DISCOVERIES AT GUROB 131

Egyptian XVIIIth Dynasty. We have here another
interesting proof of a connection between XIIth Dy-
nasty Egypt and early Minoan Crete. The later con-
nection, under the X VIIIth and following dynasties, is
also illustrated in the same reign by Prof. Petrie’s finds .
of late Mycenzan objects and foreign graves at Medinet
Gurob.'*

These excavations at Hawara, Llahun, Kahun, and
Gurob were carried out in the years 1887-9. Since then
Prof. Petrie and his co-workers have revisited the same
district, and Gurob has been re-examined (in 1904) by
Messrs. Loat and Ayrton, who discovered there a shrine
devoted to the worship of fish. This work was carried
on at the same time as Prof. Petrie’s main excavation
for the Egypt Exploration Fund at Ahnas, or Ahnas-
yet el-Medina, the site of the ancient Henensu, the
Herakleopolis of the Greeks. Prof. Naville had exea-
vated there for the Egypt Exploration Fund in 1892,
but had not completely cleared the temple. This work
was now taken up by Prof. Petrie, who laid the whole
building bare. It is dedicated to Hershefi, the local
deity of Herakleopolis. This god, who was called Ar-
saphes by the Greeks, and identified with Herakles, was
in fact a form of Horus with the head of a ram; his
name means “‘ Terrible-Face.’’ The greater part of the
temple dates to the time of the XIXth Dynasty, and
nothing of the early period is left. We know, however,

1Qne man who was buried here bore the name An-Tursha, “ Pillar of the
Tursha.” The Tursha were a people of the Mediterranean, possibly Tylissians
of Crete.

132 MEMPHIS AND THE PYRAMIDS

that the Middle Kingdom was the flourishing period of
the city of Hershefi. For a comparatively brief period,
between the age of Memphite hegemony and that of
Theban dominion, Herakleopolis was the capital city
of Egypt. The kings of the [Xth and Xth Dynasties
were Herakleopolites, though we know little of them.
One, Kheti, is said to have been a great tyrant. An-
other, Nebkaura, is known only as a figure in the
‘‘ Legend of the Eloquent Peasant,’’ a classical story
much in vogue in later days. Another, Merikara, is a
more real personage, for we have contemporary records
of his days in the inscriptions of the tombs at Asyit,
from which we see that the princes of Thebes were
already wearing down the Northerners, in spite of the
resistance of the adherents of Herakleopolis, among
whom the most valiant were the chiefs of Asyait. The
civil war eventuated in favour. of Thebes, and the
Theban XIth Dynasty assumed the double crown. The
sceptre passed from Memphis and the North, and Thebes
enters upon the scene of Egyptian history.

With this event the Nile-land also entered upon a
new era of development. The metropolis of the king-
dom was once more shifted to the South, and, although
the kings of the XIIth Dynasty actually resided in the
North, their Theban origin was never forgotten, and
Thebes was regarded as the chief city of the country.
The XIth Dynasty kings actually reigned at Thebes, and
there the later kings of the XIIIth Dynasty retired after
the conquest of the Hyksos. The fact that with Thebes
were associated all the heroic traditions of the struggle

RELATIONS WITH OUTER WORLD 133

against the Hyksos ensured the final stability of the
capital there when the hated Semites were finally driven
out, and the national kingdom was re-established in its
full extent from north to south. But for occasional
intervals, as when Akhunaten held his court at Tell
el-Amarna and Ramses II at Tanis, Thebes remained
the national capital for six hundred years, till the time
of the XXIId Dynasty.

Another great change which differentiates the Middle
Kingdom (XIth-XIIIth Dynasties) from the Old King-
dom was caused by Egypt’s coming into contact with
other outside nations at this period. During the whole
history of the Old Kingdom, Egyptian relations with the
outer world had been nil. We have some inkling of
occasional connection with the Mediterranean peoples,
the Ha-nebu or Northerners; we have accounts of wars
with the people of Sinai and other Bedawin and negroes;
and expeditions were also sent to the land of Punt
(Somaliland) by way of the Upper Nile. But we have
not the slightest hint of any connection with, or even
knowledge of, the great nations of the Euphrates valley
or the peoples of Palestine. The Babylonian king
Naram-Sin invaded the Sinaitic peninsula (the land
of Magan) as early as 3750 B.c., about the time of the
Illd Egyptian Dynasty. The great King Tjeser, of that
dynasty, also invaded Sinai, and so did Snefru, the last
king of the dynasty. But we have no hint of any col-
lision between Babylonians and Egyptians at that time,
nor do either of them betray the slightest knowledge
of one another’s existence. It can hardly be that the

134 MEMPHIS AND THE PYRAMIDS

two civilized peoples of the world in those days were
really absolutely ignorant of each other, but we have
no trace of any connection between them, other than
the possible one before the founding of the Egyptian
monarchy.

This early connection, however, is very problemati-
cal. We have seen that there seems to be in early Egyp-
tian civilization an element ultimately of Babylonian
origin, and that there are two theories as to how it
reached Egypt. One supposes that it was brought by
a Semitic people of Arab affinities (represented by the
modern Gallas), who crossed the Straits of Bab el-Man-
deb and reached HKgypt either by way of the Wadi
Hammamat or by the Upper Nile. The other would
bring it across the Isthmus of Suez to the Delta, where,
at Heliopolis, there certainly seems to have been a set-
tlement of a Semitic type of very ancient culture. In
both cases we should have Semites bringing Babylonian
culture to Egypt. This, as we may remind the reader,
was not itself of Semitic origin, but was a development
due to a non-Semitic people, the Sumerians as they are
called, who, so far as we know, were the aboriginal
inhabitants of Babylonia. The Sumerian language was
of agglutinative type, radically distinct both from the
pure Semitic idioms and from Egyptian. The Baby-
lonian elements of culture which the early Semitic in-
vaders brought with them to Egypt were, then, ulti-
mately of Sumerian origin. Sumerian civilization had
profoundly influenced the Semitic tribes for centuries
before the Semitic conquest of Babylonia, and when the

ORIGIN OF SEMITIC CULTURE 135

Sumerians became more and more a conquered race,
finally amalgamating with their conquerors and losing
their racial and linguistic individuality, they were con-
quered by an alien race but not by an alien culture.
For the culture of the Semites was Sumerian, the
Semitic races owing their civilization to the Su-
merians. That is as much as to say that a great deal
of what we call Semitic culture is fundamentally non-
Semitic.

In the earliest days, then, Egypt received elements
of Sumerian culture through a Semitic medium, which
introduced Semitic elements into the language of the
people, and a Semitic racial strain. It is possible that
both theories as to the routes of these primeval con-
querors are true, and that two waves of Semites entered
the Nile valley towards the close of the Neolithic period,
one by way of the Upper Nile or Wadi Hammamat, the
other by way of Heliopolis.

After the reconsolidation of the Egyptian people,
with perhaps an autocratic class of Semitic origin and
a populace of indigenous Nilotic race, we have no trace
of further connection with the far-away centre of Sem-
itic culture in Babylonia till the time of the Theban
hegemony. Under the XIIth Dynasty we see Egyptians
in friendly relations with the Bedawin of Idumza and
Southern Palestine. Thus Sanehat, the younger son of
Amenemhat I, when the death of his royal father was
* announced, fled from the new king Usertsen (Senusret)
into Palestine, and there married the daughter of the
chief Ammuanshi and became a Syrian chief himself,

136 MEMPHIS AND THE PYRAMIDS

only finally returning to Egypt as an old man on the
assurance of the royal pardon and favour. We have
in the reign of Usertsen (Senusret) II the famous visit
of the Arab chief Abisha (Abéshu’) with his following
to the court of Khnumhetep, the prince of the Oryx
nome in Middle Egypt, as we see it depicted on the walls
of Khnumhetep’s tomb at Beni Hasan. We see Usert-
sen (Senusret) III invading Palestine to chastise the
land of Sekmem and the vile Syrians.'

The arm of Egypt was growing longer, and its weight
was being felt in regions where it had previously
been entirely unknown. Eventually the collision came.
Egypt collided with an Asiatic power, and got the worst
of the encounter. So much the worse that the Theban
monarchy of the Middle Kingdom was overthrown, and
Northern Egypt was actually conquered by the Asiatic
foreigners and ruled by a foreign house for several
centuries. Who these conquering Hyksos, or Shepherd
Kings, were no recent discovery has told us. An old
idea was that they were Mongols. It was supposed that
the remarkable faces of the sphinxes of Tanis, now in
the Cairo Museum, which bore the names of Hyksos
kings, were of Mongolian type, as also those of two
colossal royal heads discovered by M. Naville at Bu-

1 We know of this campaign from the interesting historical stele of the gen-
eral Sebek-khu (who took part in it), which was found during Mr. Garstang’s
excavations at Abydos, not previously referred to above. They were carried out
in 1900, and resulted in the complete clearance of a part of the great cemetery
which had been created during the XIIth Dynasty. The group of objects from
the tombs of this cemetery, and those of XVIIIth Dynasty tombs also found,

is especially valuable as showing the styles of objects in use at these two
periods (see Garstang, el-Ardbah, 1901).

RACIAL THEORIES 137

bastis. But M. Golénischeff has now shown that these
heads are really those of XI1th Dynasty kings, and not
of Hyksos at all. Messrs. Newberry and Garstang have
lately endeavoured to show that this type was foreign,
and probably connected with that of the Kheta, or Hit-
tites, of Northern Syria, who came into prominence as
enemies of Egypt at a later period. They think that
the type was introduced into the Egyptian royal family
by Nefret, the queen of Usertsen (Senusret) II, whom
they suppose to have been a Hittite princess. At the
same time they think it probable that the type was also
that of the Hyksos, whom they consider to have been
practically Hittites. They therefore revive the theory
of de Cara, which connects the Hyksos with the Hittites
and these with the Pelasgi and Tyrseni.

This is a very interesting theory, which, when carried
out to its logical conclusion, would connect the Hyksos
and Hittites racially with the pre-Hellenic ‘‘ Minoans ”’
or Mycenezans of Greece, as well as with the Etruscans
of Italy. But there is little of certainty in it. It is
by no means impossible that we may eventually come
to know that the Hittites (Kheta, the Khatté of the
Assyrians) and other tribes of Asia Minor were racially
akin to the ‘* Minoans ”’ of Greece, but the connection
between the Hyksos and the Hittites is to seek. The
countenances of the Kheta on the Egyptian monuments
of Ramses II’s time have an angular cast, and so have
those of the Tanis sphinxes, of Queen Nefret, of the
Bubastis statues, and the statues of Usertsen (Senu-
sret) III and Amenemhat III. We might then suppose,

138 MEMPHIS AND THE PYRAMIDS

with Messrs. Newberry and Garstang, that Nefret was
a Kheta princess, who gave her peculiar racial traits
to her son Usertsen (Senusret) III and his son Amenem-
hat, were it not far more probable that the resemblance
between this peculiar XIIth Dynasty type and the
Kheta face is purely fortuitous. |

There is really no reason to suppose that the type of
face presented by Nefret, Usertsen, and Amenemhat is
not purely Egyptian. It may be seen in many a modern
fellah, and the truth probably is that the sculptors have
in the case of these rulers very faithfully and carefully
depicted their portraits, and that their faces happen
to have been of a rather hard and forbidding type.
But, if we grant the contention of Messrs. Newberry
and Garstang for the moment, where is the connection
between these XIIth Dynasty kings and the Hyksos?
All the Tanite monuments with this peculiar facial type
which would be considered Hyksos are certainly of the
XIith Dynasty. The only statue of a Hyksos king,
which was undoubtedly originally made for him and
is not one of the XIIth Dynasty usurped, is the small
one of Khian at Cairo, discovered by M. Naville at
Bubastis, and this has no head. So that we have not
the slightest idea of what a Hyksos looked like. More-
over, the evidence of the Hyksos names which are
known to us points in quite a different direction. The
Kheta, or Hittites, were certainly not Semites, yet the
Hyksos names are definitely Semitic. In fact it is most
probable that the Hyksos, or Shepherd Kings, were, as
the classical authorities say they were, and as their name

ARAB DOMINANCE 139

(hiku-semut or hiku-shasu, ‘‘ princes of the deserts ’’ or
‘‘ princes of the Bedawin’’) also testifies, purely and
simply Arabs.

Now it is not a little curious that almost at the
same time that a nomad Arab race conquered Lower
Egypt and settled in it as rulers (just as Amr and the
followers of Islam did over two thousand years later),
another Arab race may have imposed its rule upon
Babylonia. Yet this may have been the case; for the
First Dynasty of Babylon, to which the famous Ham-
murabi belonged, was very probably of Arab origin,
to judge by the forms of some of the royal names. It
is by no means impossible that there was some con-
nection between these two conquests, and that both
Babylonia and Egypt fell, in the period before the year
2000 B. c., before some great migratory movement from
Arabia, which overran Babylonia, Palestine, and even
the Egyptian Delta.

In this manner Egypt and Babylonia may have been
brought together in common subjection to the Arab.
We do not know whether any regular communication
between Egypt, under Semitic rule, and Babylonia was
now established; but we do know that during the
Hyksos period there were considerable relations be-
tween Egypt and over-sea Crete, and relations with
Mesopotamia may possibly have been established. At
any rate, when the war of liberation, which was
directed by the princes of Thebes, was finally brought
to a successful conclusion and the Arabs were expelled,
we find the Egyptians a much changed nation. They

140 MEMPHIS AND THE PYRAMIDS

had adopted for war the use of horse and chariot, which
they learnt from their Semitic conquerors, whose victory
was in all probability largely gained by their use, and,
generally speaking, they had become much more like
the Western Asiatic nations. Egypt was no longer iso-
lated, for she had been forcibly brought -into contact
with the foreign world, and had learned much. She was
no longer self-contained within her own borders. If
the Semites could conquer her, so could she conquer
the Semites. Armed with horse and chariot, the Egyp-
tians went forth to battle, and their revenge was com-
plete. All Palestine and Syria were Egyptian domains
for five hundred years after the conquest by Thothmes I
and III, and Ashur and Babel sent tribute to the
Pharaoh of Egypt.

The reaction came, and Egypt was thrown prostrate
beneath the feet of Assyria; but her claim to dominion
over the Western Asiatics was never abandoned, and
was revived in all its pomp by Ptolemy Euergetes, who
brought back in triumph to Egypt the images of the
gods which had been removed by Assyrians and Baby-
lonians centuries before. This claim was never allowed
by the Asiatics, it is true, and their kings wrote to the
proudest Pharaoh as to an absolute equal. Even the
King of Cyprus calls the King of Egypt his brother.
But Palestine was admitted to be an Egyptian posses-
sion, and the Phcenicians were always energetic sup-
porters of the Egyptian régime against the lawless
Bedawin tribes, who were constantly intriguing with
. the Kheta or Hittite power to the north against Egypt.

DISCOVERIES IN MESOPOTAMIA 141

The existence of this extra-Egyptian imperial posses-
sion meant that the eyes of the Egyptians were now
permanently turned in the direction of Western Asia,
with which they were henceforth in constant and inti-
mate communication. The first Theban period and the
Hyksos invasion, therefore, mark a turning-point in
Egyptian history, at which we may fitly leave it for a
time in order to turn our attention to those peoples of
Western Asia with whom the Egyptians had now come
into permanent contact. |

Just as new discoveries have been made in Egypt,
which have inodified our previous conception of her
history, so also have the excavators of the ancient sites
in the Mesopotamian valley made, during the last few
years, far-reaching discoveries, which have enabled us
to add to and revise much of our knowledge of the
history of Babylonia and Assyria. In Palestine and
the Sinaitic peninsula also the spade has been used with
effect, but a detailed account of work in Sinai and
Palestine falls within the limits of a description of
Biblical discoveries rather than of this book. The fol-
lowing chapters will therefore deal chiefly with modern
discoveries which have told us new facts with regard
to the history of the ancient Sumerians themselves, and
of the Babylonians, Elamites, Kassites, and Assyrians,
the inheritors of the ancient Sumerian civilization,
which was older than that of Egypt, and which, as we
have seen, probably contributed somewhat to its forma-
tion. These were the two primal civilizations of the
ancient world. For two thousand years each marched

142 MEMPHIS AND THE PYRAMIDS

upon a solitary road, without meeting the other. Even-
tually the two roads converged. We have hitherto dealt
with the road of the Egyptians; we now describe that
of the Mesopotamians, up to the point of convergence.

CHAPTER IV

RECENT EXCAVATIONS IN WESTERN ASIA AND THE
DAWN OF CHALDA-AN HISTORY

N the preceding pages it has been shown how recent

excavations in Egypt have revealed an entirely new
chapter in the history of that country, and how, in
consequence, our theories with regard to the origin of
Egyptian civilization have been entirely remodelled.
Excavations have been and are being carried out in
Mesopotamia and the adjacent countries with no less
enthusiasm and energy than in HKgypt itself, -and, al-
though it cannot be said that they have resulted in
any sweeping modification of our conceptions with
regard to the origin and kinship of the early races of
Western Asia, yet they have lately added considerably
to our knowledge of the ancient history of the countries
in that region of the world. This is particularly the
case in respect of the Sumerians, who, so far as we know
at present, were the earliest inhabitants of the fertile
plains of Mesopotamia. The beginnings of this ancient
people stretch back into the remote past, and their

origin is still shrouded in the mists of antiquity. When
143

144 RECENT EXCAVATIONS IN WESTERN ASIA

first we come across them they have already attained
a high level of civilization. They have built temples
and palaces and houses of burnt and unburnt brick, and
they have reduced their system of agriculture to a
science, intersecting their country with canals for pur-
poses of irrigation and to ensure a good supply of
water to their cities. Their sculpture and pottery fur-
nish abundant evidence that they have already attained
a comparatively high level in the practice of the arts,
and finally they have evolved a complicated system of
writing which originally had its origin in picture-char-
acters, but afterwards had been developed along pho-
netic lines. To have attained to this pitch of culture
argues long periods of previous development, and we
must conclude that they had been settled in Southern
Babylonia many centuries before the period to which
we must assign the earliest of their remains at present
discovered.

That this people were not indigenous to Babylonia
is highly probable, but we have little data by which
to determine the region from which they originally
came. From the fact that they built their ziggurats,
or temple towers, of huge masses of unburnt brick
which rose high above the surrounding plain, and that
their ideal was to make each “ like a mountain,’’ it
has been argued that they were a mountain race, and
the home from which they sprang has been sought in
Central Asia. Other scholars have detected signs of
their origin in their language and system of writing,
and, from the fact that they spoke an agglutinative

INFLUENCE OF SUMERIANS 145

tongue and at the earliest period arranged the char-
acters of their script in vertical lines like the Chinese,
it has been urged that they were of Mongol extraction.

Though a case may be made out for this hypothesis,
it would be rash to dogmatize for or against it, and
it is wiser to await the discovery of further material
on which a more certain decision may be based. But
whatever their origin, it is certain that the Sumerians
exercised an extraordinary influence on all races with
which, either directly or indirectly, they came in con-
tact. The ancient inhabitants of Elam at a very early
period adopted in principle their method of writing, and
afterwards, living in isolation in the mountainous dis-
tricts of Persia, developed it on lines of their own.
On their invasion of Babylonia the Semites fell abso-
lutely under Sumerian influence, and, although they
eventually conquered and absorbed the Sumerians, their
civilization remained Sumerian to the core. Moreover,
by means of the Semitic inhabitants of Babylonia Su-
merian culture continued to exert its influence on other
and more distant races. We have already seen how
a Babylonian element probably enters into Egyptian
civilization through Semitic infiltration across the
Straits of Bab el-Mandeb or by way of. the Isthmus of
Suez, and it was Sumerian culture which these Semites
brought with them. In like manner, through the Sem-
itic Babylonians, the Assyrians, the Kassites, and the
inhabitants of Palestine and Syria, and of some parts
of Asia Minor, Armenia, and Kurdistan, all in turn

1See Chap. V, p. 232 and note.

146 RECENT EXCAVATIONS IN WESTERN ASIA

experienced indirectly the influence of Sumerian civili-
zation and continued in a greater or less degree to
reproduce elements of this early culture.

It will be seen that the influence of the Sumerians
furnishes us with a key to much that would otherwise
prove puzzling in the history of the early races of West-
ern Asia. It is therefore all the more striking to recall
the fact that but a few years ago the very existence of
this ancient people was called in question. At that
time the excavations in Mesopotamia had not revealed
many traces of the race itself, and its previous existence
had been mainly inferred from a number of Sumerian
compositions inscribed upon Assyrian tablets found in
the library of Ashur-bani-pal at Nineveh. These com-
positions were furnished with Assyrian translations
upon the tablets on which they were inscribed, and it
was correctly argued by the late Sir Henry Rawlinson,
the late M. Oppert, Prof. Schrader, Prof. Sayce,
and other scholars that they were written in the lan-
guage of the earlier inhabitants of the country whom
the Semitic Babylonians had displaced. But M. Halévy
started a theory to the effect that Sumerian was not a
language at all, in the proper sense of the term, but
was a cabalistic method of writing invented by the
Semitic Babylonian priests. The argument on which
the upholders of this theory mainly relied was that.
many of the phonetic values of the Sumerian signs were
_ obviously derived from Semitic equivalents, and they
hastily jumped to the conclusion that the whole lan-
guage was similarly derived from Semitic Babylonian,

ASSYRIAN TABLETS 147

and was, in fact, a purely arbitrary invention of the
Babylonian priests. This theory ignored all questions
of inherent probability, and did not attempt to explain

ase

|
|
|
|
|
|
|

LIST OF ARCHAIC CUNEIFORM SIGNS.

Drawn up by an Assyrian scribe to assist him in his studies of
early texts. Photograph by Messrs. Mansell & Co.

why the Babylonian priests should have troubled them-
selves to make such an invention and afterwards have
stultified themselves by carefully appending Assyrian

148 RECENT EXCAVATIONS IN WESTERN ASIA

translations to the majority of the Sumerian compo-
sitions which they copied out. Moreover, the nature
of these compositions is not such as we should expect
to find recorded in a ecabalistic method of writing.
They contain no secret lore of the Babylonian priests,
but are merely hymns and prayers and religious com-
positions similar to those employed by the Babylonians
and Assyrians themselves.

But in spite of its inherent improbabilities, M. Ha-
lévy succeeded in making many converts to his theory,
including Prof. Friedrich Delitzsch and a number of
the younger school of German Assyriologists. More
conservative scholars, such as Sir Henry Rawlinson,
M. Oppert, and Prof. Schrader, stoutly opposed the
theory, maintaining that Sumerian was a real language
and had ‘been spoken by an earlier race whom the
Semitic Babylonians had conquered; and they ex-
plained the resemblance of some of the Sumerian values
to Semitic roots by supposing that Sumerian had not
been suddenly superseded by the language of the Sem-
itic invaders of Babylonia, but that the two tongues
had been spoken for long periods side by side and that
each had been strongly influenced by the other. This
very probable and sane explanation has been fully cor-
roborated by subsequent excavations, particularly those
that were carried out at Telloh in Southern Babylonia
by the late M. de Sarzec. In these mounds, which
mark the site of the ancient Sumerian city of Shirpurla,
were found thousands of clay tablets inscribed in *
archaic characters and in the Sumerian language, prov-

METHODS OF WRITING 149

ing that it had actually been the language of the early
inhabitants of Babylonia; while the examples of their
art and the representations of their form and features,
which were also afforded by the diggings at Telloh,
proved once for all that the Sumerians were a race
of strongly marked characteristics and could not be
ascribed to a Semitic stock.

The system of writing invented by the ancient Sume-
rians was adopted by the Semitic Babylonians, who
modified it to suit their own language. Moreover, the
archaic forms of the characters, many of which under
the Sumerians still retained resemblances to the pic-
tures of objects from which they were descended, were
considerably changed. The lines, of which they were
originally composed, gave way to wedges, and the num-
ber of the wedges of which each sign consisted was
gradually diminished, so that in the time of the Assy-
rians and the later Babylonians many of the characters
bore small resemblance to the ancient Sumerian forms
from which they had been derived. The reading of
Sumerian and early Babylonian inscriptions by the late
Assyrian scribes was therefore an accomplishment only
to be acquired as the result of long study, and it is
interesting to note that as an assistance to the reading
of these early texts the scribes compiled lists of archaic
signs. Sometimes opposite each archaic character they
drew a picture of the object from which they imagined
it was derived. This fact is significant as proving that
the Assyrian scribes recognized the pictorial origin of
cuneiform writing, but the pictures they drew opposite

150 RECENT EXCAVATIONS IN WESTERN ASIA

the signs are rather fanciful, and it cannot be said that
their guesses were very successful. That we are able
to criticize the
theories. of the
Assyrians as to
the origin and
forms of the early
characters is in
the main due to
M. de Sarzee’s la-
bours, from whose
excavations many
thousands of in-
scriptions of the
Sumerians have
been recovered.

The main re-
sults of M. de
Sarzec’s diggings
at Telloh have al-
ready been de-
scribed by M.
Maspero in his
FRAGMENT OF A LIST OF ARCHAIC CUNEIFORM SIGNS. history, and there-
Opposite each the scribe has drawn a picture of the

object from which he imagined it was derived. Photo. fore we need not
graph by Messrs. Mansell & Co.

go over them
again, but will here confine ourselves to the results
which have been obtained from recent excavations at
Telloh and at other sites in Western Asia. With the
death of M. de Sarzec, which occurred in his sixty-fifth

MISSION OF CAPT. GASTON CROS 151

year, on May 31, 1901, the wonderfully successful series
of excavations which he had carried out at Telloh was
brought to an end. In consequence it was feared at
the time that the French diggings on this site might
be interrupted for a considerable period. Such an event
would have been regretted by all those who are inter-
ested in the early history of the East, for, in spite of
the treasures found by M. de Sarzec in the course of
his various campaigns, it was obvious that the site was
far from being exhausted, and that the tells as yet
unexplored contained inscriptions and antiquities ex-
tending back to the very earliest periods of Sumerian
history. The announcement which was made in 1902,
that the French government had appointed Capt. Gaston
Cros as the late M. de Sarzec’s successor, was therefore
received with general satisfaction. The fact that Capt.
Cros had already successfully carried out several diffi- -
cult topographical missions in the region of the Sahara
was a sufficient guarantee that the new diggings would
be conducted on a systematic and exhaustive scale.
The new director of the French mission in Chaldea
arrived at Telloh in January, 1903, and one of his first
acts was to shift the site of the mission’s settlement
from the bank of the Shatt el-Hai, where it had always
been established in the time of M. de Sarzec, to the
mounds where the actual digging took place. The Shatt
el-Hai had been previously chosen as the site of the
settlement to ensure a constant supply of water, and as
it was more easily protected against attack by night.
But the fact that it was an hour’s ride from the diggings

152 RECENT EXCAVATIONS IN WESTERN ASIA

caused an unnecessary loss of time, and rendered the
strict supervision of the diggers a matter of considerable
difficulty. During the first season’s work rough huts
of reeds, surrounded by a wall of earth and a ditch,
served the new expedition for its encampment among
the mounds of Telloh, but last year these makeshift
arrangements were superseded by a regular house built
out of the burnt bricks which are found in abundance
on the site. A reservoir has also been built, and car-
avans of. asses bring water in skins from the Shatt
el-Hai to keep it filled with a constant supply of water,
while the excellent relations which Capt. Cros has estab-
lished with the Karagul Arabs, who occupy Telloh and
its neighbourhood, have proved to be the best kind of
protection for the mission engaged in scientific work
upon the site.

The group of mounds and hillocks, known as Telloh,
which marks the site of the ancient Sumerian city of
Shirpurla, is easily distinguished from the flat surround-
ing desert. The mounds extend in a rough oval forma-
tion running north and south, about two and a half miles
long and one and a quarter broad. In the early spring,
when the desert is covered with a light green verdure,
the ruins are clearly marked out as a yellow spot in
the surrounding green, for vegetation does not grow
upon them. In the centre of this oval, which approxi-
mately marks the limits of the ancient city and its
suburbs, are four large tells or mounds running, roughly,
north and south, their sides descending steeply on the
east, but with their western slopes rising by easier

RICH DISCOVERIES 153

undulations from the plain. These four principal tells
are known as the ‘‘ Palace Tell,”’ the ‘‘ Tell of the Fruit-
house,”’ the ‘‘ Tell of the Tablets,’’ and -the ‘‘ Great
Tell,’’ and, rising as they do in the centre of the site,
they mark the position of the temples and the other
principal buildings of the city.

An indication of the richness of the site in antiqui-
ties was afforded to the new mission before it had
started regular excavation and while it was yet engaged
in levelling its encampment and surrounding it with a
wall and ditch. The spot selected for the camp was a
small mound to the south of the site of Telloh, and here,
in the course of preparing the site for the encampment
and digging the ditch, objects were found at a depth of
less than a foot beneath the surface of the soil. These
included daggers, copper vases, seal-cylinders, rings of
lapis and cornelian, and pottery. M. de Sarzec had
earried out his latest diggings in the Tell of the Tablets,
and here Capt. Cros continued the excavations and came
upon the remains of buildings and recovered numerous
objects, dating principally from the period of Gudea and
the kings of Ur. The finds included small terra-cotta
figures, a boundary-stone of.Gamil-Sin, and a new statue
of Gudea, to which we will refer again presently.

In the Tell of the Fruit-house M. de Sarzec had
already discovered numbers of monuments dating from
the earlier periods of Sumerian history before the con-
quest and consolidation of Babylonia under Sargon of
Agade, and had excavated a primitive terrace built by
the early king Ur-Nina. Both on and around this large

154 RECENT EXCAVATIONS IN WESTERN ASIA

mound Capt. Cros cut an extensive series of trenches,
and in digging to the north of the mound he found a
number of objects, including an alabaster tablet of Ente-
mena which had been blackened by fire. At the foot
of the tell he found a copper helmet like those repre-
sented on the famous Stele of Vultures discovered by
M. de Sarzec, and among the tablets here recovered was
one with an inscription of the time of Urukagina, which
records the complete destruction of the city of Shirpurla
during his reign, and will be described in greater detail
later.on in this chapter. On the mound itself a consid-
erable area was uncovered with remains of buildings
still in place, the use of which appears to have been
of an industrial character. They included flights of
steps, canals with raised banks, and basins for storing
water. Not far off are the previously discovered wells
of Eannadu, so that it is legitimate to suppose that
Capt. Cros has here come upon part of the works which
were erected at a very early period of Sumerian history
for the distribution of water to this portion of the city.

In the Palace Tell Capt. Cros has sunk a series of
deep shafts to determine precisely the relations which
the buildings of Ur-Bau and Gudea, found already on
this part of the site, bear to each other, and to the
building of Adad-nadin-akhé, which had been erected
there at a much later period. From this slight sketch
of the work carried out during the last two years at
Telloh it will have been seen that the French mission
in Chaldea is at present engaged in excavations of a
most important character, which are being conducted in

ee

Obelisk of Manishtusu.

An early Semitic king of the city of Kish in Babylonia. The
photograph is taken from M. de Morgan’s Delégation en Perse,
Mem.., t. i, pl. ix.

EXCAVATIONS AT SUSA 155

a regular and scientific manner. As the area of the
excavations marks the site of the chief city of the
Sumerians, the diggings there have yielded and are
yielding material of the greatest interest and value for
the reconstruction of the early history of Chaldma.
After briefly describing the character and results of
other recent excavations in Mesopotamia and the neigh-
bouring lands, we will return to the discoveries at Telloh
and sketch the new information they supply on the his-
tory of the earliest inhabitants of the country.

Another French mission that is carrying out work
of the very greatest interest to the student of early
Babylonian history is that which is excavating at Susa
in Persia, under the direction of M. J. de Morgan, whose
work on the prehistoric and early dynastic sites in
Egypt has already been described. M. de Morgan’s
first season’s digging at Susa was carried out in the
years 1897-8, and the success with which he met from
the very first, when cutting trenches in the mound
which marks the acropolis of the ancient city, has led
him to concentrate his main efforts in this part of
the ruins ever since. Provisional trenches cut in the
part of the ruins called ‘‘ the Royal City,’”’ and in others
of the mounds at Susa, indicate that many remains may
eventually be found there dating from the period of the
Achemenian Kings of Persia. But it is in the mound
of the acropolis at Susa that M. de Morgan has found
monuments of the greatest historical interest and value,
not only in the history of ancient Elam, but also in
that of the earliest rulers of Chaldea. —

156 RECENT EXCAVATIONS IN WESTERN ASIA

In the diggings carried out during the first season’s
work on the site, an obelisk was found inscribed on four
sides with a long text of some sixty-nine columns, writ-
ten in Semitic Babylonian by the orders of Manishtusu,
a very early Semitic king of the city of Kish in Baby-
lonia.! The text records the purchase by the King of
Kish of immense tracts of land situated at Kish and
in its neighbourhood, and its length is explained by the
fact that it enumerates full details of the size and posi-
tion of each estate, and the numbers and some of the
names of the dwellers on the estates who were engaged
in their cultivation. After details have been given of
a number of estates situated in the same neighbourhood,
a summary is appended referring to the whole neigh-
bourhood, and the fact is recorded that the district dealt
with in the preceding catalogue and summary had been
duly acquired by purchase by Manishtusu, King of Kish.
The long text upon the obelisk is entirely taken up with
details of the purchase of the territory, and therefore
its subject has not any great historical value. Mention
is made in it of two personages, one of whom may pos-
sibly be identified with a Babylonian ruler whose name
is known from other sources. If the proposed identi-
fication should prove to be correct, it would enable us
to assign a more precise date to Manishtusu than has
hitherto been possible. One of the personages in ques-
tion was a certain Urukagina, the son of Engilsa, patesi
of Shirpurla, and it has been suggested that he is the
same Urukagina who is known to have occupied the

1 See illustration.

A STELE OF VICTORY 157

throne of Shirpurla, though this identification would
bring Manishtusu down somewhat later than is prob-
able from the general character of his inscriptions. The
other personage mentioned in the text is the son of
Manishtusu, named Mesalim, and there is more to be
said for the identification of this prince with Mesilim,
the early King of Kish, who reigned at a period anterior
to that of Eannadu, patesi of Shirpurla.

The mere fact of so large and important an obelisk,
inscribed with a Semitic text by an early Babylonian
king, being found at Susa was an indication that other
monuments of even greater interest might be forth-
coming from the same spot; and this impression was
intensified when a stele of victory was found bearing
an inscription of Nar&m-Sin, the early Semitic King of
Agade, who reigned about 3750 B.c. One face of this
stele is sculptured with a representation of the king
conquering his enemies in a mountainous country.’ ‘The
king himself wears a helmet adorned with the horns
of a bull, and he carries his battle-axe and his bow and
an arrow. He is nearly at the summit of a high moun-
tain, and up its steep sides, along paths through the
trees which clothe the mountain, climb his allies and
warriors bearing standards and weapons. The king’s
enemies are represented suing for mercy as they turn
to fly before him. One grasps a broken spear, while
another, crouching before the king, has been smitten
in the throat by an arrow from the king’s bow. On
the plain surface of the stele above the king’s head may

1 See illustration.

158 RECENT EXCAVATIONS IN WESTERN ASIA

be seen traces of an inscription of Naram-Sin engraved
in three columns in the archaic characters of his period.
From the few signs of the text that remain, we gather
that Narém-Sin had conducted a campaign with the
assistance of certain allied princes, including the
Princes of Sidur, Saluni, and Lulubi, and it is not
improbable that they are to be identified with the war-
riors represented on the stele as climbing the mountain
behind Naraém-Sin.

In reference to this most interesting stele of Naram-
Sin we may here mention another inscription of this
king, found quite recently at Susa and published only
this year, which throws additional light on Nar4m-Sin’s
allies and on the empire which he and his father Sargon
founded. The new inscription was engraved on the base
of a diorite statue, which had been broken to pieces so
that only the base with a portion of the text remained.
From this inscription we learn that Naram-Sin was the
head of a confederation of nine chief allies, or vassal
princes, and waged war on his enemies with their assist-
ance. Among these nine allies of course the Princes
of Sidur, Saluni, and Lulubi are to be included. The
new text further records that Naram-Sin made an expe-
dition against Magan (the Sinaitic peninsula), and
defeated Manium, the lord of that region, and that he
cut blocks of stone in the mountains there and trans-
ported them to his city of Agade, where from one of
them he made the statue on the base of which the text
was inscribed. It was already known from the so-called
‘“ Omens of Sargon and Naraém-Sin ”’ (a text inscribed

STARTLING DISCOVERIES AT SUSA 159

on a clay tablet from Ashur-bani-pal’s library at Nin-
eveh which associates the deeds of these two early rulers
with certain augural phenomena) that Naram-Sin had
made an expedition to Sinai in the course of his reign
and had conquered the king of the country. The new
text gives contemporary confirmation of this assertion
and furnishes us with additional information with re-
gard to the name of the conquered ruler of Sinai and
other details of the campaign.

That monuments of such great interest to the early
history of Chaldea should have been found at Susa in
Persia was sufficiently startling, but an easy explana-
tion was at first forthcoming from the fact that Naram-
Sin’s stele of victory had been used by the later Elamite
king, Shutruk-Nakhkhunte, for an inscription of his
own; this he had engraved in seven long lines along
the great cone in front of Naram-Sin, which is probably
intended to represent the peak of the mountain. From
the fact that it had been used in this way by Shutruk-
Nakhkhunte, it seemed permissible to infer that it had
been captured in the course of a campaign and brought
to Susa as a trophy of war. But we shall see later on
that the existence of early Babylonian inscriptions and
monuments in the mound of the acropolis at Susa is
not to be explained in this way, but was due to the wide
extension of both Sumerian and Semitic influence
throughout Western Asia from the very earliest periods.
This subject will be treated more fully in the chapter
dealing with the early history of Elam.

The upper surface of the tell of the acropolis at

160 RECENT EXCAVATIONS IN WESTERN ASIA

Susa for a depth of nearly two metres contains remains
of the buildings and antiquities of the Achzmenian
kings and others of both later and earlier dates. In
these upper strata of the mound are found remains:of
the Arab, Sassanian, Parthian, Seleucian, and Persian
periods, mixed indiscriminately with one another and
with Elamite objects and materials of all ages, from

BABIL.

The most northern of the mounds which now mark the site of the ancient city of Babylon ;
used for centuries as a quarry for building materials.

that of the earliest. patesis down to that of the Susian
kings of the seventh century B.c. The reason of this
mixture of the remains of many races and periods is
that the later builders on the mound made use of the
earlier building materials which they found preserved
within it. Along the skirts of the mound may still be
seen the foundations of the wall which formed the prin-
cipal defence of the acropolis in the time of Xerxes,
and in many places not only are the foundations pre-

29

ICTORY.

E OF V

“6 STEL

who reigned about B. C. 3750.

ylonia,
Mansell &

-Sin, an early Semitic King of Agade in Bab

im

€

Stele of Nar

Co.

aph by Messrs

From the photogr

THE FORTRESS OF SUSA . 161

served but large pieces of the wall itself still rise above
the surface of the soil. The plan of the wall is quite
irregular, following the contours of the mound, and,
though it is probable that the wall was strengthened
and defended at intervals by towers, no trace of these-
now remains. The wall is very thick and built of un-

ROUGHLY HEWN SCULPTURE OF A LION STANDING OVER A FALLEN MAN, FOUND AT
BABYLON.

The group probably represents Babylon or the Babylonian king triumphing over the country’s
enemies. The Arabs regard the figure as an evil spirit, and it is pitted with the marks of
bullets shot at it. They also smear it with filth when they can do so unobserved ; in the photo-
graph some newly smeared filth may be seen adhering to the side of the lion.
burnt bricks, and the system of fortification seems to
have been extremely simple at this period. The earlier
citadel or fortress of the city of Susa was built at the
top of the mound and must have been a more formid-
able stronghold than that of the Achemenian kings, for,
besides its walls, it had the additional protection of the
steep slopes of the mound.

Below the depth of two metres from the surface of

162 RECENT EXCAVATIONS IN WESTERN ASIA

the mound are found strata in which Elamite objects
and materials are no longer mixed with the remains
of later ages, but here the latest EKlamite remains are
found mingled with objects and materials dating from
the earliest periods of Elam’s history. The use of un-
burnt bricks as the principal material for buildings
erected on the mound in all ages has been another cause
of this mixture of materials, for it has little power of
resistance to water, and a considerable rain-storm will
wash away large portions of the surface and cause the
remains of different strata to be mixed indiscriminately
with one another. In proportion as the trenches were
cut deeper into the mound the strata which were laid
bare showed remains of earlier ages than those in the
upper layers, though here also remains of different peri-
ods are considerably mixed. The only building that has
hitherto been discovered at Susa by M. de Morgan, the
ground plan of which was in a comparatively good state
of preservation, was a small temple of the god Shu-_
’ shinak, and this owed its preservation to the fact that
it was not built of unburnt brick, but was largely com-
posed of burnt brick and plaques and tiles of enamelled
terra-cotta.

But although the diggings of M. de Morgan at Susa
have so far afforded little information on the subject
of Klamite architecture, the separate objects found have
enabled us to gain considerable knowledge of the artis-
tic achievements of the race during the different periods
of its existence. Moreover, the stele and stone records
that have been recovered present a wealth of material

CODE OF LAWS OF HAMMURABIL 163

for the study of the long history of Elam and of the
kings who ruled in Babylonia during the earliest ages.
The most famous of M. de Morgan’s recent finds is the
long code of laws drawn up by Hammurabi, the great-

GENERAL VIEW OF THE EXCAVATIONS ON THE KASR AT BABYLON.

Showing the depth in the mound to which the diggings are carried.

est king of the First Dynasty of Babylon.t' This was
engraved upon a huge block of black diorite, and was
found in the tell of the acropolis in the winter of
1901-2. This document in itself has entirely revolu-
tionized current theories as to the growth and origin

1]t will be noted that the Babylonian dynasties are referred to throughout
this volume as “First Dynasty,” “Second Dynasty,” “Third Dynasty,” ete.
They are thus distinguished from the Egyptian dynasties, the order of which is
indicated by Roman numerals, e.g. “Ist Dynasty,” “Id Dynasty,” «IIId

Dynasty.”

164 RECENT EXCAVATIONS IN WESTERN ASIA

of the principal ancient legal codes. It proves that
Babylonia was the fountainhead from which many later
races borrowed portions of their legislative systems.
Moreover, the subjects dealt with in this code of laws
embrace most of the different classes of the Babylonian
people, and it regulates their duties and their relations
to one another in their ordinary occupations and pur-
suits. It therefore throws much light upon early Baby-
lonian life and customs, and we shall return to it in
the chapter dealing with these subjects.

The American excavators at Nippur, under the di-
rection of Mr. Haynes, have done much in the past to
increase our knowledge of Sumerian and early Baby-
lonian history, but the work has not been continued in
recent years, and, unfortunately, little progress has
been made in the publication of the material already
accumulated. In fact, the leadership in American ex-
cavation has passed from the University of Pennsyl-
vania to that of Chicago. This progressive university
has sent out an expedition, under the general direction
of Prof. R. F. Harper (with Dr. E. J. Banks as director
of excavations), which is doing excellent work at
Bismya, and, although it is too early yet to expect de-
tailed accounts of their achievements, it is clear that
they have already met with considerable success. One
of their recent finds consists of a white marble statue
of an early Sumerian king named Daudu, which was
set up in the temple of E-shar in the city of Udnun, of
which he was ruler. From its archaic style of work-
manship it may be placed in the earliest period of

GERMAN ACTIVITY 165

Sumerian history, and may be regarded as an earnest
of what may be expected to follow from the future
labours of Prof. Harper’s expedition.

At Fara and at Abii Hatab in Babylonia, the
Deutsch-Orient Gesellschaft, under Dr. Koldewey’s di-
rection, has excavated Sumerian and Babylonian re-

WITHIN THE PALACE OF NEBUCHADNEZZAR II.

mains of the early period. At the former site they
unearthed the remains of many private houses and
found some Sumerian tablets of accounts and com-
mercial documents, but little of historical interest; and
an inscription, which seems to have come from Abi
Hatab, probably proves that the Sumerian name of the
city whose site it marks was Kishurra. But the main

166 RECENT EXCAVATIONS IN WESTERN ASIA

centre of German activity in Babylonia is the city of
Babylon itself, where for the last seven years Dr. Kol-
dewey has conducted excavations, unearthing the pal-
aces of Nebuchadnezzar II on the mound termed the
Kasr, identifying the temple of H-sagila under the
mound e¢alled Tell Amran ibn-Ali, tracing the course

EXCAVATIONS IN THE TEMPLE OF NINIB AT BABYLON.

Hae MG Ory cL Terinersoraler east teens
of the sacred way between H-sagila and the palace-
mound, and excavating temples dedicated to the goddess
Ninmakh and the god Ninib. Dr. Andrae, Dr. Kolde-
wey’s assistant, has also completed the excavation of
the temple dedicated to Nabi at Birs Nimrud. On the
principal mound at this spot, which marks the site of
the ancient city of Borsippa, traces of the ziggurat, or
temple tower, may still be seen rising from the soil,

EXCAVATIONS AT. NINEVEH 167

the temple of Nabi lying at a lower level below the
steep slope of the mound, which is mainly made up of
débris from the ziggurat. Dr. Andrae has recently left
Babylonia for Assyria, where his excavations at Sher-
ghat, the site of the ancient Assyrian city of Ashur,

THE PRINCIPAL MOUND OF BIRS NIMRUD, WHICH MARKS
THE SITE OF THE ANCIENT CITY OF BORSIPPA.

are confidently expected to throw considerable light on
the early history of that country and the customs of the
' people, and already he has made numerous finds of con-
_ siderable interest.

Since the early spring of 1903 excavations have been
. conducted at Kuyunjik, the site of the city of Nineveh,
by Messrs. L. W. King and R. C. Thompson on behalf
of the Trustees of the British Museum, and have re-

168 RECENT EXCAVATIONS IN WESTERN ASIA

sulted in the discovery of many early remains in the
lower strata of the mound, in addition to the finding
of new portions of the two palaces already known and
partly excavated, the identification of a third palace,
and the finding of an ancient temple dedicated to Nabi,
whose existence had already been inferred from a study
of the Assyrian inscriptions.t All these diggings at

ANCIENT CAPITAL OF THE ASSYRIANS.

Babylon, at Ashur, and at Nineveh throw more light
upon the history of the country during the Assyrian and
Neo-Babylonian periods, and will be referred to later
in the volume. Meanwhile, we will return to the

1It may be noted that excavations are also being actively carried on in
Palestine at the present time. Mr. Macalister has for some years been working
for the Palestine Exploration Fund at Gezer; Dr. Schumacher is digging at
Megiddo for the German Palestine Society; and Prof. Sellin is at present
excavating at Taanach (Ta’annak) and will shortly start work at Dothan.
Good work on remains of later historical periods is also being carried on under
the auspices of the Deutsch-Orient Gesellschaft at Ba’albek and in Galilee. It
would be tempting to include here a summary of the very interesting results

RIVAL CITIES 169

diggings described at the beginning of this chapter,
as affording new information concerning the earliest
periods of Chaldean history.

A most interesting inscription has recently been dis-
covered by Capt. Cros at Telloh, which throws consid-
erable light on the rivalry which existed between the
cities of Shirpurla and Gishkhu, and at the same time
furnishes valuable material for settling the chronology

THE MOUND OF KUYUNJIK, WHICH FORMED ONE OF THE PALACE MOUNDS OF THE
ANCIENT ASSYRIAN CITY OF NINEVEH.

of the earliest rulers whose inscriptions have been found
at Nippur and their relations to contemporary rulers
in Shirpurla. The cities of Gishkhu and Shirpurla were

that have recently been achieved in this fruitful field of archeological research,
for it is true that these excavations may strictly be said to bear on the history of
a portion of Western Asia. But the problems which they raise would more
naturally be discussed in a work dealing with recent excavation and research in
relation to the Bible, and to have summarized them adequately would have
increased the size of the present volume considerably beyond its natural
limits. They have therefore not been included within the scope of the present
work,

170 RECENT EXCAVATIONS IN WESTERN ASIA

probably situated not far from one another, and their
rivalry is typical of the history of the early city-states
of Babylonia. The site of the latter city, as has already
been said, is marked by the mounds of Telloh on the
east bank of the Shatt el-Hai, the natural stream join-
ing the Tigris and Euphrates, which has been improved
and canalized by the dwellers in Southern Babylonia
from the earliest period. The site of Gishkhu may be

WINGED BULL IN THE PALACE OF SENNACHERIB ON KUYUNJIK,
THE PRINCIPAL MOUND MARKING THE SITE OF NINEVEH.

set with considerable probability not far to the north
of Telloh on the ‘opposite bank of the Shatt el-Hai.
These two cities, situated so close to one another, exer-
cised considerable political influence, and though less
is known of Gishkhu than of the more famous Baby-
lonian cities such as Ur, Erech, and Larsam, her prox-
imity to Shirpurla gave her an importance which she
might not otherwise have possessed. The earliest
knowledge we possess of the relations existing between

INVASION OF SHIRPURLA 171

Gishkhu and Shirpurla refers to the reign of Mesilim,
King of Kish, the period of whose rule may be provi-
sionally set before that of Sargon of Agade, 7. e. about
4000 B. c. |

vA) tits period there was rivalry between the two
cities, in consequence of which Mesilim, King of Kish,
was called in as arbitrator. A record of the treaty of
delimitation that was drawn up on this occasion has
been preserved upon the recently discovered cone of
Entemena. This document tells us that at the command
of the god Enlil, described as “‘ the king of the coun-
tries,’’ Ningirsu, the chief god of Shirpurla, and the
god of Gishkhu decided to draw up a line of division
between their respective territories, and that Mesilim,
King of Kish, acting under the direction of his own
god Kadi, marked out the frontier and set up a stele
between the two territories to commemorate the fixing
of the boundary.

- This policy of fixing the boundary by arbitration
seems to have been successful, and to have secured
peace between Shirpurla and Gishkhu for some genera-
tions. But after a period which cannot be accurately
determined a certain patesi of Gishkhu, named Ush,
was filled with ambition to extend his territory at the
expense of Shirpurla. He therefore removed the stele
which Mesilim had set up, and, invading the plain of
Shirpurla, succeeded in conquering and holding a dis-
trict named Gu-edin. But Ush’s successful raid was not
of any permanent benefit to his city, for he was in
his turn defeated by the forces of Shirpurla, and his

172 RECENT EXCAVATIONS IN WESTERN ASIA

successor upon the throne, a patesi named Enakalli,
abandoned a policy of aggression, and concluded with
Eannadu, patesi of Shirpurla, a solemn treaty concern-
ing the boundary between their realms, the text of
which has been preserved to us upon the famous Stele
of Vultures in the Louvre."

According to this treaty Gu-edin was restored to
Shirpurla, and a deep ditch was dug between the two
territories which should permanently indicate the line of
demarcation. The stele of Mesilim was restored to its
place, and a second stele was inscribed and set up as
a memorial of the new treaty. Enakalli did not negoti-
ate the treaty on equal terms with Eannadu, for he only
secured its ratification by consenting to pay heavy trib-
ute in grain for the supply of the great temples of Nin-
girsu and Ninf in Shirpurla. It would appear that
under Eannadu the power and influence of Shirpurla
were extended over the whole of Southern Babylonia,
and reached even to the borders of Elam. At any rate,
it is clear that during his lifetime the city of Gishkhu
was content to remain in a state of subjection to its
more powerful neighbour. But it was always ready
to seize any opportunity of asserting itself and of at-
tempting to regain its independence. Accordingly, after
Eannadu’s death the men of Gishkhu again took the
offensive. At this time Urlumma, the son and successor
of Enakalli, was on the throne of Gishkhu, and he
organized the forces of the city and led them out to

1A fragment of this stele is also preserved in the British Museum. It is
published in Cuneiform Teats in the British Museum, Pt. vii.

Clay Memorial-tablet of Eannadu.

One of the most powerful of the patesis or viceroys of Shirpurla. The characters of the inscription well
illustrate the pictorial origin of the Sumerian system of writing. Photograph by Messrs. Mansell & Co.

WARFARE BETWEEN RIVAL CITIES 173

battle. His first act was to destroy the frontier ditches
named after Ningirsu and Nina, the principal god and
goddess of Shirpurla, which Eannadu, the powerful foe
of Gishkhu, had caused to be dug. He then tore down
the stele on which the terms of Eannadu’s treaty had
been engraved and broke it into pieces by casting it
into the fire, and the shrines which Eannadu had built
near the frontier, and had consecrated to the gods of
Shirpurla, he razed to the ground. But again Shirpurla
in the end proved too strong for Gishkhu. The ruler
in Shirpurla at this time was Enannadu, who had suc-
ceeded his brother Eannadu upon the throne. He
marched out to meet the invading forces of the men
of Gishkhu, and a battle was fought in the territory
of Shirpurla. According to one account, the forces of
Shirpurla were victorious, while on the cone of Ente-
mena no mention is made of the issue of the combat.
The result may not have been decisive, but Enannadu’s
action at least checked Urlumma’s encroachments for
the time.

It would appear that the death of the reigning patesi
in Shirpurla was always the signal for an attack upon
that city by the men of Gishkhu. They may have hoped
that the new ruler would prove a less successful leader
than the last, or that the accession of a new monarch
might give rise to internal dissensions in the city which
would weaken Shirpurla’s power of resisting a sudden
attack. As Eannadu’s death had encouraged Urlumma
to lead out the men of Gishkhu, so the death of Enan-
nadu seemed to him a good opportunity to make another

174 RECENT EXCAVATIONS IN WESTERN ASIA

bid for victory. But this time the result of the battle
was not indecisive. Entemena had succeeded his father
Enannadu, and he led out to victory the forces of Shir-
purla. The battle was fought near the canal Lumma-
girnun-ta, and when the men of Gishkhu were put to
flight they left sixty of their fellows lying dead upon
the banks of the canal. Entemena tells us that the
bones of these warriors were left to bleach in the open
plain, but he seems to have buried those of the men
of Gishkhu who fell in the pursuit, for he records that
in five separate places he piled up burial-mounds in
which the bodies of the slain were interred. HEntemena
was not content with merely inflicting a defeat upon
the army of Gishkhu and driving it back within its own
borders, for he followed up his initial advantage and
captured the capital itself. He deposed and imprisoned
Urlumma, and chose one of his own adherents to rule
as patesi of Gishkhu in his stead. The man he ap-
pointed for this high office was named Ili, and he had
up to that time been priest in Ninab. Entemena sum-
moned him to his presence, and, after marching in a
triumphal procession from Girsu in the neighbourhood
of Shirpurla to the conquered city, proceeded to invest
him with the office of patesi of Gishkhu.

Entemena also repaired the frontier ditches named
after Ningirsu and Nina, which had been employed for
purposes of irrigation as well as for marking the fron-
tier; and he gave instructions to Ili to employ the men
dwelling in the district of Karkar on this work, as a
punishment for the active part they had taken in the

ENTERPRISE OF ENTEMENA 175

recent raid into the territory of Shirpurla. Entemena
also restored and extended the system of canals in the
region between the Tigris and the Euphrates, lining
one of the principal channels with stone. He thus added

MARBLE GATE-SOCKET BEARING AN INSCRIPTION OF ENTEMENA, A POWERFUL PATESI,
OR VICEROY, OF SHIRPURLA.

In the photograph the gate-socket is resting on its side so as to show the inscription, but
when in use it was set flat upon the ground and partly buried below the level of the pavement
of the building in which it was used. It was fixed at the side of a gateway and the pivot of the
heavy gate revolved in the shallow hole or depression in its centre. As stone is not found in
the alluvial soil of Babylonia, the blocks for gate-sockets had to be brought from great dis-
tances and they were consequently highly prized. The kings and patesis who used them in
their buildings generally had their names and titles engraved upon them, and they thus form a
Mice aa class of inscriptions for the study of the early history. Photograph by Messrs. Man-
se O. \

greatly to the wealth of Shirpurla by increasing the
area of territory under cultivation, and he continued:

176 RECENT EXCAVATIONS IN WESTERN ASIA

to exercise authority in Gishkhu by means of officers
appointed by himself. A record of his victory over Gish-
khu was inscribed by Entemena upon a number of clay
cones, that the fame of it might be preserved in future
days to the honour of Ningirsu and the goddess Nina.
He ends this record with a prayer for the preservation
of the frontier. If ever in time to come the men of
Gishkhu should break out across the frontier-ditch of
Ningirsu, or the frontier-ditch of Nina, in order to seize
or lay waste the lands of Shirpurla, whether they be
men of the city of Gishkhu itself or men of the moun-
tains, he prays that Enlil may destroy them and that
Ningirsu may lay his curse upon them; and if ever the
warriors of his own city should be called upon to defend
it, he prays that they may be full of courage and ardour
for their task.

The greater part of this information with regard to
the struggles between Gishkhu and Shirpurla, between
the period of Mesilim, King of Kish, and that of Ente-
mena, is supplied by the inscription of the latter ruler
which has been found written around a small cone of
clay. There is little doubt that the text was also en-
graved by the orders of Entemena upon a stone stele
which was set up, like those of Mesilim and Eannadu,
upon the frontier. Other copies of the inscription were
probably engraved and erected in the cities of Gishkhu
and Shirpurla, and to ensure the preservation of the
record Entemena probably had numerous copies of it
made upon small cones of clay which were preserved
and possibly buried in the structure of the temples of

PEACEFUL DEVELOPMENT 2 er

Shirpurla. Entemena’s foresight in this matter has
been justified by results, for, while his great memorials
of stone have perished, the preservation of one of his
small cones has sufficed to make known to later ages
his own and his forefathers’ prowess in their continual
contests with their ancient rival Gishkhu.

After the reign of Entemena we have little informa-
tion with regard to the relations between Gishkhu and
Shirpurla, though it is probable that the effects of his
decisive victory continued to exercise a moderating in-
fluence on Gishkhu’s desire for expansion and secured
a period of peaceful development for Shirpurla with-
out the continual fear of encroachments on the part of
her turbulent neighbour. We may assume that this
period of tranquillity continued during the reigns of
Enannadu II, Enlitarzi, and Lugal-anda, but, when in
the reign of Urukagina the men of Gishkhu once more
emerge from their temporary obscurity, they appear
as the authors of deeds of rapine and bloodshed com-
mitted on a scale that was rare even in that primitive
age.

In the earlier stages of their rivalry Gishkhu had
always been defeated, or at any rate checked, in her
actual conflicts with Shirpurla. When taking the ag-
gressive the men of Gishkhu seem generally to have
confined themselves to the seizure of territory, such as
the district of Gu-edin, which was situated on the west-
ern bank of the Shatt el-Hai and divided from their own
lands only by the frontier-ditch. If they ever actually
crossed the Shatt el-Hai and raided the lands on its

178 RECENT EXCAVATIONS IN WESTERN ASIA

eastern bank, they never ventured to attack the city
of Shirpurla itself. And, although their raids were
attended with some success in their initial stages, the
ruling patesis of Shirpurla were always strong enough
to check them; and on most occasions they carried the
war into the territory of Gishkhu, with the result that
they readjusted the boundary on their own terms. But
it would appear that all these primitive Chaldean cities
were subject to alternate periods of expansion and de-
feat, and Shirpurla was not an exception to the rule.
It was probably not due so much to Urukagina’s per-
sonal qualities or defects as a leader that Shirpurla suf-
fered the greatest reverse in her history during his
reign, but rather to Gishkhu’s gradual increase in power
at a time when Shirpurla herself remained inactive, pos-
sibly lulled into a false sense of security by the memory
of her victories in the past. Whatever may have been
the cause of Gishkhu’s final triumph, it is certain that
_ it took place in Urukagina’s reign, and that for many
years afterwards the hegemony of Southern Babylonia
remained in her hands, while Shirpurla for a long period
passed completely out of existence as an independent
or semi-independent state.

The evidence of the catastrophe that befell Shirpurla
at this period is furnished by a small clay tablet recently
found at Telloh during Captain Cros’s excavations on
that site. The document on which the facts in question
are recorded had no official character, and in all prob-
ability it had not been stored in any library or record
chamber. The actual spot at Telloh where it was found

RECORD OF SHIRPURLA’S DISASTERS 179

was to the north of the mound in which the most ancient
buildings have been recovered, and at the depth of two
metres below the surface. No other tablets appear to
have been found near it, but that fact in itself would
not be sufficient evidence on which to base any theory
as to its not having originally formed part of the ar-
chives of the city. Its unofficial character is attested by
the form of the tablet and the manner in which the
information upon it is arranged. In shape there is little
to distinguish the document from the tablets of accounts
inscribed in the reign of Urukagina, great numbers of
which have been found recently at Telloh. Roughly
square in shape, its edges are slightly convex, and the
text is inscribed in a series of narrow columns upon both
the obverse and the reverse. The text itself is not a
carefully arranged composition, such as are the votive
and historical inscriptions of early Sumerian rulers. It
consists of a series of short sentences enumerating
briefly and without detail the separate deeds of violence
and sacrilege performed by the men of Gishkhu after
their capture of the city. It is little more than a cata-
logue or list of the shrines and temples destroyed during
the sack of the city, or defiled by the blood of the men
of Shirpurla who were slain therein. No mention is
made in the list of the palace of the Urukagina, or of
any secular building, or of the dwellings of the citizens
themselves. There is little doubt that these also were
despoiled and destroyed by the victorious enemy, but
the writer of the tablet is not concerned for the moment
with the fate of his city or his fellow citizens. He

180 RECENT EXCAVATIONS IN WESTERN ASIA

appears to be overcome with the thought of the deeds
of sacrilege committed against his gods; his mind is
entirely taken up with the magnitude of the insult
offered to the god Ningirsu, the city-god of Shirpurla.
His bare enumeration of the deeds of sacrilege and vio-
lence loses little by its brevity, and, when he has ended
the list of his accusations against the men of Gishkhu,
he curses the goddess to whose influence he attributes
their success.

No composition at all like this document has yet been
recovered, and as it is not very long we may here give
a translation of the text. It will be seen that the writer
plunges at once into the subject of his charges against
the men of Gishkhu. No historical résumé prefaces his
accusations, and he gives no hint of the circumstances
that have rendered their delivery possible. The temples
of his city have been profaned and destroyed, and his
indignation finds vent in a mere enumeration of their
titles. To his mind the facts need no comment, for to
him it is barely conceivable that such sacred places of
ancient worship should have been defiled. He launches
his indictment against Gishkhu in the following terms:
‘The men of Gishkhu have set fire to the temple of
E-ki[...], they have set fire to Antashura, and they .
have carried away the silver and the precious stones
therefrom! They have shed blood in the palace of
Tirash, they have shed blood in Abzubanda, they have
shed blood in the shrine of Enlil and in the shrine of
the Sun-god, they have shed blood in Akhush, and they
have carried away the silver and the precious stones

SACRILEGE AND VIOLENCE 181

therefrom! They have shed blood in the Gikana of the
sacred grove of the goddess Ninmakh, and they have
carried away the silver and the precious stones there-
from! They have shed blood in Baga, and they have
carried away the silver and the precious stones there-
from! They have shed blood in Abzu-ega, they have
set fire to the temple of Gatumdug, and they have ear-
ried away the silver and the precious stones therefrom,
and have destroyed her statue! They have set fire to
the . . . of the temple H-anna of the goddess Ninni, and
they have carried away the silver and the precious
stones therefrom, and have destroyed her statue! They
have shed blood in Shapada, and they have carried away
the silver and precious stones therefrom! They have

- in Khenda, they have shed blood in the temple
of Nindar in the town of Kiab, and they have carried
away the silver and the precious stones therefrom!
They have set fire to the temple of Dumuzi-abzu in the
town of Kinunir, and they have carried away the silver
and the precious stones therefrom! They have set fire
to the temple of Lugaluru, and they have carried away
the silver and the precious stones therefrom! They have
shed blood in E-engura, the temple of the goddess Nina,
and they have carried away the silver and the precious
stones therefrom! They have shed blood in Sag... ,
the temple of Amageshtin, and the silver and the pre-
cious stones of Amageshtin have they carried away!
They have removed the grain from Ginarbaniru, the
field of the god Ningirsu, so much of it as was under
cultivation! The men of Gishkhu, by the despoiling of

182 RECENT EXCAVATIONS IN WESTERN ASIA

Shirpurla, have committed a transgression against the
god Ningirsu! The power that is come unto them, from
them shall be taken away! Of transgression on the part
of Urukagina, King of Girsu, there is none. As for
Lugalzaggisi, patesi of Gishkhu, may his goddess Ni-
daba bear on her head (the weight of) this trans-
gression! ”’

Such is the account, which has come down to us from
the rough tablet of some unknown scribe, of the greatest
misfortune experienced by Shirpurla during the long
course of her history. Many of the great temples men-
tioned in the text as among those which were burnt
down and despoiled of their treasures are referred to
more than once in the votive and historical inscriptions
of earlier rulers of Shirpurla, who occupied the throne
before the ill-fated Urukagina. The names of some of
them, too, are to be found in the texts. of the later pate-
sis of that city, so that it may be concluded that in
course of time they were rebuilt and restored to their
former splendour. But there is no doubt that the de-
spoiling and partial destruction of Shirpurla in the reign
of Urukagina had a lasting effect upon the fortunes of
that city, and effectively curtailed her influence among
the greater cities of Southern Babylonia.

We may now turn our attention to the leader of the
men of Gishkhu, under whose direction they achieved
their final triumph over their ancient, and for long years
more powerful, rival Shirpurla. The writer of our tablet
mentions his name in the closing words of his text when
he curses him and his goddess for the destruction and

A POWERFUL COALITION ‘ 183

sacrilege that they have wrought. ‘‘ As for Lugalzag-
gisi,’’ he says, ‘‘ patesi of Gishkhu, may his goddess
Nidaba bear on her head (the weight of ) this trans-
gression! ’’ Now the name of Lugalzaggisi has been
found upon a number of fragments of vases made of
white calcite stalagmite which were discovered by Mr.
Haynes during his excavations at Nippur. All the vases
were engraved with the same inscription, so that it was
possible by piecing the fragments of text together to
obtain a more or less complete copy of the records which
were originally engraved upon each of them. From
these records we learned for the first time, not only the
name of Lugalzaggisi, but the fact that he founded a
powerful coalition of cities in Babylonia at what was
obviously a very early period in the history of the coun-
try. In the text he describes himself as ‘‘ King of
Erech, king of the world, the priest of Ana, the hero of
Nidaba, the son of Ukush, patesi of Gishkhu, the hero
of Nidaba, the man who was favourably regarded by the
sure eye of the King of the Lands (1. e. the god Enlil),
the great patesi of Enlil, unto whom understanding was
granted by Enki, the chosen of the Sun-god, the exalted
minister of Enzu, endowed with strength by the Sun-
god, the worshipper of Ninni, the son who was con-
ceived by Nidaba, who was nourished by Ninkharsag
with the milk of life, the attendant of Umu, priestess
of Erech, the servant who was trained by Ninagidkhadu,
the mistress of Erech, the great minister of the gods.”’
Lugalzaggisi then goes on to describe the extent of his
dominion, and he says: ‘‘ When the god Enlil, the lord

184 RECENT EXCAVATIONS IN WESTERN ASIA

of the countries, bestowed upon Lugalzaggisi the king-
dom of the world, and granted unto him success in the
sight of the world, when he filled the lands with his
power, and conquered them from the rising of the sun
unto the setting of the same, at that time he made
straight his path from the Lower Sea of the Tigris and
Euphrates unto the Upper Sea, and he granted him
dominion over all from the rising of the sun unto the
setting of the same, so that he caused the lands to dwell
in peace.”’

Now when first the text of this inscription was pub-
lished there existed only vague indications of the date
to be assigned to Lugalzaggisi and the kingdom that he
founded. It was clear from the titles which he bore,
that, though Gishkhu was his native place, he had
extended his authority far beyond that city and had
chosen Erech as his capital. Moreover, he claimed an
empire extending from ‘‘ the Lower Sea of the Tigris
and Euphrates unto the Upper Sea.’”’ There is no doubt
that the Lower Sea here mentioned is the Persian Gulf,
and it has been suggested that the Upper Sea may be
taken to be the Mediterranean, though it may possibly
have been Lake Van or Lake Urmi. But whichever of
these views might be adopted, it was clear that Lugal-
zaggisi was a great conqueror, and had achieved the
right to assume the high-sounding title of Jugal kalama,
‘king of the world.’’ In these circumstances it was
of the first importance for the study of primitive Chal-
dean history and chronology to ascertain approximately
the period at which Lugalzaggisi reigned.

TRADITIONS CONFIRMED 185

The evidence on which such a question could be
provisionally settled was of the vaguest and most un-
certain character, but such as it was it had to suffice,
in the absence of more reliable data. In settling all
problems connected with early Chaldean chronology,
the starting-point was, and in fact still is, the period
of Sargon I, King of Agade, inasmuch as the date of
his reign is settled, according to the reckoning of the
seribes of Nabonidus, as about 3800 B.c. It is true that
this date has been called in question, and ingenious
suggestions for amending it have been made by some
writers, while others have rejected it altogether, holding
that it merely represented a guess on the part of the
late Babylonians and could be safely ignored in the
chronological schemes which they brought forward.
But nearly every fresh discovery made in the last few
years has tended to confirm some point in the traditions
current among the later Babylonians with regard to the
earlier history of their country. Consequently, reliance
may be placed with increased confidence on the truth
of such traditions as a whole, and we may continue to
accept those statements which yet await confirmation
from documents more nearly contemporary with the
early period to which they refer. It is true that such a
date as that assigned by Nabonidus to Sargon is not to
be regarded as absolutely fixed, for Nabonidus is obvi-
ously speaking in round numbers, and we may allow for
some minor inaccuracies in the calculations of his
scribes. But it is certain that the later Babylonian
priests and scribes had a wealth of historical material

186 RECENT EXCAVATIONS IN WESTERN ASIA

at their disposal which has not come down to us. We
may therefore accept the date given by Nabonidus for
Sargon of Agade and his son Narém-Sin as approxi-
mately accurate, and this is also the opinion of the
majority of writers on early Babylonian history.

The diggings at Nippur furnished indications that
certain inscriptions found on that site and written in a
very archaic form of script were to be assigned to a
period earlier than that of Sargon. One class of evi-
dence was obtained from a careful study of the different
levels at which the inscriptions and the remains of
buildings were found. At a comparatively deep level
in the mound inscriptions of Sargon himself were recov-
ered, along with bricks stamped with the name of
Naram-Sin, his son. It was, therefore, a reasonable
conclusion roughly to date the particular stratum in
which these objects were found to the period of the
empire established by Sargon, with its centre at Agade.
Later on excavations were carried to a lower level, and
remains of buildings were discovered which appeared to
belong to a still earlier period of civilization. An altar
was found standing in a small enclosure surrounded by
a kind of curb. Near by were two immense clay vases
which appeared to have been placed on a ramp or in-
clined plane leading up to the altar, and remains were
also found of a massive brick building in which was an
arch of brick. No inscriptions were actually found at
this level, but in the upper level assigned to Sargon
were a number of texts which might very probably be
assigned to the pre-Sargonic period. None of these were

UNCERTAIN EVIDENCE 187

complete, and they had the appearance of having been
intentionally broken into small fragments. There was
therefore something to be said for the theory that they
might have been inscribed by the builders of the con-
struction in the lowest levels of the mound, and that
they were destroyed and scattered by some conqueror
who had laid their city in ruins.

But all such evidence derived from noting the levels
at which inscriptions are found is in its nature ex-
tremely uncertain and liable to many different inter-
pretations, especially if the strata show signs of having
been disturbed. Where a pavement or building is still
intact, with the inscribed bricks of the builder remain-
ing in their original positions, conclusions may be con-
fidently drawn with regard to the age of the building
and its relative antiquity to the strata above and below
it. But the strata in the lowest levels at Nippur, as we
have seen, were not in this condition, and such evidence
as they furnished could only be accepted if confirmed by
independent data. Such confirmation was to be found
by examination of the early inscriptions themselves.

It has been remarked that most of them were broken
into small pieces, as though by some invader of the
country; but this was not the case with certain gate-
sockets and great blocks of diorite which were too hard
and big to be easily broken. Moreover, any conqueror
of a city would be unlikely to spend time and labour
in destroying materials which might be usefully em-
ployed in the construction of other buildings which he
himself might erect. Stone could not be obtained in

188 RECENT EXCAVATIONS IN WESTERN ASIA

the alluvial plains of Babylonia and had to be quarried
in the mountains and brought great distances. From
any building of his predecessors which he razed to the
ground, an invader would therefore remove the gate-
sockets and blocks of stone for his own use, supposing

STONE GATE - SOCKET BEARING AN INSCRIPTION OF UR-ENGUR, AN EARLY
KING OF THE CITY OF UR.

Photograph by Messrs. Mansell & Co.

he contemplated building on the site. If he left the
city in ruins.and returned to his own country, some
subsequent king, when clearing the ruined site for build-
ing operations, might come across the stones, and he

PERIOD OF LUGALZAGGISI 189

would not leave them buried, but would use them for
his own construction. And this is what actually did
happen in the case of some of the building materials
of one of these early kings, from the lower strata of
Nippur. Certain of the blocks which bore the name of
Lugalkigubnidudu had been used again by Sargon, King
of Agade, who engraved his own name upon them with-
out obliterating the name of the former king.

It followed that Lugalkigubnidudu belonged to the
pre-Sargonic period, and, although the same conclusive
evidence was not forthcoming in the case of Lugalzag-
gisi, he also without much hesitation was set in this
early period, mainly on the strength of the archaic forms
of the characters employed in his inscriptions. In fact,
they were held to be so archaic that, not only was he
said to have reigned before Sargon of Agade, but he
was set in the very earliest period of Chaldean history,
and his empire was supposed to have been contempora-
neous with the very earliest rulers of Shirpurla. The
new inscription found by Captain Cros will cause this
opinion to be considerably modified. While it corrob-
orates the view that Lugalzaggisi is to be set in the
pre-Sargonic period, it proves that he lived and reigned
very shortly before him. As we have already seen, he
was the contemporary of Urukagina, who belongs to the
middle period of the history of Shirpurla. Lugalzag-
gisi’s capture and sack of the city of Shirpurla was only
one of a number of conquests which he achieved. His
father Ukush had been merely patesi of the city of Gish-
khu, but he himself was not content with the restricted

190 RECENT EXCAVATIONS IN WESTERN ASIA

sphere of authority which such a position implied, and
he eventually succeeded in enforcing his authority over
the greater part of Babylonia. From the fact that he
styles himself King of Erech, we may conclude that he
removed his capital from Ukush to that city, after hav-
ing probably secured its submission by force of arms.
In fact, his title of ‘* king of the world ’’ can only have
been won as the result of many victories, and Captain
Cros’s tablet gives us a glimpse of the methods by which
he managed to secure himself against the competition of
any rival. The capture of Shirpurla must have been one
of his earliest achievements, for its proximity to Gish-
khu rendered its reduction a necessary prelude to any
more extensive plan of conquest. But the kingdom
which Lugalzaggisi founded cannot have endured long.

Under Sargon of Agade, the Semites gained the
upper hand in Babylonia, and Erech, Gishkhu, and Shir-
purla, as well as the other ancient cities in the land,
fell in turn under his domination and formed part of
the extensive empire which he ruled.

Concerning the later rulers of city-states of Baby-
lonia which succeeded the disruption of the empire
founded by Sargon of Agade and consolidated by
Narém-Sin, his son, the excavations have little to tell
us which has not already been made use of by Prof.
Maspero in his history of this period.’ Ur, Isin, and

1 The tablets found at Telloh by the late M. de Sarzec, and published during
his lifetime, fall into two main classes, which date from different periods in
early Chaldean history. The great majority belong to the period when the city
of Ur held pre-eminence among the cities of Southern Babylonia, and they are

Statue of Gudea.

The most famous of the later patesis, or viceroys, of Shirpurla, the Sumerian city in
Southern Babylonia now marked by the mounds of Telloh. Photograph by Messrs.
Mansell & Co.

STRIFE FOR HEGEMONY AE |

Larsam succeeded one another in the position of leading
city in Babylonia, holding Nippur, Eridu, Erech, Shir-
purla, and the other chief cities in a condition of semi-
dependence upon themselves. We may note that the
true reading of the name of the founder of the dynasty
of Ur has now been ascertained from a syllabary to be
Ur-Engur; and an unpublished chronicle in the British
Museum relates that his son Dungi cared greatly for the
city of Hridu, but sacked Babylon and carried off its
spoil, together with the treasures from E-sagila, the
great temple of Marduk. Such episodes must have been
common at this period when each city was striving for
hegemony. Meanwhile, Shirpurla remained the centre
of Sumerian influence in Babylonia, and her patesis
were content to owe allegiance to so powerful a ruler
as Dungi, King of Ur, while at all times exercising com-
plete authority within their own jurisdiction.

During the most recent diggings that have been car-
ried out at Telloh a find of considerable value to the
history of Sumerian art has been made. The find is also
of great general interest, since it enables us to identify
a portrait of Gudea, the most famous of the later Sume-

dated in the reigns of Dungi, Bur-Sin, Gamil-Sin, and Ine-Sin. The other and
smaller collection belongs to the earlier period of Sargon and Narfm-Sin; while
many of the tablets found in M. de Sarzec’s last diggings, which were published
after his death, are to be set in the great gap between these two periods. Some
of those recently discovered, which belong to the period of Dungi, contain
memoranda concerning the supply of food for the maintenance of officials
stopping at Shirpurla in the course of journeys in Babylonia and Elam, and
they throw an interesting light on the close and constant communication which
took place at this time between the great cities of Mesopotamia and the neigh-
bouring countries.

192 RECENT EXCAVATIONS IN WESTERN ASIA

rian patesis. In the course of excavating the Tell of
Tablets Captain Cros found a little seated statue made
of diorite. It was not found in place, but upside down,
and appeared to have been thrown with other débris
scattered in that portion of the mound. On lifting it

TABLET INSCRIBED IN SUMERIAN WITH DETAILS OF A SURVEY
OF CERTAIN PROPERTY.

hee eo teas eae eave! becipod olny toe

survey-tablets. Photograph by Messrs. Mansell & Co.
from the trench it was seen that the head of the statue
was broken off, as is the case with all the other statues
of Gudea found at Telloh. The statue bore an inscrip-
tion of Gudea, carefully executed and well preserved,
but it was smaller than other statues of the same ruler
that had been already recovered, and the absence of the
head thus robbed it of any extraordinary interest. On

STATUES OF GUDEA 193

its arrival at the Louvre, M. Léon Heuzey was struck by
its general resemblance to a Sumerian head of diorite
formerly discovered by M. de Sarzec at Telloh, which
has been preserved in the Louvre for many years. On
applying the head to the newly found statue, it was
found to fit it exactly, and to complete the monument,
and we are thus enabled to identify the features of
Gudea. From a photographic reproduction of this
statue, it is seen that the head is larger than it should
be, in proportion to the body, a characteristic which is
also apparent in a small Sumerian statue preserved in
the British Museum.

Gudea caused many statues of himself to be made
out of the hard diorite which he brought for that pur-
pose from the Sinaitic peninsula, and from the inserip-
tions preserved upon them it is possible to ascertain the
buildings in which they were originally placed. Thus
one of the statues previously found was set up in the
temple of Ninkharsag, two others in E-ninni, the temple
of the god Ningirsu, three more in the temple of the
goddess Bau, one in E-anna, the temple of the goddess
Ninni, and another in the temple of Gatumdug. The
newly found statue of the king was made to be set up
in the temple erected by Gudea at Girsu in honour of
the god Ningishzida, as is recorded in the inscription
engraved on the front of the king’s robe, which reads
as follows:

“In the day when the god Ningirsu, the strong
warrior of Enlil, granted unto the god Ningishzida, the
son of Ninazu, the beloved of the gods, (the guardian-

194 RECENT EXCAVATIONS IN WESTERN ASIA

ship of) the foundation of the city and of the hills
and valleys, on that day Gudea, patesi of Shirpurla,
the just man who loveth his god, who for his master
Ningirsu hath constructed his temple E-ninni, called
the shining Imgig, and his temple E-pa, the temple of
the seven zones of heaven, and for the goddess Nina,
the queen, his lady, hath constructed the temple Sirara-
shum, which riseth higher than (all) the temples in the
world, and hath constructed their temples for the great
gods of Lagash, built for his god Ningishzida his temple
in Girsu. Whosoever shall proclaim the god Ningirsu
as his god, even as I proclaim him, may he do no harm
unto the temple of my god! May he proclaim the name
of this temple! May that man be my friend, and may
he proclaim my name! Gudea hath made the statue,
and ‘ Unto - Gudea - the - builder - of - the - temple - hath
life-been-given ’ hath he called its name, and he hath
brought it into the temple.’’

The long name which Gudea gave to the statue,
‘Unto - Gudea - the - builder - of - the - temple - hath -
life-been-given,’’ is characteristic of the practice of the
Sumerian patesis, who always gave long and symbolical
names to statues, stele, and sacred objects dedicated
and set up in their temples. The occasion on which the
temple was built, and this statue erected within it, seems
to have been the investiture of the god Ningishzida with
special and peculiar powers, and it possibly inaugurated
his introduction into the pantheon of Shirpurla. Nin-
gishzida is called in the inscription the son of Ninazu,
who was the husband of the Queen of the Underworld.

FAMOUS CYLINDERS OF GUDEA 195

In one of his aspects he was therefore probably a god
of the underworld himself, and it is in this character
that he was appointed by Ningirsu as guardian of
the city’s foundations. But ‘‘ the hills and valleys ”’
.(.e. the open country) were also put under his juris-
diction, so that in another aspect he was a god of vege-
tation. It is therefore not improbable that, like the god
Dumuzi, or Tammuz, he was supposed to descend into
the underworld in winter, ascending to the surface of
the earth with the earliest green shoots of vegetation
in the spring.’

A most valuable contribution has recently been made
to our knowledge of Sumerian religion and of the light
in which these early rulers regarded the cult and wor-
ship of their gods, by the complete interpretation of
the long texts inscribed upon the famous cylinders of
Gudea, the patesi of Shirpurla, which have been pre-
served for many years in the Louvre. These two great
cylinders of baked clay were discovered by the late
M. de Sarzec so long ago as the year 1877, during the
first period of his diggings at Telloh, and, although the
general nature of their contents has long been recog-
nized, no complete translation of the texts inscribed
upon them had been published until a few months ago.
M. Thureau-Dangin, who has made the early Sumerian
texts his special study, has devoted himself to their
interpretation for some years past, and he has just
issued the first part of his monograph upon them. In
view of the importance of the texts and of the light they

1 Cf. Thureau-Dangin, Rev. d’Assyr., vol. vi. (1904), p. 24.

196 RECENT EXCAVATIONS IN WESTERN ASIA

throw upon the religious beliefs and practices of the
early Sumerians, a somewhat detailed account of their
contents may here be given.

The occasion on which the cylinders were made was
the rebuilding by Gudea of H-ninnt, the great temple
of the god Ningirsu, in the city of Shirpurla. The two
cylinders supplement one another, one of them having
been inscribed while the work of construction was still
in progress, the other after the completion of the temple,
when the god Ningirsu had been installed within his
shrine with due pomp and ceremony. It would appear
that Southern Babylonia had been suffering from a pro-
longed drought, and that the water in the rivers and
canals had fallen, so that the crops had suffered and the
country was threatened with famine. Gudea was at a
loss to know by what means he might restore prosperity
to his country, when one night he had a dream, and it
was in consequence of this dream that he eventually
erected one of the most sumptuously appointed of Sume-
rian temples. By this means he secured the return of
Ningirsu’s favour and that of the other gods, and his
country once more enjoyed the blessings of peace and
prosperity. .

In the opening words of the first of his cylinders
Gudea describes how the great gods themselves took
counsel and decreed that he should build the temple of
E-ninnii and thereby restore to his city the supply of
water it had formerly enjoyed. He records that on the
day on which the destinies were fixed in heaven and
upon earth, Enlil, the chief of the gods, and Ningirsu,

GUDEA’S VISION 197

the city-god of Shirpurla, held converse. And Enlil,
turning to Ningirsu, said: ‘‘ In my city that which is
fitting is not done. The stream doth not rise. The
stream of Enlil doth not rise. The high waters shine
not, neither do they show their splendour. The stream
of Enlil bringeth not good water like the Tigris. Let
the King (7. e. Ningirsu) therefore proclaim the temple.
Let the decrees of the temple E-ninnfi be made illus-
trious in heaven and upon earth!’’ The great gods did
not communicate their orders directly to Gudea, but
conveyed their wishes to him by means of a dream. And
while the patesi slept a vision of the night came to him,
and he beheld a man whose stature was so great that it
equalled the heavens and the earth. And by the crown
he wore upon his head Gudea knew that the figure must
be a god. And by his side was the divine eagle, the
emblem of Shirpurla, and his feet rested upon the whirl-
wind, and a lion was crouching upon his right hand and
upon his left. And the figure spoke to the patesi, but
he did not understand the meaning of the words. Then
it seemed to Gudea that the sun rose from the earth
and he beheld a woman holding in her hand a pure reed,
and she carried also a tablet on which was a star of the
heavens, and she seemed to take counsel with herself.
And while Gudea was gazing he seemed to see a second
man who was like a warrior; and he carried a slab of
lapis lazuli and on it he drew out the plan of a temple.
And before the patesi himself it seemed that a fair
cushion was placed, and upon the cushion was set a
mould, and within the mould was a brick, the brick of

198 RECENT EXCAVATIONS IN WESTERN ASIA

destiny. And on the right hand the patesi beheld an
ass which lay upon the ground.

Such was the dream which Gudea beheld in a vision
of the night, and he was troubled because he could not
interpret it. So he decided to go to the goddess Nina,
who could divine all mysteries of the gods, and beseech
her to tell him the meaning of the vision. But before
applying to the goddess for her help, he thought it best
to secure the mediation of the god Ningirsu and the
goddess Gatumdug, in order that they should use their
influence with Nina to induce her to reveal the inter-
pretation of the dream. So the patesj] set out to the
temple of Ningirsu, and, having offered a sacrifice and
poured out fresh water, he prayed to the god that his
sister, Nina, the child of Eridu, might be prevailed upon
to give him help. And the god hearkened to his prayer.
Then Gudea made offerings, and before the sleeping-
chamber of the goddess Gatumdug he offered a sacrifice
and poured out fresh water. And he prayed to the god-
dess, calling her his queen and the child of the pure
heaven, who gave life to the countries and befriended
and preserved the people or the man on whom she
looked with favour.

‘¢T have no mother,”’ cried Gudea, ‘* but thou art
my mother! I have no father, but thou art a father
to me!’’ And the goddess Gatumdug gave ear to the
patesi’s prayer. Thus encouraged by her favour and
that of Ningirsu, Gudea set out for the temple of the
goddess Nina.

On his arrival at the temple, the patesi offered a

INTERPRETATION OF GUDEA’S DREAM 199

sacrifice and poured out fresh water, as he had already
done when approaching the presence of Ningirsu and
Gatumdug. And he prayed to Nina, as the goddess who
divines the secrets of the gods, beseeching her to inter-
pret the vision that had been sent to him; and he then
recounted to her the details of his dream. When the
patesi had finished his story, the goddess addressed him
and told him that she would explain the meaning of his
dream to him. And this was the interpretation of the
dream. The man whose stature was so great that it
equalled the heavens and the earth, whose head was
that of a god, at whose side was the divine eagle, whose
feet rested on the whirlwind, while a lion couched on
his right hand and on his left, was her brother, the god
Ningirsu. And the words which he uttered were an
order to the patesi that he should build the temple
E-ninnéi. And the sun which rose from the earth before
the patesi was the god Ningishzida, for like the sun
he goes forth from the earth. And the maiden who held
a pure reed in her hand, and earried the tablet with
the star, was her sister, the goddess Nidaba: the star
was the pure star of the temple’s construction, which
she proclaimed. And the second man, who was like a
warrior and carried the slab of lapis lazuli, was the god
Nindub, and the. plan of the temple which he drew was
the plan of E-ninnf. And the brick which rested in its
mould upon the cushion was the sacred brick of E-ninni.
_ And as for the ass which lay upon the ground, that, the
goddess said, was the patesi himself.

Having interpreted the. meaning of the dream, the

200 RECENT EXCAVATIONS IN WESTERN ASIA

goddess Nina proceeded to give Gudea instruction as
to how he should go to work to build the temple. She
told him first of all to go to his treasure-house and bring
forth his treasures from their sealed cases, and out of
these to make certain offerings which he was to place
near the god Ningirsu, in the temple in which he was
dwelling at that time. The offerings were to consist
of a chariot, adorned with pure metal and precious
stones; bright arrows in a quiver; the weapon of the
god, his sacred emblem, on which Gudea was to inscribe
his own name; and finally a lyre, the music of which
was wont to soothe the god when he took counsel with
himself. Nina added that if the patesi carried out her
instructions and made the offerings she had specified,
Ningirsu would reveal to him the plan on which the
temple was to be built, and would also bless him. Gudea
bowed himself down in token of his submission to the
commands of the goddess, and proceeded to execute
them forthwith. He brought out his treasures, and from
the precious woods and metals which he possessed his
craftsmen fashioned the objects he was to present, and
he set them in Ningirsu’s temple near to the god. He
worked day and night, and, having prepared a suitable
spot in the precincts of the temple at the place of judg-
ment, he spread out upon it as offerings a fat sheep
and a kid and the skin of a young female kid. Then
he built a fire of cypress and cedar and other aromatic
woods, to make a sweet savour, and, entering the inner _
chamber of the temple, he offered a prayer to Ningirsu.
He said that he wished to build the temple, but he had

A PROMISE OF ABUNDANCE 201

received no sign that this was the will of the god, and
he prayed for a sign.

While he prayed the patesi was stretched out upon
the ground, and the god, standing near his head, then
answered him. He said that he who should build his
temple was none other than Gudea, and that he would
give him the sign for which he asked. But first he
described the plan on which the temple was to be built,
naming its various shrines and chambers and describing
the manner in which they were to be fashioned and
adorned. And the god promised that when Gudea
should build the temple, the land would once more enjoy
abundance, for Ningirsu would send a wind which
‘should proclaim to the heavens the return of the waters.
And on that day the waters would fall from the heavens,
the water in the ditches and canals would rise, and
water would gush out from the dry clefts in the ground.
And the great fields would once more produce their
crops, and oil would be poured out plenteously in Sumer,
and wool would again be weighed in great abundance.
In that day the god would go to the mountain where
dwelt the whirlwind, and he would himself direct the
wind which should give the land the breath of life.
Gudea must therefore work day and night at the task
of building the temple. One company of men was to
relieve another at its toil, and during the night the men
were to kindle lights so that the plain should be as
bright as day. Thus the builders would build contin-
uously. Men were also to be sent to the mountains to
cut down cedars and pines and other trees and bring

202 RECENT EXCAVATIONS IN WESTERN ASIA

their trunks to the city, while masons were to go to
the mountaims and were to cut and transport huge
blocks of stone to be used in the construction of the
temple. Finally the god gave Gudea the sign for which
he asked. The sign was that he should feel his side
touched as by a flame, and thereby he should know that
he was the man chosen by Ningirsu to carry out his
commands. }

Gudea bowed his head in submission, and his first
act was to consult the omens, and the omens were fa-
vourable. He then proceeded to purify the city by spe-
cial rites, so that the mother when angered did not chide
her son, and the master did not strike his servant’s head,
and the mistress, though provoked by her handmaid,
did not smite her face. And Gudea drove all the evil
wizards and sorcerers from the city, and he purified and
sanctified the city completely. Then he kindled a great
fire of cedar and other aromatic woods, to make a sweet
savour for the gods, and prayers were offered day and
night; and the patesi addressed a prayer to the Anun-
naki, or Spirits of the Earth, who dwelt in Shirpurla,
and assigned a place to them in the temple. Then, hav-
ing completed his purification of the city itself, he con-
secrated its immediate surroundings. Thus he conse-
erated the district of Gu-edin, whence the revenues of
Ningirsu were derived, and the lands of the goddess
Nina with their populous villages. And he consecrated
the wild and savage bulls which no man could turn
aside, and the cedars which were sacred to Ningirsu,
and the cattle of the plains. And he consecrated the

CONSTRUCTION OF GUDEA’S TEMPLE 203

armed men, and the famous warriors, and the warriors
of the Sun-god. And the emblems of the god Ningirsu,
and of the two great goddesses, Nina and Ninni, he
installed before them in their shrines.

Then Gudea sent far and wide to fetch materials for
the construction of the temple. And the Elamite came
from Elam, and men of Susa came from Susa, and men
brought wood from the mountains of Sinai and Melukh-
kha. And into the mountain of cedars, where no man
before had penetrated, the patesi cut a road, and he
brought cedars and beams of other precious woods in
ereat quantities to the city. And he also made a road
into the mountain where stone was quarried, into places
where no man before had penetrated. And he carried
great blocks of stone down from the mountain and
loaded them into barges and brought them to the city.
And the barges brought bitumen and plaster, and they
were loaded as though they were carrying grain, and
all manner of great things were brought to the city.
Copper ore was brought from the mountain of copper
in the land of Kimash, and gold was brought in powder
from the mountains, and silver was brought from the
mountains and porphyry from the land of Melukhkha,
and marble from the mountain of marble. And the
patesi installed goldsmiths and_ silversmiths, who
wrought in these precious metals, for the adornment
of the temple; and he brought smiths who worked in
copper and lead, who were priests of Nin-tu-kalama. In
his search for fitting materials for the building of the
temple, Gudea journeyed from the lower country to the

204 RECENT EXCAVATIONS IN WESTERN ASIA

upper country, and from the upper country to the lower
country he returned.

The only other materials now wanting for the con-
struction of the temple were the sun-dried bricks of
clay, of which the temple platform and the structure
of the temple itself were in the main composed. Their
manufacture was now inaugurated by a symbolical cere-
mony carried out by the patesi in person. At dawn he
performed an ablution with the fitting rites that accom-
panied it, and when the day was more advanced he slew
a bull and a kid as sacrifices, and he then entered the
temple of Ningirsu, where he prostrated himself. And
he took the sacred mould and the fair cushion on which
it rested in the temple, and he poured a libation into the
mould. Afterwards, having made offerings of honey and
butter, and having burnt incense, he placed the cushion
and the mould upon his head and carried it to the ap-
pointed place. There he placed clay in the mould, shap-
ing it into a brick, and he left the brick in its mould
within the temple. And last of all he sprinkled oil of
cedar-wood around.

The next day at dawn Gudea broke the mould and
set the brick in the sun. And the Sun-god was rejoiced
at the brick that he had fashioned. And Gudea took
the brick and raised it on high towards the heavens,
and he earried the brick to his people. In this way the
patesi inaugurated the manufacture of the sun-dried
bricks for the temple, the sacred brick which he had
made being the symbol and pattern of the innumerable
bricks. to be used in its construction. He then marked

THE GODS HELP GUDEA 205

out the plan of the temple, and the text states that he
devoted himself to the building of the temple like a
young man who has begun building a house and allows
no pleasure to interfere with his task. And he chose
out skilled workmen and employed them on the building,
and he was filled with joy. The gods, too, are stated
to have helped with the building, for Enki fixed the
temennu of the temple, and the goddess Nina looked
after its oracles, and Gatumdug, the mother of Shir-
purla, fashioned bricks for it morning and evening,
while the goddess Bau sprinkled aromatic oil of cedar-
wood. Gudea himself laid its foundations, and as he
did so he blessed the temple seven times, comparing it
to the sacred brick, to the holy libation-vase, to the
divine eagle of Shirpurla, to a terrible couching panther,
to the beautiful heavens, to the day of offerings, and
to the morning light which brightens the land. He
caused the temple to rise towards heaven like a moun-
‘tain, or like a cedar growing in the desert. He built
it of bricks of Sumer, and the timbers which he set in
place were as strong as the dragon of the deep.

While he was engaged on the building Gudea took
counsel of the god Enki, and he built a fountain for the
gods, where they might drink. With the great stones
which he had brought and fashioned he built a reservoir
and a basin for the temple. And seven of the great
stones he set up as stele, and he gave them favourable
names. The text then recounts the various parts and
shrines of the temple, and it describes their splendours
in similes drawn from the heavens and the earth and the

206 RECENT EXCAVATIONS IN WESTERN ASIA

abyss, or deep, beneath the earth. The temple itself is
described as being like the crescent of the new moon,
or like the sun in the midst of the stars, or ike a moun-
tain of lapis lazuli, or like a mountain of shining mar-
ble. Parts of it are said to have been terrible and strong
as a savage bull, or a lion, or the antelope of the abyss,
or the monster Lakhamu who dwells in the abyss, or
the sacred leopard that inspires terror. One of the doors
of the temple was guarded by a figure of the hero who
slew the monster with six heads, and at another door
was a good dragon, and at another a lion; opposite the
city were set figures of the seven heroes, and facing the
rising sun was fixed the emblem of the Sun-god. Fig-
ures of other heroes and favourable monsters were set
up as guardians of other portions of the temple. The
fastenings of the main entrance were decorated with
dragons shooting out their tongues, and the bolt of the
great door was fashioned like a raging hound.

After this description of the construction and adorn-
ment of the temple the text goes on to narrate how
Gudea arranged for its material endowment. He stalled
oxen and sheep, for sacrifice and feasting, in the out-
houses and pens within the temple precincts, and he
heaped up grain in its granaries. Its storehouses he
filled with spices so that they were like the Tigris when
its waters are in flood, and in its treasure-chambers he
piled up precious stones, and silver, and lead in abun-
dance. Within the temple precincts he planted a sacred
garden which was like a mountain covered with vines;
and on the terrace he built a great reservoir, or tank,

TREASURES OF THE TEMPLE 207

lined with lead, in addition to the great stone reservoir
within the temple itself. He constructed a special dwell- -
ing-place for the sacred doves, and among the flowers of
the temple garden and under the shade of the great trees
the birds of heaven flew about unmolested.

The first of the two great cylinders of Gudea ends
at this point in the description of the temple, and it
is evident that its text was composed while the work
of building was still in progress. Moreover, the writing
of the cylinder was finished before the actual work of
building the temple was completed, for the last column
of the text concludes with a prayer to Ningirsu to make
it glorious during the progress of the work, the prayer
ending with the words, ‘‘ O Ningirsu, glorify it! Glorify
the temple of Ningirsu during its construction! ’’ The
text of the second of the two great cylinders is shorter
than that of the first, consisting of twenty-four instead
of thirty columns of writing, and it was composed and
written after the temple was completed. Like the first
of the cylinders, it concludes with a prayer to Ningirsu
on behalf of the temple, ending with the similar refrain,
““O Ningirsu, glorify it! Glorify the temple of Ningirsu
after its construction! ’’ The first cylinder, as we have
seen, records how it came about that Gudea decided
to rebuild the temple E-ninnii in honour of Ningirsu.
It describes how, when the land was suffering from
drought and famine, Gudea had a dream, how Nind
interpreted the dream to mean that he must rebuild the
temple, and how Ningirsu himself promised that this
act of piety would restore abundance and prosperity to

208 RECENT EXCAVATIONS IN WESTERN ASIA

the land. Its text ends with the long description of the
’ sumptuous manner in which the patesi carried out the
work, the most striking points of which we have just
summarized. The narrative of the second cylinder be-
gins at the moment when the building of the temple was
finished, and when all was ready for the great god Nin-
girsu to be installed therein, and its text is taken up
with a description of the ceremonies and rites with
which this solemn function was carried out. It presents
us with a picture, drawn from life, of the worship and
eult of the ancient Sumerians in actual operation. In
view of its importance from the point of view of the
study and comparison of the Sumerian and Babylonian
religious systems, its contents also may be summarized.
We will afterwards discuss briefly the information fur-
nished by both the cylinders on the Sumerian origin of
many of the religious beliefs and practices which were
current among the later Semitic inhabitants of Baby-
lonia and Assyria.

When Gudea had finished building the new temple of
E-ninnii, and had completed the decoration and adorn-
ment of its shrines, and had planted its gardens and
stocked its treasure-chambers and storehouses, he ap-
plied himself to the preliminary ceremonies and relig-
ious preparations which necessarily preceded the actual
function of transferring the statue of the god Ningirsu
from his old temple to his new one. Gudea’s first act
was to install the Anunnaki, or Spirits of the Earth,
in the new temple, and when he had done this, and had
supplied additional sheep for their sacrifices and food

REMOVAL OF NINGIRSU 209

in abundance for their offerings, he prayed to them to
give him their assistance and to pronounce a prayer at
his side when he should lead Ningirsu into his new
dwelling-place. The text then describes how Gudea
went to the old temple of Ningirsu, accompanied by
his protecting spirits who walked before him and behind
him. Into the old temple he carried sumptuous offer-
ings, and when he had set them before the god, he
addressed him in prayer and said: ‘‘O my King, Nin-
girsu! O Lord, who curbest the raging waters! O Lord,
whose word surpasseth all others! O Son of Enlil, O
warrior, what commands shall I faithfully carry out?
O Ningirsu, I have built thy temple, and with joy
would I lead thee therein, and my goddess Bau would

I install at thy side.’’ We are told that the god accepted
- Gudea’s prayer, and thereby he gave his consent to be
removed from the old temple of E-ninnii to his new one
which bore the same name.

But the ceremony of the god’s removal was not car-
ried out at once, for the due time had not arrived. The
year ended, and the new year came, and then ‘“ the
month of the temple’’ began. The third day of the
month was that appointed for the installation of Nin-
girsu. Gudea meanwhile had sprinkled the ground with
oil, and set out offerings of honey and butter and wine,
and grain mixed with milk, and dates, and food un-
touched by fire, to serve as food for the gods; and the
gods themselves had assisted in the preparations for
the reception of Ningirsu. The god Asaru made ready
the temple itself, and Ninmada performed the ceremony

210 RECENT EXCAVATIONS IN WESTERN ASIA

of purification. The god Enki issued oracles, and the
god Nindub, the supreme priest of Eridu, brought in-
cense. Nina performed chants within the temple, and
brought black sheep and holy cows to its folds and stalls.
This record of the help given by the other gods we may
interpret as meaning that the priests attached to the
other great Sumerian temples took part in the prepara-
tion of the new temple, and added their offerings to the
temple stores. To many of the gods, also, special shrines
within the temple were assigned.

When the purification of E-ninnfi was completed and”
the way between the old temple and the new made
ready, all the inhabitants of the city prostrated them-
selves on the ground. ‘‘ The city,’ says Gudea, ‘* was
like the mother of a sick man who prepareth a potion
for him, or like the cattle of the plain which lie down
together, or like the fierce lion, the master of the plain,
- when he coucheth.’’ During the day and the night
before the ceremony of removal, prayers and supplica-
tions were uttered, and at the first light of dawn on
the appointed day the god Ningirsu went into his new
temple ‘like a whirlwind,’ the goddess Bau entering
at his side ‘‘ like the sun rising over Shirpurla.’”’ She
entered beside his couch, like a faithful wife, whose
eares are for her own household, and she dwelt beside
his ear and bestowed abundance upon Shirpurla..

As the day began to brighten and the sun rose,
Gudea set out as offerings in the temple a fat ox and
a fat sheep, and he brought a vase of lead and filled
it with wine, which he poured out as a libation, and he

DUTIES OF THE GODS 211

performed incantations. Then, having duly established
Ningirsu and Bau in the chief shrine, he turned his
attention to the lesser gods and installed them in their
appointed places in the temple, where they would be
always ready to assist Ningirsu.in the temple cere-
monies and in the issue of his decrees for the welfare
of the city and its inhabitants. Thus he established the
god Galalim, the son of Ningirsu, in a chosen spot in
the great court in front of the temple, where, under the
orders of his father, he should direct the just and curb
the evil-doer; he would also by his presence strengthen
and preserve the temple, while his special duty was to
guard the throne of destiny and, on behalf of Ningirsu,
to place the sceptre in the hands of the reigning patesi.
Near to Ningirsu and under his orders Gudea also estab-
lished the god Dunshaga, whose function it was to sane-
tify the temple and to look after its libations and offer-
ings, and to see to the due performance of the ceremo-
nies of ablution. This god would offer water to Ningirsu
with a pure hand, he would pour out libations of wine
and strong drink, and would tend the oxen, sheep, kids,
and other offerings which were brought to the temple
night and day. To the god Lugalkurdub, who was also
installed in the temple, was assigned the privilege of
holding in his hand the mace with the seven heads, and
it was his duty to open the door of the Gate of Combat.
He guarded the sacred weapons of Ningirsu and des-
troyed the countries of his enemies. He was Ningirsu’s
chief leader in battle, and another god with lesser pow-
ers was associated with him as his second leader.

212 RECENT EXCAVATIONS IN WESTERN ASIA

Ningirsu’s counsellor was the god Lugalsisa, and he
also had his appointed place in H-ninnt. It was his
duty to receive the prayers of Shirpurla and render
them propitious; he superintended and blessed Nin-
girsu’s journey when he visited Eridu or returned from
that city, and he made special intercessions for the life
of Gudea. The minister of Ningirsu’s harim was the
god Shakanshabar, and he was installed near to Nin-
girsu that he might issue his commands, both great and
small. The keeper of the harim was the god Urizu, and
it was his duty to purify the water and sanctify the
grain, and he tended Ningirsu’s sleeping-chamber and
saw that all was arranged therein as was fitting. The
driver of Ningirsu’s chariot was the god Ensignun; it
was his duty to keep the sacred chariot as bright as the
stars of heaven, and morning and evening to tend and
feed Ningirsu’s sacred ass, called Ug-kash, and the ass
of Eridu. The shepherd of Ningirsu’s kids was the god
Enlulim, and he tended the sacred she-goat who suckled
the kids, and he guarded her so that the serpent should
not steal her milk. This god also looked after the oil
and the strong drink of E-ninnf, and saw that its store
increased.

Ningirsu’s beloved musician was the god Ushum-
gabkalama, and he was installed in E-ninnii that he
might take his flute and fill the temple court with joy.
It was his privilege to play to Ningirsu as he listened
in his hartm, and to render the life of the god pleasant
in E-ninni. Ningirsu’s singer was the god Lugaligi-
khusham, and he had his appointed place in E-ninn@, for

NINGIRSU’S DAUGHTERS 213

he could appease the heart and soften anger; he could
stop the tears which flowed from weeping eyes, and
could lessen sorrow in the sighing heart. Gudea also
installed in E-ninnii the seven twin-daughters of the
goddess Bau, all virgins, whom Ningirsu had begotten.
Their names were Zarzaru, Impaé, Urenuntaéa, Khegir-
nuna, Kheshaga, Gurmu, and Zarmu. Gudea installed
them near their father that they might offer favourable
prayers.

The cultivator of the district of Gu-edin was the god
Gishbare, and he was installed in the temple that he
might cause the great fields to be fertile, and might
make the wheat glisten in Gu-edin, the plain assigned
to Ningirsu for his revenues. It was this god’s duty
also to tend the machines for irrigation, and to raise
the water into the canals and ditches of Shirpurla, and
thus to keep the city’s granaries well filled. The god
Kal was the guardian of the fishing in Gu-edin, and his
chief duty was to place fish in the sacred pools. The
steward of Gu-edin was the god Dimgalabzu, whose duty
it was to keep the plain in good order, so that the birds
might abound there and the beasts might raise their
young in peace; he also guarded the special privilege,
which the plain enjoyed, of freedom from any tax levied
upon the increase of the cattle: pastured there. Last
of all Gudea installed in E-ninnfi the god Lugalenurua-
zagakam, who looked after the construction of houses in
the city and the building of fortresses upon the city
wall; in the temple it was his privilege to raise on high
a battle-axe made of cedar.

214 RECENT EXCAVATIONS IN WESTERN ASIA

All these lesser deities, having close relations to the
god Ningirsu, were installed by Gudea in his temple in
close proximity to him, that they might be always ready
to perform their special functions. But the greater
deities also had their share in the inauguration of the
temple, and of these Gudea specially mentions Ana,
Enlil, Ninkharsag, Enki, and Enzu, who all assisted in
rendering the temple’s lot propitious. For at least three
of the greater gods (Ana, Enlil, and the goddess Nin-
makh) Gudea erected shrines near one another and
probably within the temple’s precincts, and, as the pas-
sage which records this fact is broken, it is possible that
the missing portion of the text recorded the building of
shrines to other deities. In any case, it is clear that
the composer of the text represents all the great gods
as beholding the erection and inauguration of Ningirsu’s
new temple with favour.

After the account of the installation of Ningirsu, and
his spouse Bau, and his attendant deities, the text re-
cords the sumptuous offerings which Gudea placed
within Ningirsu’s shrine. These included another char-
iot drawn by an ass, a seven-headed battle-axe, a sword
with nine emblems, a bow with terrible arrows and a
quiver decorated with wild beasts and dragons shooting
out their tongues, and a bed which was set within the
god’s sleeping-chamber. On the couch in the shrine
the goddess Bau reclined beside her lord Ningirsu, and
ate of the great victims which were sacrificed in their
honour.

When the ceremony of installation had been success-

RESTING AND FEASTING 215

fully performed, Gudea rested, and for seven days he
feasted with his people. During this time the maid was
the equal of her mistress, and master and servant con-
sorted together as friends. The powerful and the hum-
ble man lay down side by side, and in place of evil
speech only propitious words were heard. The rich
man did not wrong the orphan and the strong man did
not oppress the widow. The laws of Nina and Ningirsu
were observed, justice was bright in the sunlight, and
the Sun-god trampled iniquity under foot. The building
of the temple also restored material prosperity to the
land, for the canals became full of water and fish
swarmed in the pools, the granaries were filled with
grain and the flocks and herds brought forth their in-
crease. The city of Shirpurla was satiated with abun-
dance.

Such is a summary of the account which Gudea has
left us of his rebuilding of the temple E-ninni, of the
reasons which led him to undertake the work, and of
the results which followed its completion. It has often
been said that the inscriptions of the ancient Sumerians
are without much intrinsic value, that they mainly con-
sist of dull votive formule, and that for general interest
the best of them cannot be compared with the later
inscriptions of the Semitic inhabitants of Mesopotamia.
This reproach, for which until recently there was con-
siderable justification, has been finally removed by the
working out of the texts upon Gudea’s eylinders. For
picturesque narrative, for wealth of detail, and for strik-
ing similes, it would be hard to find their superior in

216 RECENT EXCAVATIONS IN WESTERN ASIA

Babylonian and Assyrian literature. They are, in fact,
very remarkable compositions, and in themselves justify
the claim that the Sumerians were possessed of a litera-
ture in the proper sense of the term.

But that is not their only value, for they give a
vivid picture of ancient Sumerian life and of the ideals
and aims which actuated the people and their rulers.
The Sumerians were essentially an unmilitary race.
That they could maintain a stubborn fight for their ter-
ritory is proved by the prolonged struggle maintained
by Shirpurla against her rival Gishkhu, but neither
ruler nor people was inflamed by love of conquest for
its own sake. They were settled in a rich and fertile
country, which supplied their own wants in abundance,
and they were content to lead a peaceful life therein,
engaged in agricultural and industrial pursuits, and
devoted wholly to the worship of their gods. Gudea’s
inscriptions enable us to realize with what fervour they
earried out the rebuilding of a temple, and how the
whole resources of the nation were devoted to the suc-
cessful completion of the work. It is true that the
rebuilding of E-ninnii was undertaken in a critical
period when the land was threatened with famine, and
the peculiar magnificence with which the work was ear-
ried out may be partly explained as due to the belief
that such devotion would ensure a return of material
prosperity. But the existence of such a belief is in
itself an index to the people’s character, and we may
take it that the record faithfully represents the rela-
tions of the Sumerians to their gods, and the important

SUMERIAN WORSHIP 217

place which worship and ritual occupied in the national
life.

Moreover, the inscriptions of Gudea furnish much
valuable information with regard to the details of Sume-
rian worship and the elaborate organization of the tem-
ples. From them we can reconstruct a picture of one
of these immense buildings, with its numerous shrines
and courts, surrounded by sacred gardens and raising
its ziggurat, or temple tower, high above the surround-
ing city. Within its dark chambers were the mysterious
figures of the gods, and what little light could enter
would have been reflected in the tanks of sacred water
sunk to the level of the pavement. The air within the
shrines must have been heavy with the smell of incense
and of aromatic woods, while the deep silence would
have been broken only by the chanting of the priests
and the feet of those that bore offerings. Outside in
the sunlight cedars and other rare trees cast a pleasant
shade, and birds flew about among the flowers and
bushes in the outer courts and on the garden terraces.
The area covered by the temple buildings must have
been enormous, for they included the dwellings of the
priests, stables and pens for the cattle, sheep, and kids
employed for sacrifice, and treasure-chambers and store-
houses and granaries for the produce from the temple
lands. |

We also get much information with regard to the
nature of the offerings and the character of the cere-
monies which were performed. We may mention as
of peculiar interest Gudea’s symbolical rite which pre-

218 RECENT EXCAVATIONS IN WESTERN ASIA

ceded the making of the sun-dried bricks, and the cere-
mony of the installation of Ningirsu in the presence of
the prostrate city. The texts also throw an interesting
light on the truly Oriental manner in which, when ap-
proaching one deity for help, the codperation and assist-
ance of other deities were first secured. Thus Gudea
solicited the intercession of Ningirsu and Gatumdug
before applying to the goddess Nina to interpret his
dream. The extremely human character of the gods
themselves is also well illustrated. Thus we gather from
the texts that Ningirsu’s temple was arranged like the
palace of a Sumerian ruler and that he was surrounded
by gods who took the place of the attendants and min-
isters of his human counterpart. His son was installed
in a place of honour and shared with him the responsi-
bility of government. Another god was his personal
attendant and cupbearer, who offered him fair water
and looked after the ablutions. Two more were his
generals, who secured his country against the attacks
of foes. Another was his counsellor, who received and
presented petitions from his subjects and superintended
his journeys. Another was the head of his harim, a
position of great trust and responsibility, while a keeper
of the harim looked after the practical details. Another
god was the driver of his chariot, and it is interesting
to note that the chariot was drawn by an ass, for horses
were not introduced into Western Asia until a much
later period. Other gods performed the functions of
head shepherd, chief musician, chief singer, head culti-
vator and inspector of irrigation, inspector of the fish-

INTERESTING CONCLUSIONS 219

ing, land steward, and architect. His household also
included his wife and his seven virgin daughters. In
addition to the account of the various functions per-
formed by these lesser deities, the texts also furnish
valuable facts with regard to the characters and attri-
butes of the greater gods and goddesses, such as the
attributes of Ningirsu himself, and the character of Nin4 .
as the goddess who divined and interpreted the secrets
of the gods.

But perhaps the most interesting conclusions to be
drawn from the texts relate to the influence exerted by
the ancient Sumerians upon Semitic beliefs and prac-
tices. It has, of course, long been recognized that the
later Semitic inhabitants of Babylonia and Assyria drew
most of their culture from the Sumerians, whom they
displaced and absorbed. Their system of writing, the
general structure of their temples, the ritual of their
worship, the majority of their religious compositions,
and many of their gods themselves are to be traced to
a Sumerian origin, and much of the information ob-
tained from the cylinders of Gudea merely confirms or
illustrates the conclusions already deduced from other
sources. As instances we may mention the belief in
spirits, which is illustrated by the importance attached
to the placating of the Anunnaki, or Spirits of the
Earth, to whom a special place and special offerings
were assigned in E-ninnti. The Sumerian origin of cere-
monies of purification is confirmed by Gudea’s purifica-
tion of the city before beginning the building of the
temple, and again before the transference of the god

220 RECENT EXCAVATIONS IN WESTERN ASIA

from his old temple to the new one. The consultation
of omens, which was so marked a feature of Babylonian
and Assyrian life, is seen in actual operation under the
Sumerians; for, even after Gudea had received direct
instructions from Ningirsu to begin building his tem-
ple, he did not proceed to carry them out until he had
consulted the omens and found that they were favour-
able. Moreover, the references to mythological beings,
such as the seven heroes, the dragon of the deep, and
the god who slew the dragon, confirm the opinion that
the creation legends and other mythological composi-
tions of the Babylonians were derived by them from
Sumerian sources. But there are two incidents in the
narrative which are on a rather different plane and are
more startling in their novelty. One is the story of
Gudea’s dream, and the other the sign which he sought
from his god. The former is distinctly apocalyptic in
character, and both may be parallelled in what is re-
garded as purely Semitic literature. That such concep-
tions existed among the Sumerians is a most interesting
fact, and although the theory of independent origin is
possible, their existence may well have influenced later
Semitic beliefs.

CHAPTER V

ELAM AND BABYLON, THE COUNTRY OF THE SEA AND
THE KASSITES

P to five years ago our knowledge of Elam and of

the part she played in the ancient world was derived,
in the main, from a few allusions to the country to be
found in the records of Babylonian and Assyrian kings.
Tt is true that a few inscriptions of the native rulers had
been found in Persia, but they belonged to the late peri-
ods of her history, and the majority consisted of short
dedicatory formule and did not supply us with much
historical information. But the excavations carried on
since then by M. de Morgan at Susa have revealed an
entirely new chapter of ancient Oriental history, and
have thrown a flood of light upon the position occupied
by Elam among the early races of the East.

Lying to the north of the Persian Gulf and to the
east of the Tigris, and rising from the broad plains
nearer the coast to the mountainous districts within its
borders on the east and north, Elam was one of the
nearest neighbours of Chaldea. A few facts concerning

her relations with Babylonia during certain periods of
221

222 ELAM AND BABYLON

her history have long been known, and her struggles
with the later kings of Assyria are known in some
detail; but for her history during the earliest periods
we have had to,trust mainly to conjecture. That in the
earlier as in the later periods she should have been in
constant antagonism with Babylonia might legitimately
be suspected, and it is not surprising that we should
find an echo of her early struggles with Chaldza in the
legends which were current in the Jater periods of Baby-
lonian history. In the fourth and fifth tablets, or sec-
tions, of the great Babylonian epic which describes the
exploits of the Babylonian hero Gilgamesh, a story is
told of an expedition undertaken by Gilgamesh and his
friend EKa-bani against an Elamite despot named Khum-
baba. It is related in the poem that Khumbaba was
feared by all who dwelt near him, for his roaring was
like the storm, and any man perished who was rash
enough to enter the cedar-wood in which he dwelt. But
Gilgamesh, encouraged by a dream sent him by Sha-
mash, the Sun-god, pressed on with his friend, and,
having entered the wood, succeeded in slaying Khum-
baba and in cutting off his head. This legend is doubt-
less based on episodes in early Babylonian and Hlamite
history. Khumbaba may not have been an actual his-
torical ruler, but at least he represents or personifies
the power of Elam, and the success of Gilgamesh no
doubt reflects the aspirations with which many a Baby-
lonian expedition set out for the Elamite frontier.
Incidentally it may be noted that the legend possibly
had a still closer historical parallel, for the name of

ELAM’S STRUGGLES WITH CHALDAA 223

Khumbaba occurs as a component in a proper name
upon one of the Elamite contracts found recently by
M. de Morgan at Mal-Amir. The name in question is
written Khumbaba-arad-th, ‘‘ Khumbaba, the servant
of God,”’ and it proves that at the date at which the
contract was written (about 13800-1000 B.c.) the name
of Khumbaba was still held in remembrance, possibly
as that of an early historical ruler of the country.

In her struggles with Chaldzea, Elam was not suc-
cessful during the earliest historical period of which
we have obtained information; and, so far as we can
tell at present, her princes long continued to own alle-
giance to the Semitic rulers whose influence was pre-
dominant from time to time in the plains of Lower.
Mesopotamia. Tradition relates that two of the earliest
Semitic rulers whose names are known to us, Sargon
and Nardm-Sin, kings of Agade, held sway in Elam,
for in the ‘‘ Omens ”’ which were current in a later
period concerning them, the former is credited with the
conquest of the whole country, while of the latter it is
related that he conquered Apirak, an Elamite district,
and captured its king. Some doubts were formerly cast
upon these traditions inasmuch as they were found in
a text containing omens or forecasts, but these doubts
were removed by the discovery of contemporary docu-
ments by which the later traditions were confirmed.
Sargon’s conquest of Elam, for instance, was proved
to be historical by a reference to the event in a date-
formula upon tablets belonging to his reign. Moreover,
the event has received further confirmation from an

224 ELAM AND BABYLON

unpublished tablet in the British Museum, containing
a copy of the original chronicle from which the histori-
eal extracts in the ‘‘ Omens ”’ were derived. The por-
tion of the composition inscribed upon this tablet does
not contain the lines referring to Sargon’s conquest of
Hlam, for these occurred in an earlier section of the
composition; but the recovery of the tablet puts beyond
a doubt the historical character of the traditions pre-
served upon the omen-tablet as a whole, and the con-
quest of Elam is thus confirmed by inference. The new
text does recount the expedition undertaken by Naram-
Sin, the son of Sargon, against Apirak, and so furnishes
a direct confirmation of this event.

Another early conqueror of Elam, who was probably
of Semitic origin, was Alu-usharshid, king of the city
of Kish, for, from a number of his inscriptions found
near those of Sargon at Nippur in Babylonia, we learn
that he subdued Elam and Para’se, the district in which
the city of Susa was probably situated. From a small
mace-head preserved in the British Museum we know
of another conquest of Elam by a Semitic ruler of this
early period. The mace-head was made and engraved
by the orders of Mutabil, an early governor of the city
of Dar-ilu, to commemorate his own valour as the man
‘¢ who smote the head of the hosts ’’ of Elam. Mutabil
was not himself an independent ruler, and his conquest
of Elam must have been undertaken on behalf of the
suzerain to whom he owed allegiance, and thus his vic-
tory cannot be classed in the same category as those
of his predecessors. A similar remark applies to the

LIGHT FROM SUSA 225

success against the city of Anshan in Elam, achieved
by Gudea, the Sumerian ruler of Shirpurla, inasmuch
as he was a patesi, or viceroy, and not an independent
king. Of greater duration was the influence exercised
over Hlam by the kings of Ur, for bricks and contract-
tablets have been found at Susa proving that Dungi,
one of the most powerful kings of Ur, and Bur-Sin, Ine-
Sin, and Gamil-Sin, kings of the second dynasty in that
city, all in turn included Elam within the limits of their
empire.

Such are the main facts which until recently had
been ascertained with regard to the influence of early
Babylonian rulers in Elam. The information is obtained
mainly from Babylonian sources, and until recently we
have been unable to fill in any details of the picture
from the Elamite side. But this inability has now been
removed by M. de Morgan’s discoveries. From the
inscribed bricks, cones, stele, and statues that have been
brought to light in the course of his excavations at Susa,
we have recovered the name of a succession of native
Elamite rulers. All those who are to be assigned to
this early period, during which Elam owed allegiance
to the kings of Babylonia, ascribe to themselves the
title of patest, or viceroy, of Susa, in acknowledgment
of their dependence. Their records consist principally
of building inscriptions and foundation memorials, and
they commemorate the construction or repair of temples,
the cutting of canals, and the like. They do not, there-
fore, throw much light upon the problems connected
with the external history of Elam during this early

226 ELAM AND BABYLON

period, but we obtain from them a glimpse of the in-
ternal administration of the country. We see a nation
without ambition to extend its boundaries, and content,
at any rate for the time, to owe allegiance to foreign
rulers, while the energies of its native princes are de-
voted exclusively to the cultivation of the worship of
the gods and to the amelioration of the conditions of the
life of the people in their charge.

A difficult but interesting problem presents itself for
solution at the outset of our inquiry into the history of
this people as revealed by their lately recovered inscrip-
tions,—the problem of their race and origin. Found at
Susa in Elam, and inscribed by princes bearing purely
Elamite names, we should expect these votive and me-
morial texts to be written entirely in the Elamite lan-
guage. But such is not the case, for many of them
are written in good Semitic Babylonian. While some
are entirely composed in the tongue which we term
Elamite or Anzanite, others, so far as their language
and style is concerned, might have been written by any
early Semitic king ruling in Babylonia. Why did early
princes of Susa make this use of the Babylonian tongue?

At first sight it might seem possible to trace a par-
allel in the use of the Babylonian language by kings and
. officials in Egypt and Syria during the fifteenth cen-
| tury B. C., as revealed in the letters from Tell el-Amarna.
But a moment’s thought will show that the cases are
not similar. The Egyptian or Syrian scribe employed
Babylonian as a medium for his official foreign corre-
spondence because Babylonian at that period was the

PURPOSE OF ELAMITE MEMORIALS 227

lingua franca of the East. But the object of the early
Elamite rulers was totally different. Their inscribed
bricks and memorial stele were not intended for the eyes
of foreigners, but for those of their own descendants.
Built into the structure of a temple, or buried beneath
the edifice, one of their principal objects was to preserve
the name and deeds of the writer from oblivion. Like
similar documents found on the sites of Assyrian and
Babylonian cities, they sometimes include curses upon
any impious man, who, on finding the inscription after
the temple shall have fallen into ruins, should in any
way injure the inscription or deface the writer’s name.
It will be obvious that the writers of these inscriptions
intended that they should be intelligible to those who
might come across them in the future. If, therefore,
they employed the Babylonian as well as the Elamite
language, it is clear that they expected that their future
readers might be either Babylonian or Elamite; and this
belief can only be explained on the supposition that
their own subjects were of mixed race.

It is therefore certain that at this early period of
Elamite history Semitic Babylonians and Elamites dwelt
side by side in Susa and retained their separate lan-
guages. The problem therefore resolves itself into the
inquiry: which of these two peoples occupied the coun-
try first? Were the Semites at first in sole possession,
which was afterwards disputed by the incursion of
Elamite tribes from the north and east? Or were the
Elamites the original inhabitants of the land, into which
the Semites subsequently pressed from Babylonia?

228 ELAM AND BABYLON

A similar mixture of races is met with in Babylonia
itself in the early period of the history of that country.
There the early Sumerian inhabitants were gradually
dispossessed by the invading Semite, who adopted the
civilization of the conquered race, and took over the
system of cuneiform writing, which he modified to suit
his own language. In Babylonia the Semites eventually
predominated and the Sumerians as a race disappeared,
but during the process of absorption the two languages
were employed indiscriminately. The kings of the First
Babylonian Dynasty wrote their votive inscriptions
sometimes in Sumerian, sometimes in Semitic Baby-
lonian; at other times they employed both languages
for the same text, writing the record first in Sumerian
and afterwards appending a Semitic translation by the
side; and in the legal and commercial documents of the
period the old Sumerian legal forms and phrases were
retained intact. In Elam we may suppose that the use
of the Sumerian and Semitic languages was the same.

It may be surmised, however, that the first Semitic
incursions into Elam took place at a much later period
than those into Babylonia, and under very different con-
ditions. When overrunning the plains and cities of the
Sumerians, the Semites were comparatively uncivilized,
and, so far as we know, without a system of writing of
their own. The incursions into Elam must have taken
place under the great Semitic conquerors, such as Sar-
gon and Narém-Sin and Alu-usharshid. At this period
they had fully adopted and modified the Sumerian char-
acters to express their own Semitic tongue, and on their

BABYLONIAN INSCRIPTIONS IN ELAM 229

invasion of Elam they brought their system of writing
with them. The native princes of Elam, whom they
conquered, adopted it in turn for many of their votive
texts and inscribed monuments when they wished to
write them in the Babylonian language.

Such is the most probable explanation of the occur-
rence in Elam of inscriptions in the Old Babylonian lan-
guage, written by native princes concerning purely
domestic matters. But a further question now suggests
itself. Assuming that this was the order in which
events took place, are we to suppose that the first
Semitic invaders of Elam found there a native popula-
tion in a totally undeveloped stage of civilization? Or
did they find a population enjoying a comparatively
high state of culture, different from their own, which
they proceeded to modify and transform? Luckily, we
have not to fall back on conjecture for an answer to
these questions, for a recent discovery at Susa has fur-
nished material from which it is possible to reconstruct
in outline the state of culture of these early Elamites.

This interesting discovery consists of a number of
clay tablets inscribed in the proto-Elamite system of
writing, a system which was probably the only one in
use in the country during the period before the Semitic
invasion. The documents in question are small, roughly
formed tablets of clay very similar to those employed
in the early periods of Babylonian history, but the signs
and characters impressed upon them offer the greatest
contrast to the Sumerian and early Babylonian char-
acters with which we are familiar. Although they can-

230 ELAM AND BABYLON

not be fully deciphered at present, it is probable that
they are tablets of accounts, the signs upon them con-
sisting of lists of figures and what are probably ideo-
graphs for things. Some of the ideographs, such as that

CLAY TABLET, FOUND AT SUSA, BEARING AN INSCRIPTION-
IN THE EARLY PROTO-ELAMITE CHARACTER.

The photograph is ALON oe Hee Morgan's Délégation en
for ‘‘ tablet,’’ with which many of the texts begin, are
very similar to the Sumerian or Babylonian signs for
the same objects; but the majority are entirely different
and have been formed and developed upon a system of
their own. On these tablets, in fact, we have a new

PROTO-ELAMITE CLAY TABLETS 231

class of cuneiform writing in an early stage of its devel-
opment, when the hieroglyphic or pictorial character of
the ideographs was still prominent. Although the mean- -
ing of the majority of these ideographs has not yet been
identified, Pére Scheil, who has edited the texts, has

CLAY TABLET, RECENTLY FOUND AT SUSA, BEARING AN INSCRIP-
TION IN THE EARLY PROTO-ELAMITE CHARACTER.

The photograph is a eA i M. hel cal Délégation en
erse, Mém., t. vi, pl. 22.

succeeded in making out the system of numeration. He
has identified the signs for unity, 10, 100, and 1,000, and
for certain fractions,’ and the signs for these figures are
quite different from those employed by the Sumerians.

LE. g. 4, 4, 3,4, 3, 4,4, 4, 3 tn ty Hy, etc. See Delegation en Perse, Meé-
moires, tome vi (1905), pp. 115 #7

232 ELAM AND BABYLON

The system, too, is different, for it is a decimal, and not
a sexagesimal, system of numeration.

That in its origin this form of writing had some
connection with that employed and, so far as we know,
invented by the ancient Sumerians is possible.*’ But it
shows small trace of Sumerian influence, and the dispar-
ity in the two systems of numeration is a clear indica-
tion that, at any rate, it broke off and was isolated from
the latter at a very early period. Having once been
adopted by the early Elamites, it continued to be used
by them for long periods with but small change or modi-
fication. Employed far from the centre of Sumerian
civilization, its development was slow, and it seems to
have remained in its ideographic state, while the system
employed by the Sumerians, and adopted by the Semitic
Babylonians, was developed along syllabic lines.

It was without doubt this proto-Elamite system of
writing which the Semites from Babylonia found em-
ployed in Elam on their first incursions into that coun-
try. They brought with them their own more conve-
nient form of writing, and, when the country. had once
been finally subdued, the subject EHlamite princes
adopted the foreign system of writing and language
from their conquerors for memorial and monumental
inscriptions. But the ancient native writing was not

1Tt is, of course, also possible that the system of writing had no connection
in its origin with that of the Sumerians, and was invented independently of
the system employed in Babylonia. In that case, the signs which resemble cer-
tain of the Sumerian characters must have been adopted in a later stage of its
development. Though it would be rash to dogmatize on the subject, the view
that connects its origin with the Sumerians appears on the whole to fit in best
with the evidence at present available.

MODIFIED BABYLONIAN WRITING 233

entirely ousted, and continued to be employed by the
common people of Elam for the ordinary purposes of
daily life. That this was the case at least until the
reign of Karibu-sha-Shu-
shinak, one of the early sub-
ject native rulers, is clear
from one of his inscriptions
engraved upon a block of
limestone to commemorate
the dedication of what were
probably ‘some temple furnish-
ings in honour of the god Shu-
shinak. The main part of the
inscription is written in Sem-
itic Babylonian, and below
there is an addition to the
text written in proto-Elamite
characters, probably enumer-
ating the offerings which the
Karibu-sha-Shushinak de-
creed should be made for the
future in honour of the god.

In course of time this proto- Tae HEUNEE (UR eae
Blamite system of writing by qytitnv-tssemmnan 0
means.of ideographs seéms' to -sty* Men et Pate, Mm. t. v1,
have died out, and a modified form of the Babylonian
system was adopted by the Elamites for writing their
own language phonetically. It is in this phonetic char-

*We have assumed that both inscriptions were the work of Karibu-sha-
Shushinak. But it is also possible that the second one in proto-Elamite charac-

234 ELAM AND BABYLON

acter that the so-called ‘‘ Anzanite ’’ texts of the later
Hlamite princes were composed.

Karibu-sha-Shushinak, whose recently discovered
bilingual inscription has been referred to above, was
one of the earlier of the subject princes of Elam, and
he probably reigned at Susa not later than B.c. 3000.
He styles himself ‘‘ patesi of Susa, governor of the land
of Elam,’’ but we do not know at present to what con-
temporary king in Babylonia he owed allegiance. The
longest of his inscriptions that have been recovered is
engraved upon a stele of limestone and records the
building of the Gate of Shushinak at Susa and the cut-
ting of a canal; it also recounts the offerings which
Karibu-sha-Shushinak dedicated on the completion of
the work. It may here be quoted as an example of the
class of votive inscriptions from which the names of
these early Elamite rulers have been recovered. The
inscription runs as follows: ‘‘ For the god Shushinak,
his lord, Karibu-sha-Shushinak, the son of Shimbi-ish-
khuk, patesi of Susa, governor of the land of Elam,—
when he set the (door) of his Gate in place, . . . in the
Gate of the god Shushinak, his lord, and when he had
opened the canal of. Sidur, he set up in face thereof his
canopy, and he set planks of cedar-wood for its gate.
A sheep in the interior thereof, and sheep without, he
appointed (for sacrifice) to him each day. On days of
festival he caused the people to sing songs in the Gate

ters was added at a later period. From {ts position on the stone it is clear that
it was written after and not before Karibu-sha-Shushinak’s inscription in
Semitic Babylonian. See the photographic reproduction.

A VOTIVE INSCRIPTION 235

of the god Shushinak. And twenty measures of fine
oil he dedicated to make his gate beautiful. Four magi
of silver he dedicated; a censer of silver and gold he
dedicated for a sweet odour; a sword he dedicated; an
axe with four blades he dedicated, and he dedicated sil-
ver in addition for the mounting thereof. ... A right-
eous judgment he judged in the city! As for the man
who shall transgress his judgment or shall remove his
gift, may the gods Shushinak and Shamash, Bél and Ha,
Ninni and Sin, Ninkharsag and Nati— may all the
gods uproot his foundation, and his seed may they
destroy! ’’

It will be seen that Karibu-sha-Shushinak takes a
delight in enumerating the details of the offerings he
has ordained in honour of his city-god Shushinak, and
this religious temper is peculiarly characteristic of the
princes of Elam throughout the whole course of their
history. Another interesting point to notice in the in-
scription is that, although the writer invokes Shushinak,
his own god, and puts his name at the head of the list
of deities whose vengeance he implores upon the impi-
ous, he also calls upon the gods of the Babylonians.
As he wrote the inscription itself in Babylonian, in the
belief that it might be recovered by some future Semitic
inhabitant of his country, so he included in his impre-
cations those deities whose names he conceived would
be most reverenced by such a reader. In addition to
Karibu-sha-Shushinak the names of a number of other —
patesis, or viceroys, have recently been recovered, such
as Khutran-tepti, and Idadu I and his son Kal-Rukhu-

236 ELAM AND BABYLON

ratir, and his grandson Idadu II. All these probably
ruled after Karibu-sha-Shushinak, and may be set in
the early period of Babylonian supremacy in Elam.

It has been stated above that the allegiance which
these early Elamite princes owed to their overlords in
Babylonia was probably reflected in the titles which
they bear upon their inscriptions recently found at Susa.
These titles are ‘‘ patesi of Susa, shakkannak of Elam,’’
which may be rendered as ‘‘ viceroy of Susa, governor
of Elam.’’ But inscriptions have been found on the
same site belonging to another series of rulers, to whom
a different title is applied. Instead of referring to them-
selves as viceroys of Susa and governors of Elam, they
bear the title of suwkkal of Elam, of Siparki, and of Susa.
Siparki, or Sipar, was probably the name of an impor-
tant section of Elamite territory, and the title sukkalu,
‘“‘ ruler,’’ probably carries with it an idea of independ-
ence of foreign control which is absent from the title of
patest. It is therefore legitimate to trace this change
of title to a corresponding change in the political condi-
tion of Elam; and there is much to be said for the view
that the rulers of Elam who bore the title of sukkalu
reigned at a period when Elam herself was independent,
and may possibly have exercised a suzerainty over the
neighbouring districts of Babylonia.

The worker of this change in the political condition
of Hlam and the author of her independence was a king
named Kutir-Nakhkhunte or Kutir-Na’khunde, whose
name and deeds have been preserved in later Assyrian
records, where he is termed Kudur-Nankhundi and

ASCENDENCY OF KUTIR-NAKHKHUNTE 237

Kudur-Nakhundu.* This ruler, according to the Assyr-
ian king Ashur-bani-pal, was not content with throw-
ing off the yoke under which his land had laboured for
so long, but carried war into the country of his suze-
rain and marched through Babylonia devastating and
despoiling the principal cities. This successful Elamite
campaign took place, according to the computation of the
later Assyrian scribes, about the year 2280 B.c., and it
is probable that for many years afterwards the author-
ity of the King of Elam extended over the plains of.
Babylonia. It has been suggested that Kutir-Nakh-
khunte, after including Babylonia within his empire,
did not remain permanently in Elam, but may have
resided for a part of each year, at least, in Lower Meso-
potamia. His object, no doubt, would have been to
superintend in person the administration of his empire
and to check any growing spirit of independence among
his local governors. He may thus have appointed in
Susa itself a local governor who would carry on the
business of the country during his absence, and, under
the king himself, would wield supreme authority. Such
governors may have been the sukkali, who, unlike the
patesi, were independent of foreign control, but yet did
not enjoy the full title of ‘‘ king.’’

It is possible that the sukkalu who ruled in Elam
during the reign of Kutir-Nakhkhunte was named
Temti-agun, for a short inscription of this ruler has
been recovered, in which he records that he built and

1 For references to the passages where the name occurs, see King, Letters of
Hammurabi, vol. i, p. lv f.

238 ELAM AND BABYLON

dedicated a certain temple with the object of ensuring
the preservation of the life of Kutir-Na’khundi. If we
may identify the Kutir-Na’khundi of this text with the
great Elamite conqueror, Kutir-Nakhkhunte, it follows
that Temti-agun, the sukkal of Susa, was his subordi-
nate.’ The inscription mentions other names which are
possibly those of rulers of this period, and reads as
follows: ‘‘ Temti-agun, sukkal of Susa, the son of the
sister of Sirukdu’, hath built a temple of bricks at
Ishme-karab for the preservation of the life of Kutir-
Na’khundi, and for the preservation of the life of Lila-
irtash, and for the preservation of his own life, and for
the preservation of the life of Temti-khisha-khanesh and
of Pil-kishamma-khashduk.’’ As Lila-irtash is men-
tioned immediately after Kutir-Na’khundi, he was possi-
bly his son, and he may have succeeded him as ruler of
the empire of Elam and Babylonia, though no confirma-
tion of this view has yet been discovered. Temti-khisha-
khanesh is mentioned immediately after the reference
to the preservation of the life of Temti-agun himself,
and it may be conjectured that the name was that of
Temti-agun’s son, or possibly that of his wife, in which
event the last two personages mentioned in the text
may have been the sons of Temti-agun.

This short text affords a good example of one class
of votive inscriptions from which it is possible to re-
cover the names of Elamite rulers of this period, and
it illustrates the uncertainty which at present attaches
to the identification of the names themselves and the
order in which they are to be arranged. Such uncer-

ELAM’S CLAIMS DISPUTED 239

tainty necessarily exists when only a few texts have
been recovered, and it will disappear with the discovery
of additional monuments by which the results already
arrived at may be checked. We need not here enumer-
ate all the names of the later Elamite rulers which have
been found in the numerous votive inscriptions recov-
ered during the recent excavations at Susa. The order
in which they should be arranged is still a matter of
considerable uncertainty, and the facts recorded by them
in such inscriptions as we possess mainly concern the
building and restoration of Elamite temples and the
decoration of shrines, and they are thus of no great
historical interest. These votive texts are well illus-
trated by a remarkable find of foundation deposits made
last year by M. de Morgan in the temple of Shushinak
at Susa, consisting of figures and jewelry of gold and
silver, and objects of lead, bronze, iron, stone, and ivory,
cylinder-seals, mace-heads, vases, etc. This is the rich-
est foundation deposit that has been recovered on any
ancient site, and its archeological interest in connection
with the development of Elamite art is great. But in
no other way does the find affect our conception of the
history of the country, and we may therefore pass on
to a consideration of such recent discoveries as throw
new light upon the course of history in Western Asia.
With the advent of the First Dynasty in Babylon
Elam found herself face to face with a power prepared
to dispute her claims to exercise a suzerainty over the
plains of Mesopotamia. It is held by many writers that
the First Dynasty of Babylon was of Arab origin, and

240 ELAM AND BABYLON

there is much to be said for this view. M. Pognon was
the first to start the theory that its kings were not
purely Babylonian, but were of either Arab or Aramean
extraction, and he based his theory on a study of the
forms of the names which some of them bore. The
name of Samsu-iluna, for instance, means ‘‘ the sun is
our god,”’ but the form of the words of which the name
is composed betray foreign influence. Thus in Baby-
lonian the name for ‘‘ sun’’ or the Sun-god would be
Shamash or Shamshu, not Samsu; in the second half
of the name, while ilu (‘‘ god ’’) is good Babylonian, the
ending na, which is the pronominal suffix of the first
person plural, is not Babylonian, but Arabic. We need
not here enter into a long philological discussion, and
the instance already cited may suffice to show in what
way many of the names met in the Babylonian inscrip-
tions of this period betray a foreign, and possibly an
Arabic, origin. But whether we assign the forms of
these names to Arabic influence or not, it may be re-
garded as certain that the First Dynasty of Babylon
had its origin in the incursion into Babylonia of a new
wave of Semitic immigration. The invading Semites
brought with them fresh blood and unexhausted energy,
and, finding many of their own race in scattered cities
and settlements throughout the country, they succeeded
in establishing a purely Semitic dynasty, with its capital
at Babylon, and set about the task of freeing the coun-
try from any vestiges of foreign control. Many cen-
turies earlier Semitic kings had ruled in Babylonian
cities, and Semitic empires had been formed there. Sar-

Brick Stamped with an Inscription of Kudur-mabug.
Photograph by Messrs. Mansell & Co.

BABYLONIAN SYSTEM OF DATING 244

gon and Naram-Sin, having their capital at Agade, had
established their control over a considerable area of
Western Asia and had held Elam as a province. But
so far-as Elam was concerned Kutir-Nakhkhunte had
reversed the balance and had raised Elam to the position
of the predominant power.

Of the struggles and campaigns of the earlier kings
of the First Dynasty of Babylon we know little, for,
although we possess a considerable number of legal and
commercial documents of the period, we have recov-
ered no strictly historical inscriptions. Our main source
of information is the dates upon these documents,
which are not dated by the years of the reigning king,
but on a system adopted by the early Babylonian kings
from their Sumerian predecessors. In the later periods
of Babylonian history tablets were dated in the year of
the king who was reigning at the time the document
was drawn up, but this simple system had not been
adopted at this early period. In place of this we find
that each year was cited by the event of greatest impor-
tance which occurred in that year. This event might
be the cutting of a canal, when the year in which this
took place might be referred to as ‘‘ the year in which
the canal named Ai-khegallu was cut; ’’ or it might be
the building of a temple, as in the date-formula, ‘‘ the
year in which the great temple of the Moon-god was
built; ’’ or it might be the conquest of a city, such as
‘* the year in which the city of Kish was destroyed.”’
Now it will be obvious that this system of dating
had many disadvantages. An event might be of great

242 ELAM AND BABYLON

importance for one city, while it might never have been
heard of in another district; thus it sometimes hap-
pened that the same event was not adopted throughout
the whole country for designating a particular year,
and the result was that different systems of dating were
employed in different parts of Babylonia. Moreover,
when a particular system had been in use for a con-
siderable time, it required a very good memory to retain
the order and period of the various events referred to
in the date-formule, so as to fix in a moment the
date of a document by its mention of one of them. In
order to assist themselves in their task of fixing dates
in this manner, the scribes of the First Dynasty of
Babylon drew up lists of the titles of the years, arranged
in chronological order under the reigns of the kings to
which they referred. Some of these lists have been re-
covered, and they are of the greatest assistance in fixing
the chronology, while at the same time they furnish us
with considerable information concerning the history
of the period of which we should otherwise have been
in ignorance.

From these lists of date-formule, and from the dates
themselves which are found upon the legal and com-
mercial tablets of the period, we learn that Kish, Ka-
sallu, and Isin all gave trouble to the earlier kings of
the First Dynasty, and had in turn to be subdued. Elam
did not watch the diminution of her influence in Baby-
lonia without a struggle to retain it. Under Kudur-
mabug, who was prince or governor of the districts
lying along the frontier of Elam, the Elamites strug-

STRUGGLE BETWEEN ELAM AND BABYLONIA 243

gled hard to maintain their position in Babylonia, mak-
ing the city of Ur the centre from which they sought
to check the growing power of Babylon. From bricks
that have been recovered from Mukayyer, the site of the
city of Ur, we learn that Kudur-mabug rebuilt the tem-
ple in that city dedicated to the Moon-god, which is an
indication of the firm hold he had obtained upon the
city. It was obvious to the new Semitic dynasty in
Babylon that, until Ur and the neighbouring city of
Larsam had been captured, they could entertain no hope
of removing the Elamite yoke from Southern Babylonia.
It is probable that the earlier kings of the dynasty made
many attempts to capture them, with varying success.
An echo of one of their struggles in which they claimed
the victory may be seen in the date-formula for the
fourteenth year of the reign of Sin-muballit, Hammu-
rabi’s father and predecessor on the throne of Babylon.
This year was referred to in the documents of the period
as “‘ the year in which the people of Ur were slain with
the sword.’’ It will be noted that the capture’ of the
city is not commemorated, so that we may infer that
the slaughter of the Elamites which is recorded did not
materially reduce their influence, as they were left in
possession of their principal stronghold. In fact, Elam
was not signally defeated in the reign of Kudur-mabug,
but in that of his son Rim-Sin. From the date-formule
of Hammurabi’s reign we learn that the struggle be-
tween EKlam and Babylon was brought to a climax in
the thirtieth year of his reign, when it is recorded in
the formule that he defeated the Elamite army and

244 ELAM AND BABYLONIA

overthrew Rim-Sin, while in the following year we
gather that he added the land of Emutbal, that is, the
western district of Elam, to his dominions.

An unpublished chronicle in the British Museum
gives us further details of Hammurabi’s victory over
the Elamites, and at the same time makes it clear that
the defeat and overthrow of Rim-Sin was not so crush-
ing as has hitherto been supposed. This chronicle re-
lates that Hammurabi attacked Rim-Sin, and, after
capturing the cities of Ur and Larsam, carried their
spoil to Babylon. Up to the present it has been sup-
posed that Hammurabi’s victory marked the end of
-Elamite influence in Babylonia, and that thenceforward
the supremacy of Babylon was established throughout
the whole of the country. But from the new chronicle
we gather that Hammurabi did not succeed in finally
suppressing the attempts of Elam to regain her former
position. It is true that the cities of Ur and Larsam
were finally incorporated in the Babylonian empire, and
the letters of Hammurabi to Sin-idinnam, the governor
whom he placed in authority over Larsam, afford abun-
dant evidence of the stringency of the administrative
control which he established over Southern Babylonia.
But Rim-Sin was only crippled for the time, and, on
being driven from Ur and Larsam, he retired beyond
the Elamite frontier and devoted his energies to the
recuperation of his forces against the time when he
should feel himself strong enough again to make a bid.
for victory in his struggle against the growing power
of Babylon. It is probable that he made no further

RIM-SIN’S FINAL STRUGGLE 245

attempt to renew the contest during the life of Hammu-
rabi, but after Samsu-iluna, the son of Hammurabi, had
succeeded to the Babylonian throne, he appeared in

SEMITIC BABYLONIAN CONTRACT - TABLET, INSCRIBED IN THE REIGN OF HAM-
MURABI WITH A DEED RECORDING THE DIVISION OF PROPERTY.

The actual tablet is on the right ; that which appears to be another and larger tablet on
the left is the hollow clay case in which the tablet on the right was originally enclosed.
Photograph by Messrs. Mansell & Co.

Babylonia at the head of the forces he had collected,
and attempted to regain the cities and territory he had
lost. The portion of the text of the chronicle relating

246 ELAM AND BABYLON

to the war between Rim-Sin and Samsu-iluna is broken
so that it is not possible to follow the campaign in detail,
but it appears that Samsu-iluna defeated Rim-Sin, and
possibly captured him or burnt him alive in a palace
in which he had taken refuge.

With the final defeat of Rim-Sin by Samsu-iluna it
is probable that Elam ceased to be a thorn in the side
of the kings of Babylon and that she made no further
attempts to extend her authority beyond her own fron-
tiers. But no sooner had Samsu-iluna freed his country
from all danger from this quarter than he found himself
faced by a new foe, before whom the dynasty very nearly
succumbed. This fact we learn from the unpublished
chronicle to which reference has already been made, and
the name of. this new foe, as supplied by the chronicle,
will render it necessary to revise all current schemes
of Babylonian chronology. Samsu-iluna’s new foe was
no other than Iluma-ilu, the first king of the Second
Dynasty, and, so far from having been regarded as
Samsu-iluna’s contemporary, hitherto it has been imag-
ined that he ascended the throne of Babylon one hun-
dred and eighteen years after Samsu-iluna’s death. The
new information supplied by the chronicle thus proves
two important facts: first, that the Second Dynasty,
instead of immediately succeeding the First Dynasty,
was partly contemporary with it; second, that during
the period in which the two dynasties were contem-
porary they were at war with one another, the Sec-
ond Dynasty gradually encroaching on the territory of
the First Dynasty, although it never succeeded in cap-

BABYLONIAN CHRONOLOGY | 247

turing Babylon and in getting the whole of the country
under its control. We also learn from the new chronicle
that this Second Dynasty at first established itself in
‘the Country of the Sea,’’ that is to say, the districts
in the extreme south of Babylonia bordering on the
Persian Gulf, and afterwards extended its borders
northward although it never absorbed the whole of
Babylonia. Before discussing the other facts supplied
by the new chronicle, with regard to the rise and growth
of the Country of the Sea, whose kings formed the so-
ealled ‘‘ Second Dynasty,” it will be well to refer briefly
to the sources from which the information on the period
to be found in the current histories is derived.

All the schemes of Babylonian chronology that have
been suggested during the last twenty years have been
based mainly on the great list of kings which is pre-
served in the British Museum. This document was
drawn up in the Neo-Babylonian or Persian period, and
when complete it gave a list of the names of all the
Babylonian kings from the First Dynasty of Babylon
down to the time in which it was written. The names
of the kings are arranged in dynasties, and details
are given as to the length of their reigns and the
total number of years each dynasty lasted. The be-
ginning of the list which gave the names of the First
Dynasty is wanting, but the missing portion has been
restored from a smaller document which gives a list of
the kings of the First and Second Dynasties only. In
the great list of kings the dynasties are arranged one
after the other, and it was obvious that its compiler

248 ELAM AND BABYLON

imagined that they succeeded one another in the order
in which he arranged them. But when the total num-
ber of years the dynasties lasted is learned, we obtain
dates for the first dynasties in the list which are too
early to agree with other chronological information sup-
plied by the historical inscriptions. The majority of
writers have accepted the figures of the list of kings
and have been content to ignore the discrepancies;
others have sought to reconcile the available data by in-
genious emendations of the figures given by the list and
the historical inscriptions, or have omitted the Second
Dynasty entirely from their calculations. The new
chronicle, by showing that the First and Second Dynas-
ties were partly contemporaneous, explains the dis-
crepancies that have hitherto proved so puzzling.
It would be out of place here to enter into a detailed
discussion of Babylonian chronology, and therefore we
will confine ourselves to a brief description of the
sequence of events as revealed by the new chronicle.
According to the list of kings, Iluma-ilu’s reign was a
long one, lasting for sixty years, and the new chronicle
gives no indication as to the period of his reign at which
active hostilities with Babylon broke out. If the war
occurred in the latter portion of his reign, it would
follow that he had been for many years organizing the
forces of the new state he had founded in the south
of Babylonia before making serious encroachments in
the north; and in that case the incessant campaigns car-
ried on by Babylon against Hlam in the reigns of Ham-
murabi and Samsu-iluna would have afforded him the

BABYLON AND THE COUNTRY OF THE SEA 249

opportunity of establishing a firm foothold in the Coun-
try of the Sea without the risk of Babylonian inter-
ference. If, on the other hand, it was in the earlier part
of his reign that hostilities with Babylon broke out,
Wwe may suppose that, while Samsu-iluna was devoting
all his energies to crush Rim-Sin, the Country of the
Sea declared her independence of Babylonian control. In
this case we may imagine Samsu-iluna hurrying south,
on the conclusion of his Elamite campaign, to crush the
newly formed state before it had had time to organize
its forces for prolonged resistance. |
Whichever of these alternatives eventually may
prove to be correct, it is certain that Samsu-iluna took
the initiative in Babylon’s struggle with the Country
of the Sea, and that his action was due either to her —
declaration of independence or to some daring act of
aggression on the part of this small state which had
hitherto appeared too insignificant to cause Babylon
any serious trouble. The new chronicle tells us that
Samsu-iluna undertook two expeditions against the
Country of the Sea, both of which proved unsuccessful.
In the first of these he penetrated to the very shores of
the Persian Gulf, where a battle took place in which
Samsu-iluna was defeated, and the bodies of many of
the Babylonian soldiers were washed away by the sea.
In the second campaign Iluma-ilu did not await Samsu-
iluna’s attack, but advanced to meet him, and again
defeated the Babylonian army. In the reign of Abéshu’,
Samsu-iluna’s son and successor, Iluma-ilu appears to
have undertaken fresh acts of aggression against

250 ELAM AND BABYLON

Babylon; and it was probably during one of his raids in
Babylonian territory that Abéshu’ attempted to crush
the growing power of the Country of the Sea by the
capture of its daring leader, Iluma-ilu himself. The
new chronicle informs us that, with this object in view,
Abéshu’ dammed the river Tigris, hoping by this means
to cut off Iluma-ilu and his army, but his stratagem
did not succeed, and Iluma-ilu got back to his own terri-
tory in safety.

The new chronicle does not supply us with further
details of the struggle between Babylon and the Country
of the Sea, but we may conclude that all similar at-
tempts on the part of the later kings of the First
Dynasty to crush or restrain the power of the new state
were useless. It is probable that from this time forward
the kings of the First Dynasty accepted the independ-
ence of the Country of the Sea upon their southern
border as an evil which they were powerless to prevent.
They must have looked back with regret to the good
times the country had enjoyed under the powerful sway
of Hammurabi, whose victorious arms even their ancient
foes, the Elamites, had been unable to withstand. But,
although the chronicle does not recount the further suc-
cesses achieved by the Country of the Sea, it records
a fact which undoubtedly contributed to hasten the fall
of Babylon and bring the First Dynasty to an end. It
tells us that in the reign of Samsu-ditana, the last king
of the First Dynasty, the men of the land of Khattu
(the Hittites from Northern Syria) marched against him
in order to conquer the land of Akkad; in other words,

INVASION OF THE HITTITES 251

they marched down the Euphrates and invaded North-
ern Babylonia. The chronicle does not state how far
the invasion was successful, but the appearance of a
new enemy from the northwest must have divided
the Babylonian forces and thus have reduced their
power of resisting pressure from any other direction.
Samsu-ditana may have succeeded in defeating the Hit-
tites and in driving them from his country; but the fact
that he was the last king of the First Dynasty proves
that in his reign Babylon itself fell into the hands of
the king of the Kassites.

The question now arises, To what race did the people
of the Country of the Sea belong? Did they represent
an advance-guard of the Kassite tribes, who eventually
succeeded in establishing themselves as the Third Dy-
nasty in Babylon? Or were they the Elamites who,
when driven from Ur and Larsam, retreated southwards
and maintained their independence on the shores of the
Persian Gulf? Or did they represent some fresh wave
of Semitic immigration? That they were not Kassites
is proved by the new chronicle which relates how the
Country of the Sea was conquered by the Kassites, and
how the dynasty founded by Tluma-ilu thus came to
anend. There is nothing to show that they were Elam-
ites, and if the Country of the Sea had been colonized
by fresh Semitic tribes, so far from opposing their kin-
dred in Babylon, most probably they would have proved
to them a source of additional strength and support.
In fact, there are indications that the people of the
Country of the Sea are to be referred to an older stock

252 ELAM AND BABYLON

than the Elamites, the Semites, or the Kassites. In
the dynasty of the Country of the Sea there is no
doubt that we may trace the last successful struggle
of the ancient Sumerians to retain possession of the
land which they had held for so many centuries before
the invading Semites had disputed its possession with
them. |

Evidence of the Sumerian origin of the kings of the
Country of the Sea may be traced in the names which
several of them bear. Ishkibal, Gulkishar, Peshgal-
daramash, A-dara-kalama, Akur-ul-ana, and Melam-kur-
kura, the names of some of them, are all good Sumerian
names, and Shushshi, the brother of Ishkibal, may also
be taken as a Sumerian name. It is true that the first
three kings of the dynasty, Iluma-ilu, Itti-ili-nibi, and
Damki-ilishu, and the last king of the dynasty, Ea-
gamil, bear Semitic Babylonian names, but there is
evidence that at least one of these is merely a Semitic
rendering of a Sumerian equivalent. IJluma-ilu, the
founder of the dynasty, has left inscriptions in which
his name is written in its correct Sumerian form as
Dingir-a-an, and the fact that he and some of his suc-
cessors either bore Semitic names or appear in the late
list of kings with their Sumerian names translated into
Babylonian form may be easily explained by supposing
that the population of the Country of the Sea was mixed
and that the Sumerian and Semitic tongues were to a
great extent employed indiscriminately. This supposi-
tion is not inconsistent with the suggestion that the
dynasty of the Country of the Sea was Sumerian, and

THE CONQUEST OF THE KASSITES 253

that under it the Sumerians once more became the
predominant race in Babylonia.

The new chronicle also relates how the dynasty of
the Country of the Sea succumbed in its turn before
the incursions of the Kassites. We know that already
under the First Dynasty the Kassite tribes had begun
to make incursions into Babylonia, for the ninth year
of Samsu-iluna was named in the date-formule after a
Kassite invasion, which, as it was commemorated in this
manner by the Babylonians, was probably successfully
repulsed. Such invasions must have taken place from
time to time during the period of supremacy attained
by the Country of the Sea, and it was undoubtedly with
a view to stopping such incursions for the future that
Ea-gamil, the last king of the Second Dynasty, decided
to invade Elam and conquer the mountainous districts
in which the Kassite tribes had built their strongholds.
This Elamite campaign of Ea-gamil is recorded by the
new chronicle, which relates how he was defeated and
driven from the country by Ulam-Buriash, the brother
of Bitiliash the Kassite. Ulam-Buriash did not rest
content with repelling EHa-gamil’s invasion of his land,
but pursued him across the border and succeeded in
conquering the Country of the Sea and in establishing
there his own administration. The gradual conquest
of the whole of Babylonia by the Kassites no doubt
followed the conquest of the Country of the Sea, for
the chronicle relates how the process of subjugation,
begun by Ulam-Buriash, was continued by his nephew
Agum, and we know from the lists of kings that

254 ELAM AND BABYLON

Ha-gamil was the last king of the dynasty founded by
Iluma-ilu. In this fashion the Second Dynasty was
brought to an end, and the Sumerian element in the
mixed population of Babylonia did not again succeed
in gaining control of the government of the country.

It will be noticed that the account of the earliest
Kassite rulers of Babylonia which is given by the new
chronicle does not exactly tally with the names of the
kings of the Third Dynasty as found upon the list of
kings. On this document the first king of the dynasty
is named Gandash, with whom we may scarcely identify
Ulam-Buriash, the Kassite conqueror of the Country of
the Sea; the second king is Agum, and the third is
Bitiliashi. According to the new chronicle Agum was
the son of Bitiliashi, and it would be improbable that
he should have ruled in Babylonia before his father.
But this difficulty is removed by supposing that the
two names were transposed by some copyist. The dif-
ferent names assigned to the founder of the Kassite
dynasty may be due to the existence of variant tradi-
tions, or Ulam-Buriash may have assumed another name
on his conquest of Babylonia, a practice which was usual
with the later kings of Assyria when they occupied the
Babylonian throne.

The information supplied by the new chronicle with
regard to the relations of the first three dynasties to
one another is of the greatest possible interest to the
student of early Babylonian history. We see that the
Semitic empire founded at Babylon by Sumu-abu, and
consolidated by Hammurabi, was not established on so

THE KASSITE DOMINION 255

firm a basis as has hitherto been believed. The later
kings of the dynasty, after Elam had been conquered,
had to defend their empire from encroachments on the
south, although they never succumbed before the on-
slaught of the Sumerian element, which still remained
in the population of Babylonia and had rallied in the
Country of the Sea. This dynasty in its turn succumbed
before the invasion of the Kassites from the mountains
in the western districts of Elam, and, although the city
of Babylon retained her position as the capital of the
country throughout these changes of government, she
was the capital of rulers of different races, who succes-
sively fought for and obtained the control of the fertile
plains of Mesopotamia.

It is probable that the Kassite kings of the Third
Dynasty exercised authority not only over Babylonia
but also over the greater part of Elam, for a number
of inscriptions of Kassite kings of Babylonia have been.
found by M. de Morgan at Susa. These inscriptions
consist of grants of land written on roughly shaped
stone stele, a class which the Babylonians themselves
called kudurru, while they have been frequently re-
ferred to by modern writers as ‘‘ boundary-stones.”’
This latter term is not very happily chosen, for it sug-
gests that the actual monuments themselves were set up
on the limits of a field or estate to mark its boundary.
It is true that the inscription on a kudurru enumerates
the exact position and size of the estate with which it
is concerned, but the kudurru was never actually used
to mark the boundary. It was preserved as a title-deed,

256 ELAM AND BABYLON

in the house of the owner of the estate or possibly in
the temple of his god, and formed his charter or title-

A KUDURRU OR ‘* BOUNDARY -STONE.”’

Inscribed with a text of Nazimaruttash, a
king of the Third or Kassite Dynasty, con-
ferring certain estates near Babylon on the
temple of Marduk and on a certain man
named Kashakti-Shugab. The photograph
is reproduced from M. de Morgan’s Déléga-
tion en Perse, Mém., t. ii, pl. 18.

deed to which he could
appeal in case of any dis-
pute arising as to his

right of, ownership. One

of the kudurrus found by
M. de Morgan records the
grant of a number of es-
tates near Babylon by
Nazimaruttash, a king of
the Third or Kassite Dy-
nasty, to the god Marduk,
that is to say they were
assigned by the king to
the service of E-sagila,
the great temple of Mar-
duk at Babylon. All the
crops and produce from
the land were granted for
the supply of the temple,
which was to enjoy the
property without the pay-
ment of any tax or trib-
ute. The text also records
the gift of considerable
tracts of land in the same

district to a private individual named Kashakti-Shugab,
who was to enjoy a similar freedom from taxation so
far as the lands bestowed upon him were concerned.

SIGNIFICANCE OF EMBLEMATIC INSCRIPTIONS 257

This freedom from taxation is specially enacted by the
document in the words: ‘‘ Whensoever in the days that
are to come the ruler of the country, or one of the gov-
ernors, or directors, or wardens of these districts, shall
make any claim with regard to these estates, or shall
attempt to impose the payment of a tithe or tax upon
them, may all the great gods whose names are com-
memorated, or whose arms are portrayed, or whose
dwelling-places are represented, on this stone, curse
him with an evil curse and blot out his name! ”’
Incidentally, this curse illustrates one of the most
striking characteristics of the kudurrus, or ‘‘ boundary-
stones,”’’ viz. the carved figures of gods and representa-
tions of their emblems, which all of them bare in addi-
tion to the texts inscribed upon them. -At one time it
was thought that these symbols were to be connected
with the signs of the zodiac and various constellations
and stars, and it was suggested that they might have
been intended to represent the relative positions of the
heavenly bodies at the time the document was drawn
up. But this text of Nazimaruttash and other similar
documents that have recently been discovered prove that
the presence of the figures and emblems of the gods
upon the stones is to be explained on another and far
more simple theory. They were placed there as guar-
dians of the property to which the kudurru referred,
and it was believed that the carving of their figures
or emblems upon the stone would ensure their inter-
vention in case of any attempted infringement of the
rights and privileges which it was the object of the

258 ELAM AND BABYLON

document to commemorate and preserve. <A _photo-
graphic reproduction of one side of the kudurru of Nazi-
maruttash is shown in the accompanying illustration.
There will be seen a representation of Gula or Bau,
the mother of the gods, who is portrayed as seated on
her throne and wearing the four-horned head-dress and
a long robe that reaches to her feet. In the field are
emblems of the Sun-god, the Moon-god, Ishtar, and other
deities, and the representation of divine emblems and
dwelling-places is continued on another face of the stone
round the corner towards which Gula is looking. The
other two faces of the document are taken up with the
inscription.

An interesting note is appended to the text inscribed
upon the stone, beginning under the throne and feet of
Marduk and continuing under the emblems of the gods
upon the other side. This note relates the history of
the document in the following words: ‘‘ In those days
Kashakti-Shugab, the son of Nusku-na’id, inscribed
(this document) upon a memorial of clay, and he set it
before his god. But in the reign of Marduk-aplu-iddina,
king of hosts, the son of Melishikhu, King of Babylon,
the wall fell upon this memorial and crushed it. Shu-
khuli-Shugab, the son of Nibishiku, wrote a copy of
the ancient text upon a new stone stele, and he set it
(before the god).’’ It will be seen, therefore, that this
actual stone that has been recovered was not the docu-
ment drawn up in the reign of Nazimaruttash, but a
copy made under Marduk-aplu-iddina, a later king of
the Third Dynasty. The original deed was drawn up

SPECIMENS OF TITLE-DEEDS 259

to preserve the rights of Kashakti-Shugab, who shared
the grant of land with the temple of Marduk. His share
was less than half that of the temple, but, as both were
situated in the same district, he was careful to enumer-
ate and describe the temple’s share, to prevent any
encroachment on his rights by the Babylonian priests.

It is probable that such grants of land were made
to private individuals in return for special services
which they had rendered to the king. Thus a broken
kudurru among M. de Morgan’s finds records the con-
firmation of a man’s claims to certain property by Biti-
_liash I, the claims being based on a grant made to the
man’s ancestor by Kurigalzu for services rendered to
the king during his war with Assyria. One of the finest
specimens of this class of charters or title-deeds has
been found at Susa, dating from the reign of Melishi-
khu, a king of the Third Dynasty. The document in
question records a grant of certain property in the dis-
trict of Bit-Pir-Shadi-rabti, near the cities Agade and
Dir-Kurigalzu, made by Melishikhu to Marduk-aplu-
iddina, his son, who succeeded him upon the throne of
Babylon. The text first gives details with regard to
the size and situation of the estates included in the grant
of land, and it states the names of the high officials who
were entrusted with the duty of measuring them. The
remainder of the text defines and secures the privileges
granted to Marduk-aplu-iddina together with the land,
and, as it throws considerable light upon the system of
land tenure at the period, an extract from it may here
be translated.

260 ELAM AND BABYLON

KUDURRU, OR ‘‘ BOUNDARY -STONE.”’

Inscribed with a text of Melishikhu, one of the kings of
the Third or Kassite Dynasty of Babylon, recording a grant
of certain property to Marduk-aplu-iddina, his son, The
photograph is reproduced from M. de Morgan’s Délégation
en Perse, Mém., t. ii, pl. 24.

“To prevent the encroachment on his land,” the
inscription runs, ‘‘ thus hath he (7. e. the king) estab-

PROVISIONS OF A TITLE-DEED 261

lished his (Marduk-aplu-iddina’s) charter. On his land
taxes and tithes shall they not impose; ditches, limits,
and boundaries shall they not displace; there shall be
no plots, stratagems, or claims (with regard to his pos-
session); for forced labour or public work for the pre-
vention of floods, for the maintenance and repair of the
royal canal under the protection of the towns of Bit-
Sikkamidu and Damik-Adad, among the gangs levied
in the towns of the district of Ninaé-Agade, they shall
not call out the people of his estate; they are not liable
to forced labour on the sluices of the royal canal, nor
are they liable for building dams, nor for closing the
canal, nor for digging out the bed thereof. A cultivator
of his lands, whether hired, or belonging to the estate,
and the men who receive his instructions (7. e. his over-
seers) shall no governor of Bit-Pir-Shadi-rabii cause to
leave his lands, whether by the order of the king, or by
the order of the governor, or by the order of whosoever
may be at Bit-Pir-Shadi-rabi. On wood, grass, straw,
corn, and every other sort of crop, on his carts and yoke,
on his ass and man-servant, shall they make no levy.
During the scarcity of water in the canal running be-
tween the Rati-Anzanim canal and the canal of the royal
district, on the waters of his ditch for irrigation shall
they make no levy; from the ditch of his reservoir shall
they not draw water, neither shall they divert (his water
for) irrigation, and other land shall they not irrigate
nor water therewith. The grass of his lands shall they
not mow; the beasts belonging to the king or to a gov-
ernor, which may be assigned to the district of Bit-Pir-

262 ELAM AND BABYLON

Shadi-rabt, shall they not drive within his boundary,
nor shall they pasture them on his grass. He shall not
be forced to build a road or a bridge, whether for the
king, or for the governor who may be appointed in the
district of Bit-Pir-Shadi-rabi, neither shall he be liable
for any new form of forced labour, which in the days
that are to come a king, or a governor appointed in
the district of Bit-Pir-Shadt-rabt, shall institute and
exact, nor for forced labour long fallen into disuse which
may be revived anew. To prevent encroachment on his
land the king hath fixed the privileges of his domain,
and that which appertaineth unto it, and all that he
hath granted unto him; and in the presence of Shamash,
and Marduk, and Anunitu, and the great gods of heaven
and earth, he hath inscribed them upon a stone, and he
hath left it as an everlasting memorial with regard to
his estate.”’

The whole of the text is too long to quote, and it
will suffice to note here that Melishikhu proceeds to
appeal to future kings to respect the land and privileges
which he has granted to his son, Marduk-aplu-iddina,
even as he himself has respected similar grants made
by his predecessors on the throne; and the text ends
with some very vivid curses against any one, whatever
his station, who should make any encroachments on the
privileges granted to Marduk-aplu-iddina, or should
alter or do any harm to the memorial-stone itself. The
emblems of the gods whom Melishikhu invokes to
avenge any infringement of his grant are sculptured
upon one side of the stone, for, as has already been

LIABILITIES OF LANDOWNERS 263

remarked, it was believed that by carving them upon
the memorial-stone their help in guarding the stone
itself and its enactments was. assured.

From the portion of the text inscribed upon the stone
which has just been translated it is seen that the owner
of land in Babylonia in the period of the Kassite kings,
unless he was granted special exemption, was liable
to furnish forced labour for public works to the state
or to his district, to furnish grazing and pasture for
the flocks and herds of the king or governor, and to pay
various taxes and tithes on his land, his water for irri-
gation, and his crops. From the numerous documents
of the First Dynasty of Babylon that have been recov-
ered and published within the last few years we know
that similar customs were prevalent at that period, so
that it is clear that the successive conquests to which
the country was subjected, and the establishment of dif-
ferent dynasties of foreign kings at Babylon, did not
to any appreciable extent affect the life and customs
of the inhabitants of the country or even the general
character of its government and administration. Some
documents of a commercial and legal nature, inscribed
upon clay tablets during the reigns of the Kassite kings
of Babylon, have been found at Nippur, but they have
not yet been published, and the information we possess
concerning the life of the people in this period is ob-
tained indirectly from kudurrus or boundary-stones,
such as those of Nazimaruttash and Melishikhu which
have been already described. Of documents relating to
the life of the people under the rule of the kings of the

264 ELAM AND BABYLON

Country of the Sea we have none, and, with the excep-
tion of the unpublished chronicle which has been de-
scribed earlier in this chapter, our information for this
period is confined to one or two short votive inscriptions.
But the case is very different with regard to the reigns
of the Semitic kings of the First Dynasty of Babylon.
Thousands of tablets relating to legal and commercial
transactions during this period have been recovered, and
more recently a most valuable series of royal letters,
written by Hammurabi and other kings of his dynasty,
has been brought to light. Moreover, the recently dis-
covered code of laws drawn up by Hammurabi contains
information of the greatest interest with regard to the
conditions of life that were prevalent in Babylonia at
that period. From these three sources it is possible to
draw up a comparatively full account of early Baby-
lonian life and customs.

Upper Part of the Stele of Hammurabi, King of Babylon.

The stele is inscribed with his great code of laws. The Sun-god is represented as seated on a
throne in the form of a temple facade, and his feet are resting upon the mountains. Photograph by

Messrs. Mansell & Co.

CHAPTER VI
EARLY BABYLONIAN LIFE AND CUSTOMS

N tracing the ancient history of Mesopotamia and the
surrounding countries it is possible to construct a
narrative which has the appearance of being compara-
tively full and complete. With regard to Babylonia it
may be shown how dynasty succeeded dynasty, and for
long periods together the names of the kings have been
recovered and the order of their succession fixed with
certainty. But the number and importance of the orig-
inal documents on which this connected narration is
based vary enormously for different periods. Gaps
occur in our knowledge of the sequence of events, which
with some ingenuity may be bridged over by means of
the native lists of kings and the genealogies furnished
by the historical inscriptions. On the other hand, as if
to make up for such parsimony, the excavations have
yielded a wealth of material for illustrating the condi-
tions of early Babylonian life which prevailed in such
periods. The most fortunate of these periods, so far as

the recovery of its records is concerned, is undoubtedly
265

266 EARLY BABYLONIAN LIFE AND CUSTOMS

the period of the Semitic kings of the First Dynasty
of Babylon, and in particular the reign of its greatest
ruler, Hammurabi. When M. Maspero wrote his his-
tory, thousands of clay tablets, inscribed with legal and
commercial documents and dated in the reigns of these
early kings, had already been recovered, and the infor-
mation they furnished was duly summarized by him.’
But since that time two other sources of information
have been made available which have largely increased
our knowledge of the constitution of the early Baby-
lonian state, its system of administration, and the con-
ditions of life of the various classes of the population.
One of these new sources of information consists of
a remarkable series of royal letters, written by kings
of the First Dynasty, which has been recovered and is
now preserved in the British Museum. The letters were
addressed to the governors and high officials of various
great cities in Babylonia, and they contain the king’s
orders with regard to details of the administration of
the country which had been brought to his notice. The
range of subjects with which they deal is enormous, and
there is scarcely one of them which does not add to our
knowledge of the period.” The other new source of
information is the great code of laws, drawn up by Ham-

1 Most of these tablets are preserved in the British Museum. The principal
works in which they have been published are Cuneiform Texts in the British
Museum (1896, etc.), Strassmaier’s Altbabylonischen Vertrige aus Warka, and
Meissner’s Beitrdge zum altbabylonischen Privatrecht. A number of similar tablets
of this period, preserved in the Pennsylvania Museum, will shortly be published
by Dr. Ranke.

2See King, Letters and Inscriptions of Hammurabi, 3 vols. (1898-1900).

HAMMURABIY’S CODE OF LAWS 267

murabi for the guidance of his people and defining the
duties and privileges of all classes of his subjects, the
discovery of which at Susa has been described in a pre-
vious chapter. The laws are engraved on a great stele
of diorite in no less than forty-nine columns of writing,
of which forty-four are preserved,’ and at the head of
the stele is sculptured a representation of the king re-
ceiving them from Shamash, the Sun-god.’

This code shows to what an extent the administra-
tion of law and justice had been developed in Babylonia
in the time of the First Dynasty. From the contracts
and letters of the period we already knew that regular
judges and duly appointed courts of law were in exist-
ence, and the code itself was evidently intended by the
king to give the royal sanction to a great body of legal
decisions and enactments which already possessed the ©
authority conferred by custom and tradition. The
means by which such a code could have come into exist-
ence are illustrated by the system of procedure adopted
in the courts at this period. After a case had been heard
and judgment had been given, a summary of the case
and of the evidence, together with the judgment, was
drawn up and written out on tablets in due legal form
and phraseology. A list of the witnesses was appended,
and, after the tablet had been dated and sealed, it was
stored away among the legal archives of the court,
where it was ready for production in the event of any
future appeal or case in which the recorded decision

1 See Scheil, Délégation en Perse, Mémoires, tome iv (1902).
2 See illustration.

268 EARLY BABYLONIAN LIFE AND CUSTOMS

was involved. This procedure represents an advanced
stage in the system of judicial administration, but the
care which was taken for the preservation of the judg-
ments given was evidently traditional, and would nat-
urally give rise in course of time to the existence of a
recognized code of laws.

Moreover, when once a judgment had been given and
had been duly recorded it was irrevocable, and if any
judge attempted to alter such a decision he was severely
punished. For not only was he expelled from his judg-
ment-seat, and debarred from exercising judicial func-
tions in the future, but, if his judgment had involved
the infliction of a penalty, he was obliged to pay twelve
times the amount to the man he had condemned. Such
an enactment must have occasionally given rise to hard-
ship or injustice, but at least it must have had the effect
of imbuing the judges with a sense of their responsi-
bility and of instilling a respect for their decisions in
the minds of the people. A further check upon injustice
was provided by the custom of the elders of the city,
who sat with the judge and assisted him in the carrying
out of his duties; and it was always open to a man, if
he believed that he could not get justice enforced, to
make an appeal to the king. It is not our present pur-
pose to give a technical discussion of the legal contents
of the code, but rather to examine it with the object
of ascertaining what light it throws upon ancient Baby-
lonian life and customs, and the conditions under which
the people lived.

The code gives a good deal of information with re-

BABYLONIAN MARRIAGE CUSTOMS 269

gard to the family life of the Babylonians, and, above
all, proves the sanctity with which the marriage-tie was
invested. The claims that were involved by marriage
were not lightly undertaken. Any marriage, to be
legally binding, had to be accompanied by a duly exe-
cuted and attested marriage-contract. If a man had
taken a woman to wife without having carried out this
necessary preliminary, the woman was not regarded as
his wife in the legal sense. On the other hand, when
once such a marriage-contract had been drawn up, its
inviolability was stringently secured. <A case of proved
adultery on the part of a man’s wife was punished by
the drowning of the guilty parties, though the husband
of the woman, if he wished to save his wife, could do
so by an appeal to the king. Similarly, death was the
penalty for a man who ravished another man’s betrothed
wife while she was still living in her father’s house,
but in this case the girl’s innocence and inexperience
were taken into account, and no penalty was enforced
against her and she was allowed to go free. Where the
adultery of a wife was not proved, and only depended
on the accusation of the husband, the woman could clear
herself by swearing her own innocence; if, however, the
accusation was not brought by the husband himself, but
by others, the woman could clear herself by submitting
to the ordeal by water; that is to say, she would plunge
into the Euphrates; if the river carried her away and
she were drowned, it was regarded as proof that the
accusation was well founded; if, on the contrary, she
survived and got safely to the bank, she was considered

270 EARLY BABYLONIAN LIFE AND CUSTOMS

innocent and was forthwith allowed to return to her
household completely vindicated.

It will have been seen that the duty of chastity on
the part of a married woman was strictly enforced, but
the husband’s responsibility to properly maintain his
wife was also recognized, and in the event of his deser-
tion she could under certain circumstances become the
wife of another man. Thus, if he left his city and fled
from it of his own free will and deserted his wife, he
could not reclaim her on his return, since he had not
been forced to leave the city, but had done so because
he hated it. This rule did not apply to the case of a
man who was taken captive in battle. In such circum-
stances the wife’s action was to be guided by the condi-
tion of her husband’s affairs. If the captive husband
possessed sufficient property on which his wife could
be maintained during his captivity in a strange land,
she had no reason nor excuse for seeking another mar-
riage. If under these circumstances she became another
man’s wife, she was to be prosecuted at law, and, her
action being the equivalent of adultery, she was to be
drowned. But the case was regarded as altered if the
captive husband had not sufficient means for the mainte-
nance of his wife during his absence. The woman would
then be thrown on her own resources, and if she became
the wife of another man she incurred no blame. On the
return of the captive he could reclaim his wife, but the
children of the second marriage would remain with their
own father. These regulations for the conduct of a
woman, whose husband was captured in battle, give an

DIVORCE LAWS 271

intimate picture of the manner in which the constant
wars of this early period affected the lives of those
who took part in them.

Under the Babylonians at the period of the First
Dynasty divorce was strictly regulated, though it was
far easier for the man to obtain one than for the woman.
If we may regard the copies of Sumerian laws, which
have come down to us from the late Assyrian period,
as parts of the code in use under the early Sumerians,
we must conclude that at this earlier period the law was
still more in favour of the husband, who could divorce
his wife whenever he so desired, merely paying her half
a mana as compensation. Under the Sumerians the
wife could not obtain a divorce at all, and the penalty
for denying her husband was death. These regulations
were modified in favour of the woman in Hammurabi’s
code; for under its provisions, if a man divorced his wife
or his concubine, he was obliged to make proper provi-
sion for her maintenance. Whether she were barren
or had borne him children, he was obliged to return her
marriage portion; and in the latter case she had the
custody of the children, for whose maintenance and edu-
cation he was obliged to furnish the necessary supplies.
Moreover, at the man’s death she and her children would
inherit a share of his property. When there had been
no marriage portion, a sum was fixed which the husband
was obliged to pay to his divorced wife, according to his
status. In cases where the wife was proved to have
wasted her household and to have entirely failed in her
duty, her husband could divorce her without paying

272 EARLY BABYLONIAN LIFE AND CUSTOMS

any compensation, or could make her a slave in his
‘house, and the extreme penalty for this offence was
death. On the other hand, a woman could not be di-
voreed because she had contracted a permanent disease;
and, if she desired to divorce her husband and could
prove that her past life had been seemly, she could do
so, returning to her father’s house and taking her mar-
riage portion with her.

It is not necessary here to go very minutely into the
regulations given by the code with regard to marriage
portions, the rights of widows, the laws of inheritance,
and the laws regulating the adoption and maintenance
of children. The customs that already have been de-
scribed with regard to marriage and divorce may serve
to indicate the spirit in which the code is drawn up and
the recognized status occupied by the wife in the Baby-
lonian household. The extremely independent position
enjoyed by women in the early Babylonian days is
illustrated by the existence of a special class of women,
to which constant reference is made in the contracts and
letters of the period. When the existence of this class
of women was first recognized from the references to
them in the contract-tablets inscribed at the time of the
First Dynasty, they were regarded as priestesses, but
the regulations concerning them which occur in the code
of Hammurabi prove that their duties were not strictly
sacerdotal, but that they occupied the position of vo-
taries. The majority of those referred to in the inscrip-
tions of this period were vowed to the service of E-bab-
bara, the temple of the Sun-god at Sippara, and of

PRIVILEGES OF VOTARIES 273

H-sagila, the great temple of Marduk at Babylon, but
it is probable that all the great temples in the country
had classes of female votaries attached to them. From
the evidence at present available it may be concluded
that the functions of these women bore no resemblance
to that of the sacred prostitutes devoted to the service
of the goddess Ishtar in the city of Erech. They seem
to have occupied a position of great influence and inde-
pendence in the community, and their duties and privi-
leges were defined and safeguarded by special legis-
lation.

Generally they lived together in a special building,
or convent, attached to the temple, but they had con-
siderable freedom and could leave the convent and also
contract marriage. Their vows, however, while securing
them special privileges, entailed corresponding responsi-
bilities. Even when married a votary was still obliged
to remain a virgin, and, should her husband desire to
have children, she could not bear them herself, but must
provide him with a maid or concubine. Also she had
to maintain a high standard of moral conduct, for any
breach of which severe penalties were enforced. Thus,
if a votary who was not living in the convent opened
a beer-shop, or should enter one for drink, she ran the
risk of being put to death. But the privileges she
enjoyed were also considerable, for even when unmar-
ried she enjoyed the status of a married woman, and
if any man slandered her he incurred the penalty of
branding on the forehead. Moreover, a married votary,
though she could not bear her husband children, was

274 EARLY BABYLONIAN LIFE AND CUSTOMS

secured in her position as the permanent head of his
household. The concubine she might give to her hus-
band was always the wife’s inferior, even after bearing
him children, and should the former attempt to put her-
self on a level of equality with the votary, the latter
might brand her as a slave and put her with the female
slaves. If the concubine proved barren she could be
sold. The votary could also possess property, and on
taking her vows was provided with a portion by her
father exactly as though she were being given in mar-
riage. Her portion was vested in herself and did not
become the property of the order of votaries, nor of the
temple to which she was attached. The proceeds of her
property were devoted to her own maintenance, and
on her father’s death her brothers looked after her in-
terests, or she might farm the property out. Under
certain circumstances she could inherit property and
was not obliged to pay taxes on it, and such property she
could bequeath at her own death; but upon her death
her portion returned to her own family unless her father
had assigned her the privilege of bequeathing it. That
the social position enjoyed by a votary was considerable
is proved by the fact that many women of good family,
and even members of the royal house, took vows. The
existence of the order and its high repute indicate a
very advanced conception of the position of women
among the early Babylonians.

From the code of Hammurabi we also gather con-
siderable information with regard to the various classes
of which the community was composed and to their rela-

CLASS DIFFERENCES 275

tive social positions. For the purposes of legislation
the community was divided into three main classes or
sections, which corresponded to well-defined strata in
the social system. The lowest of these classes consisted
of the slaves, who must have formed a considerable por-
tion of the population. The class next above them
comprised the large body of free men, who were pos-
sessed of a certain amount of property but were poor
and humble, as their name, mushkénu, implied. These
we may refer to as the middle class. The highest, or
upper class, in the Babylonian community embraced all
the officers and ministers attached to the court, the
higher officials and servants of the state, and the owners
of considerable lands and estates. The differences which
divided and marked off from one another the two great
classes of free men in the population of Babylonia is
well illustrated by the scale of payments as compensa-
tion for injury which they were obliged to make or were
entitled to receive. Thus, if a member of the upper class
were guilty of stealing an ox, or a sheep, or an ass, or
a pig, or a boat, from a temple or a private house, he
had to pay the owner thirty times its value as compen-
sation, whereas if the thief were a member of the middle
class he only had to pay ten times its price, but if he
had no property and so could not pay compensation he
was put to death. The penalty for manslaughter was
less if the assailant was a man of the middle class, and
such a man could also divorce his wife niore cheaply,
and was privileged to pay his doctor or surgeon a
smaller fee for a successful operation.

276 EARLY BABYLONIAN LIFE AND CUSTOMS

But the privileges enjoyed by a man of the middle
class were counterbalanced by a corresponding diminu-
tion of the value at which his life and limbs were
assessed. Thus, if a doctor by carrying out an opera-
tion unskilfully caused the death of a member of the
upper class, or inflicted a serious injury upon him, such
as the loss of an eye, the punishment was the amputa-
tion of both hands, but no such penalty seems to have
been exacted if the patient were a member of the middle
class. If, however, the patient were a slave of a member
of the middle class, in the event of death under the
operation, the doctor had to give the owner another
slave, and in the event of the slave losing his eye, he
had to pay the owner half the slave’s value. Penalties
for assault were also regulated in accordance with the
social position and standing of the parties to the quarrel.
Thus, if one member of the upper class knocked out
the eye or the tooth of one of his equals, his own eye
or his own tooth was knocked out as a punishment, and
if he broke the limb of one of the members of his own
class, he had his corresponding limb broken; but if he
knocked out the eye of a member of the middle class,
or broke his limb, he suffered no punishment in his own
person, but was fined one mana of silver, and for knock-
ing out the tooth of such a man he was fined one-third
of a mana. If two members of the same class were
engaged in a quarrel, and one of them made a peculiarly
improper assault upon the other, the assailant was only
fined, the fine being larger if the quarrel was between
members of the upper class. But if such an assault

RIGHTS OF SLAVES 277

was made by one man upon another who was of higher
rank than himself, the assailant was punished by being
publicly beaten in the presence of the assembly, when
he received sixty stripes from a scourge of ox-hide.
These regulations show the privileges and responsibil-
ities which pertained to the two classes of free men
in the Babylonian community, and they indicate the
relative social positions which they enjoyed.

Both classes of free men could own slaves, though
it is obvious that they were more numerous in the house-
holds and on the estates of members of the upper class.
The slave was the absolute property of his master and
could be bought and sold and employed as a deposit for
a debt, but, though slaves as a class had few rights of
their own, in certain circumstances they could acquire
them. Thus, if the owner of a female slave had begot-
ten children by her he could not use her as the payment
for a debt, and in the event of his having done so he
was obliged to ransom her by paying the original
amount of the debt in money. It was also possible for
a male slave, whether owned by a member of the upper
or of the middle class, to marry a free woman, and if
he did so, his children were free and did not become
the property of his master. Also, if the free woman
whom the slave married brought with her a marriage
portion from her father’s house, this remained her own
property on the slave’s death, and supposing the couple
had acquired other property during the time they lived
together as man and wife, the owner of the slave could
only claim half of such property, the other half being

278 EARLY BABYLONIAN LIFE AND CUSTOMS

retained by the free woman for her own use and for
that of her children.

Generally speaking, the lot of the slave was not a
particularly hard one, for he was a recognized member
of his owner’s household, and, as a valuable piece of
property, it was obviously to his owner’s interest to
keep him healthy and in good condition. In fact, the
value of the slave is attested by the severity of the pen-
alty imposed for abducting a male or female slave from
the owner’s house and removing him or her from the
city; for a man guilty of this offence was put to death.
The same penalty was imposed for harbouring and tak-
ing possession of a runaway slave, whereas a fixed re-
‘ward was paid by the owner to any one by whom a
runaway slave was captured and brought back. Special
legislation was also devised with the object of render-
ing the theft of slaves difficult and their detection easy.
Thus, if a brander put a mark upon a slave without the
owner’s consent, he was liable to have his hands cut
off, and if he could prove that he did so through being
deceived by another man, that man was put to death.
For bad offences slaves were liable to severe punish-
ments, such as cutting off the ear, which was the penalty
for denying his master, and also for making an aggra-
vated assault on a member of the upper class of free
men. But it is clear that on the whole the slave was
well looked after. He was also not condemned to remain
perpetually a slave, for while still in his master’s serv-
ice it was possible for him, under certain conditions, to
acquire property of his own, and if he did so he was

MERCANTILE LAWS 279

able with his master’s consent to purchase his freedom.
If a slave were captured by the enemy and taken to a
foreign land and sold, and were then brought back by
his new owner to his own country, he could claim his
liberty without having to pay any purchase-money to
either of his masters.

The code of Hammurabi also contains detailed regu-
lations concerning the duties of debtors and creditors,
and it throws an interesting light on the commercial
life of the Babylonians at this early period. For in-
stance, it reveals the method by which a wealthy man,
or a merchant, extended his business and obtained large
profits by trading with other towns. This he did by
employing agents who were under certain fixed obliga-
tions to him, but acted independently so far as their
trading was concerned. From the merchant these
agents would receive money or grain or wool or oil or
any sort of goods wherewith to trade, and in return
they paid a fixed share of their profits, retaining the
remainder as the recompense for their own services.
They were thus the earliest of commercial travellers.
In order to prevent fraud between the merchant and
the agent special regulations were framed for the dea!-
ings they had with one another. Thus, when the agent
received from the merchant the money or goods to trade
with, it was enacted that he should at the time of the
transaction give a properly executed receipt for the
amount he had received. Similarly, if the agent gave
the merchant money in return for the goods he had
received and in token of his good faith, the merchant

280 EARLY BABYLONIAN LIFE AND CUSTOMS

had to give a receipt to the agent, and in reckoning their
accounts after the agent’s return from his journey, only
Such amounts as were specified in the receipts were

CLAY CONTRACT TABLET AND ITS OUTER CASE.

Dating from the period of the First Dynasty of Babylon.

to be regarded as legal obligations. If the agent forgot
to obtain his proper receipt he did so at his own risk.

Travelling at this period was attended with some
risk, as it is in the East at the present day, and the
caravan with which an agent travelled was liable to
attack from brigands, or it might be captured by ene-
mies of the country from which it set out. It was right

MERCHANTS AND THEIR AGENTS 281

that loss from this cause should not be borne by the
agent, who by trading with the goods was risking his
own life, but should fall upon the merchant who had
merely advanced the goods and was safe in his own city.
It is plain, however, that disputes frequently arose in
consequence of the loss of goods through a caravan
being attacked and robbed, for the code states clearly
the responsibility of the merchant in the matter. If in
the course of his Journey an enemy had forced the agent
to give up some of the goods he was carrying, on his
return the agent had to specify the amount on oath,
and he was then acquitted of all responsibility in the
matter. If he attempted to cheat his employer by mis-
appropriating the money or goods advanced to him, on
being convicted of the offence before the elders of the
city, he was obliged to repay the merchant three times
the amount he had taken. On the other hand, if the
merchant attempted to defraud his agent by denying
that the due amount had been returned to him, he was
obliged on conviction to pay the agent six times the
amount as compensation. It will thus be seen that the
law sought to protect the agent from the risk of being
robbed by his more powerful employer.

The merchant sometimes furnished the agent with
goods which he was to dispose of in the best markets
he could find in the cities and towns along his route, and
sometimes he would give the agent money with which
to purchase goods in foreign cities for sale on his return.
If the venture proved successful the merchant and his
agent shared the profits between them, but if the agent

282 EARLY BABYLONIAN LIFE AND CUSTOMS

made bad bargains he had to refund to the merchant
the value of the goods he had received; if the merchant
had not agreed to risk losing any profit, the amount to
be refunded to him was fixed at double the value of the
goods advanced. This last enactment gives an indica-
tion of the immense profits which were obtained by both
the merchant and the agent from this system of foreign

A TRACK IN THE DESERT.

trade, for it is clear that what was regarded as a fair
profit for the merchant was double the value of the
goods disposed of. The profits of a successful journey
would also include a fair return to the agent for the
trouble and time involved in his undertaking. Many
of the contract tablets of this early period relate to such
commercial journeys, which show that various bargains
were made between the different parties interested, and

A CAMPING-GROUND IN THE DESERT 283

sometimes such contracts, or partnerships, were entered
into, not for a single journey only, but for long periods.

We may therefore conclude that at the time of the
First Dynasty of Babylon, and probably for long cen-
turies before that period, the great trade-routes of the
East were crowded with traffic. With the exception
that donkeys and asses were employed for beasts of
burden and were not supplemented by horses and camels
until a much later period, a camping-ground in the
desert on one of the great trade-routes must have pre-

A CAMPING -GROUND IN THE DESERT, BETWEEN BIREJIK AND URFA.

sented a scene similar to that of a caravan camping in
the desert at the present day. The rough tracks beaten
by the feet of men and beasts are the same to-day as
they were in that remote period. We can imagine a
body of these early travellers approaching a walled city
at dusk and hastening their pace to get there before the
gates were shut. Such a picture as that of the approach
to the city of Samarra, with its medizval walls, may be
taken as having had its counterpart in many a city of
the early Babylonians. The caravan route leads through
the desert to the city gate, and if we substitute two

284 EARLY BABYLONIAN LIFE AND CUSTOMS

massive temple towers for the domes of the mosques
that rise above the wall, little else in the picture need
be changed.

The houses, too, at this period must have resembled
the structures of unburnt brick of the present day, with
their flat mud tops, on which the inmates sleep at night
during the hot season, supported on poles and brush-

APPROACH TO THE CITY OF SAMARRA, SITUATED ON THE LEFT BANK OF THE TIGRIS.

A small caravan is here seen approaching the city at sunset before the gates are shut.
Samarra was only founded in A.D. 834, by the Khalif el-Motasim, the son of Harfin er-Rashid,
but customs in the East do not change, and the photograph may be used to illustrate the
approach of an early Babylonian caravan to a walled city of the period.

wood. The code furnishes evidence that at that time,
also, the houses were not particularly well built and
were liable to fall, and, in the event of their doing so,
it very justly fixes the responsibility upon the builder.
Tt is clear from the penalties for bad workmanship
enforced upon the builder that considerable abuses had
existed in the trade before the time of Hammurabi, and
it is not improbable that the enforcement of the pen-
alties succeeded in stamping them out. Thus, if a

BUILDING LAWS 285

builder built a house for a man, and his work was not
sound and the house fell and crushed the owner so that
he died, it was enacted that the builder himself should
be put to death. If the fall of the house killed the

A SMALL CARAVAN IN THE MOUNTAINS OF KURDISTAN.

owner’s son, the builder’s own son was to be put to
death. If one or more of the owner’s slaves were killed,
the builder had to restore him slave for slave. Any
damage which the owner’s goods might have suffered
from the fall of the house was to be made good by the

s

286 EARLY BABYLONIAN LIFE AND CUSTOMS

builder. In addition to these penalties the builder was
obliged to rebuild the house, or any portion of it that
had fallen through not being properly secured, at his
own cost. On the other hand, due provisions were made
for the payment of the builder for sound work; and
as the houses of the period rarely, if ever, consisted

THE CITY OF MOSUL.

Situated on the right bank of the Tigris opposite the mounds which mark the site of the
ancient city of Nineveh. The flat-roofed houses which may be hacen Snape in the photograph
noes similar in form and construction to those employed by the ancient Assyrians and

abylonians.

of more than one story, the scale of payment was fixed
by the area of ground covered by the building.

From the code of Hammurabi we also gain consider-
able information with regard to agricultural pursuits in
ancient Babylonia, for elaborate regulations are given
concerning the landowner’s duties and responsibilities,
and his relations to his tenants. The usual practice in
hiring land for cultivation was for the tenant to pay
his rent in kind, by assigning a certain proportion of
the crop, generally a third or a half, to the owner. If

AGRICULTURAL LAWS 287

a tenant hired certain land for cultivation he was bound
to till it and raise a crop, and should he neglect to do
so he had to pay the owner what was reckoned as the
average rent of the land, and he had also to break up
the land and plough it before handing it back. As the
rent of a field was usually reckoned at harvest, and its
amount depended on the size of the crop, it was only

THE VILLAGE OF NEBI YUNUS.

Built on one of the mounds marking the site of the Assyrian city of Nineveh. The mosque
in the photograph is built over the traditional site of the prophet Jonah’s tomb. The flat-roofed
houses of the modern dwellers on the mound can be well seen in the picture.

fair that damage to the crop from flood or storm should
not be made up by the tenant; thus it was enacted by
the code that any loss from such a cause should be
shared equally by the owner of the field and the farmer,
though if the latter had already paid his rent at the
time the damage occurred he could not make a claim
for repayment. It is clear from the enactments of the
code that disputes were frequent, not only between
farmers and landowners, but also between farmers and

288 EARLY BABYLONIAN LIFE AND CUSTOMS

shepherds. It is certain that the latter, in the attempt
to find pasture for the flocks, often allowed their sheep
to feed off the farmers’ fields in the spring. This prac-
tice the code set itself to prevent by fixing a scale of
compensation to be paid by any shepherd who caused
his sheep to graze on cultivated land without the own-
er’s consent. If the offence was committed in the early
spring, when the crop was still small, the farmer was
to harvest the crop and receive a considerable price in
kind as compensation for the shepherd. But if it oc
curred later on in the spring, when the sheep had been
brought in from the meadows and turned into the great
common field at the city gate, the offence would less
_ probably be due to accident and the damage to the crop
would be greater. In these circumstances the shepherd
had to take over the crop and pay the farmer very heav-
ily for his loss.

The planting of gardens and orchards was encour-
aged, and a man was allowed to use a field for this pur-
pose without paying a yearly rent. He might plant it
and tend it for four years, and in the fifth year of his
tenancy the original owner of the field took half of
the garden in payment, while the other half the planter
of the garden kept for himself. If a bare patch had
been left in the garden it was to be reckoned in the
planter’s half. Regulations were framed to ensure the
proper carrying out of the planting, for if the tenant
neglected to do this during the first four years, he was
still liable to plant the plot he had taken without receiv-
ing his half, and he had to pay the owner compensation

ing of Babylon

g
=
oO
n
y= |
Vi
flees
ae
wtee
aa
5 «0
ie!
Es
a5
q 2
gies
o
6 &
» ®
=
—
8
=
oO be
wn
pi

Portra

LAWS CONCERNING CATTLE 289

in addition, which varied in amount according to the
original condition of the land. If a man hired a garden,
the rent he paid to the owner was fixed at two-thirds
of its produce. Detailed regulations are also given in
the code concerning the hire of cattle and asses, and
the compensation to be paid to the owner for the loss
or ill-treatment of his beasts. These are framed on the
just principle that the hirer was responsible only for
damage or loss which he could have reasonably pre-
vented. Thus, if a lion killed a hired ox or ass in the
open country, or if an ox was killed by lightning, the
loss fell upon the owner and not on the man who hired
the beast. But if the hirer killed the ox through care-
lessness or by beating it unmercifully, or if the beast
broke its leg while in his charge, he had to restore an-
other ox to the owner in place of the one he had hired.
For lesser damages to the beast the hirer had to pay
compensation on a fixed scale. Thus, if the ox had its
eye knocked out during the period of its hire, the man
who hired it had to pay to the owner half its value;
while for a broken horn, the loss of the tail, or a torn
muzzle, he paid a quarter of the value of the beast.
Fines were also levied for carelessness in looking
after cattle, though in cases of damage or injury, where
carelessness could not be proved, the owner of a beast
was not held responsible. A bull might go wild at any
time and gore a man, however careful and conscientious
the owner might be, and in these circumstances the
injured man could not bring an action against the owner.
But if a bull had already gored a man, and, although

290 EARLY BABYLONIAN LIFE AND CUSTOMS

it was known to be vicious, the owner had not blunted
its horns or shut it up, in the event of its goring and
killing a free man, he had to pay half a mana of silver.
One-third of a mana was the price paid for a slave who
was killed. A landed proprietor who might hire farmers
to cultivate his fields inflicted severe fines for acts of
dishonesty with regard to the cattle, provender, or seed-
corn committed to their charge. If a man stole the
provender for the cattle he had to make it good, and
he was also liable to the punishment of having his hands
cut off. In the event of his being convicted of letting
out the oxen for hire, or stealing the seed-corn so that
he did not produce a crop, he had to pay very heavy
compensation, and, if he could not pay, he was lable
to be torn to pieces by the oxen in the field he should
have cultivated.

In a dry land like Babylonia, where little rain falls
and that in only one season of the year, the irrigation
of his fields forms one of the most important duties of
the agriculturist. The farmer leads the water to his
fields along small irrigation-canals or channels above
the level of the soil, their sides being formed of banks:
of earth. It is clear that similar methods were employed
by the early Babylonians. One such channel might sup-
ply the fields of several farmers, and it was the duty
of each man through whose land the channel flowed to
keep its banks on his land in repair. If he omitted
to strengthen his bank or dyke, and the water forced
a breach and flooded his neighbour’s field, he had to pay
compensation in kind for any crop that was ruined;

METHOD OF IRRIGATION 291

while if he could not pay, he and his goods were sold,
and his neighbours, whose fields had been damaged
through his carelessness, shared the money.

The land of Babylonian farmers was prepared for
irrigation before it was sown by being divided into a
number of small square or oblong tracts, each separated
from the others by a low bank of earth, the seed being
afterwards sown within the small squares or patches.
Some of the banks running lengthwise through the field
were made into small channels, the ends of which were
carried up to the bank of the nearest main irrigation
canal. No system of gates or sluices was employed, and
when the farmer wished to water one of his fields he
simply broke away the bank opposite one of his small
channels and let the water flow into it. He would let
the water run along this small channel until it reached
the part of his land he wished to water. He then
blocked the channel with a little earth, at the same time
breaking down its bank so that the water flowed over
one of the small squares and thoroughly soaked it.
When this square was finished he filled up the bank and
repeated the process for the next square, and so on until
he had watered the necessary portion of the field. When
this was finished he returned to the main channel and
stopped the flow of the water by blocking up the hole
he had made in the dyke. The whole process was, and
to-day still is, extremely simple, but it needs care and
vigilance, especially in the case of extensive irrigation
when water is being carried into several parts of an
estate at once. It will be obvious that any carelessness

292 EARLY BABYLONIAN LIFE AND CUSTOMS

on the part of the irrigator in not shutting off the water
in time may lead to extensive damage, not only to his
own fields, but to those of his neighbours. In the early
Babylonian period, if a farmer left the water running
in his channel, and it flooded his neighbour’s field and
hurt his crop, he had to pay compensation according
to the amount of damage done.

It was stated above that the irrigation-canals and
little channels were made above the level of the soil
so that the water could at any point be tapped and
-allowed to flow over the surrounding land; and in a flat
country like Babylonia it will be obvious that some
means had to be employed for raising the water from
its natural level to the higher level of the land. As we
should expect, reference is made in the Babylonian in-
scriptions to irrigation-machines, and, although their
exact form and construction are not described, they
must have been very similar to those employed at the
present day. The modern inhabitants of Mesopotamia
employ four sorts of contrivances for raising the water
into their irrigation-channels; three of these are quite
primitive, and are those most commonly employed. The
method which gives the least trouble and which is
used wherever the conditions allow is a primitive form
of water-wheel. This can be used only in a river with
a good current. The wheel is formed of rough boughs
and branches nailed together, with spokes joining the
outer rims to a roughly hewn axle. A row of rough
earthenware cups or bottles are tied round the outer
rim for picking up the water, and a few rough paddles

BABYLONIAN WATER-WHEELS 293

are fixed so that they stick out beyond the rim. The
wheel is then fixed in place near the bank of the river,
its axle resting in pillars of rough masonry. As the
current turns the wheel, the bottles on the rim dip below
the surface and are raised up full. At the top of the
wheel is fixed a trough made by hollowing half the trunk
of a date-palm, and into this the bottles pour their water,

A MODERN MACHINE FOR IRRIGATION ON THE EUPHRATES.

which is conducted from the trough by means of a small.
aqueduct into the irrigation-channel on the bank.

The convenience of the water-wheel will be obvious,
for the water is raised without the labour of man or
beast, and a constant supply is secured day and night
so long as the current is strong enough to turn the
wheel. The water can be cut off by blocking the wheel
or tying it up. These wheels are most common on the
Euphrates, and are usually set up where there is a slight
drop in the river bed and the water runs swiftly over
shallows. As the banks are very high, the wheels are

294 EARLY BABYLONIAN LIFE AND CUSTOMS

necessarily huge contrivances in order to reach the level
of the fields, and their very rough construction causes
them to creak and groan as they turn with the current.
In a convenient place in the river several of these are.
sometimes set up side by side, and the noise of their
combined creakings can be heard from a great distance.
‘Some idea of what one of these machines looks like can
be obtained from the illustration. At Hit on the Eu-
phrates a line of gigantic water-wheels is built across
the river, and the noise they make is extraordinary.

Where there is no current to turn one of these
wheels, or where the bank is too high, the water must
be raised by the labour of man or beast. The common-
est method, which is the one employed generally on the
Tigris, is to raise it in skins, which are drawn up by
horses, donkeys, or cattle. A recess with perpendicular
sides is cut into the bank, and a wooden spindle on
wooden struts is supported horizontally over the recess.
A rope running over the spindle is fastened to the skin,
while the funnel end of the skin is held up by a second
rope, running over a lower spindle, until its mouth is
opposite the trough into which the water is to be poured.
The beasts which are employed for raising the skin are
fastened to the ends of the ropes, and they get a good
purchase for their pull by being driven down a short
cutting or inclined plane in the bank. To get a constant
flow of water, two skins are usually employed, and as
one is drawn up full the other is let down empty.

The third primitive method of raising water, which
is commoner in Egypt than in Mesopotamia at the pres-

DIRECTIONS FOR TRANSPORTATION 295

ent day, is the shadduf, and is worked by hand. It con-
sists of a beam supported in the centre, at one end of
which is tied a rope with a bucket or vessel for raising
the water, and at the other end is fixed a counterweight.*
On an Assyrian bas-relief found at Kuyunjik are rep-
resentations of the shadduf in operation, two of them
being used, the one above the other, to raise the water
to successive levels. These were probably the contri-
vances usually employed by the early Babylonians for
raising the water to the level of their fields, and the
fact that they were light and easily removed must have
made them tempting objects to the dishonest farmer.
Hammurabi therefore fixed a scale of compensation to
be paid to the owner by a detected thief, which varied
according to the class and value of the machine he stole.

The rivers and larger canals of Babylonia were used
by the ancient inhabitants not only for the irrigation
of their fields, but also as waterways for the transport
of heavy materials. The recently published letters of
Hammurabi and Abéshu’ contain directions for the
transportation of corn, dates, sesame seed, and wood,
which were ordered to be brought in ships to Babylon,
and the code of Hammurabi refers to the transportation
by water of wool and oil. It is therefore clear that at

1 The fourth class of machine for raising water employed in Mesopotamia
at the present day consists of an endless chain of iron buckets running over a
wheel. This is geared by means of rough wooden cogs to a horizontal wheel,
the spindle of which has long poles fixed to it, to which horses or cattle are
harnessed. The beasts go round in a circle and so turn the machine. The con-
trivance is not so primitive as the three described above, and the iron buckets
are of European importation.

296 EARLY BABYLONIAN LIFE AND ’*CUSTOMS

this period considerable use was made of vessels of dif-
ferent size for conveying supplies in bulk by water.
The method by which the size of such ships and barges
was reckoned was based on the amount of grain they
were capable of carrying, and this was measured by the
gur, the largest measure of capacity. Thus mention is
made in the inscriptions of vessels of five, ten, fifteen,
twenty, thirty, forty, fifty, sixty, and seventy-five gur
capacity. A boat-builder’s fee for building a vessel of
sixty gur was fixed at two shekels of silver, and it was
proportionately less for boats of smaller capacity. To
ensure that the boat-builder should not scamp his work,
regulations were drawn up to fix on him the responsi-
bility for unsound work. Thus if a boat-builder were
employed to build a vessel, and he put faulty work into
its construction so that it developed defects within a
year of its being launched, he was obliged to strengthen
and rebuild it at his own expense.

The hire of a boatman was fixed at six gur of corn
to be paid him yearly, but it is clear that some of the
larger vessels carried crews commanded by a chief boat-
man, or captain, whose pay was probably on a larger
scale. If a man let his boat to a boatman, the latter
was responsible for losing or sinking it, and he had to
replace it. A boatman was also responsible for the
safety of his vessel and of any goods, such as corn, wool,
oil, or dates, which he had been hired to transport, and
if they were sunk through his carelessness he had to
make good the loss. If he succeeded in refloating the
boat after it had been sunk, he was only under obligation

FERRIES AND RAFTS 297

to pay the owner half its value in compensation for the
damage it had sustained. In the case of a collision
between two vessels, if one was at anchor at the time,
the owner of the other vessel had to pay compensation
for the boat that was sunk and its cargo, the owner of
the latter estimating on oath the value of what had been
sunk. Boats were also employed as ferries, and they
must have resembled the primitive form of ferry-boat

KAIKS, OR NATIVE BOATS ON THE EUPHRATES AT BIREJIK.

Employed for ferrying caravans across the river.

in use at the present day, which is heavily built of huge
timbers, and employed for transporting beasts as well
as men across a river.

There is evidence that under the Assyrians rafts
floated on inflated skins were employed for the transport
of heavy goods, and these have survived in the keleks
of the present day. They are specially adapted for the
transportation of heavy materials, for they are carried
down by the current, and are kept in the course by

298 EARLY BABYLONIAN LIFE AND CUSTOMS

means of huge sweeps or oars. Being formed only of
logs of wood and skins, they are not costly, for wood
is plentiful in the upper reaches of the rivers. At the
end of their journey, after the goods are landed, they
are broken up. The wood is sold at a profit, and the
skins, after being deflated, are packed on to donkeys
to return by caravan. It is not improbable that such
rafts were employed on the Tigris and the Euphrates
from the earliest periods of Chaldean history, though

THE MODERN BRIDGE OF BOATS ACROSS THE TIGRIS OPPOSITE MOSUL.

boats would have been used on the canals and more
sluggish waterways.

In the preceding pages we have given a sketch of
the more striking aspects of early Babylonian life, on
which light has been thrown by recently discovered
documents belonging to the period of the First Dynasty
of Babylon. We have seen that, in the code of laws
drawn up by Hammurabi, regulations were framed for
settling disputes and fixing responsibilities under almost

WIDESPREAD AUTHORITY OF THE KING 299

every condition and circumstance which might arise
among the inhabitants of the country at that time; and
the question naturally arises as to how far the code of
laws was in actual operation. It is conceivable that
the king may have held admirable convictions, but have
been possessed of little power to carry them out and
to see that his regulations were enforced. Luckily, we
have not to depend on conjecture for settling the ques-

A SMALL KELEK, OR RAFT, UPON THE TIGRIS AT BAGHDAD.

tion, for Hammurabi’s own letters which are now pre-
served in the British Museum afford abundant evidence
of the active control which the king exercised over every
department of his administration and in every province
of his empire. In the earlier periods of history, when
each city lived independently of its neighbours and had
its own system of government, the need for close and
frequent communication between them was not pressing,
but this became apparent as soon as they were welded
together and formed parts of an extended empire. Thus

-

300 EARLY BABYLONIAN LIFE AND CUSTOMS

in the time of Sargon of Agade, about 3800 B.c., an
extensive system of royal convoys was established be-
tween the principal cities. At Telloh the late M. de
Sarzec came across numbers of lumps of clay bearing

the seal impressions of Sargon and of his son Naram-

Sin, which had been used as seals and labels upon pack-
ages sent from Agade to Shirpurla. In the time of
Dungi, King of Ur, there was a constant interchange

_ of officials between the various cities of Babylonia and

Elam, and during the more recent diggings at Telloh
there have been found vouchers for the supply of food
for their sustenance when stopping at Shirpurla in the
course of their journeys. In the case of Hammurabi
we have recovered some of the actual letters sent by
the king himself to Sin-idinnam, his local governor in
the city of Larsam, and from them we gain considerable
insight into the principles which guided him in the
administration of his empire.

The letters themselves, in their general character-
istics, resembled the contract tablets of the period which
have been already described. They were written on
small clay tablets oblong in shape, and as they were only
three or four inches long they could easily be carried
about the person of the messenger into whose charge
they were delivered. After the tablet was written it
was enclosed in a thin envelope of clay, having been
first powdered with dry clay to prevent its sticking to

. the envelope. The name of the person for whom the

letter was intended was written on the outside of the
envelope, and both it and the tablet were baked hard

RESPECT SHOWN TO FOREIGN DEITIES 301

to ensure that they should not be broken on their travels.
The recipient of the letter, on its being delivered to him,
- broke the outer envelope by tapping it sharply, and it
then fell away in pieces, leaving the letter and its mes-
sage exposed. The envelopes were very similar to those
in which the contract tablets of the period were enclosed,
of which illustrations have already been given, their only
difference being that the text of the tablet was not
repeated on the envelope, as was the case with the
former class of documents.

The royal letters that have been recovered throw
little light on military affairs and the prosecution of
campaigns, for, being addressed to governors of cities
and civil officials, most of them deal with matters affect-
ing the internal administration of the empire. One let-
ter indeed contains directions concerning the movements
of two hundred and forty soldiers of ‘‘ the King’s Com-
pany ’’ who had been stationed in Assyria, and another
letter mentions certain troops who were quartered in
the city of Ur. A third deals with the supply of cloth-
ing and oil for a section of the Babylonian army, and
troops are also mentioned as having formed the escort
for certain goddesses captured from the Elamites; while
directions are sent to others engaged in a campaign upon
the Elamite frontier. The letter which contains direc-
tions for the safe escort of the captured Elamite god-
desses, and the one ordering the return of these same
goddesses to their own shrines, show that foreign deities,
even when captured from an enemy, were treated by the
Babylonians with the same respect and reverence that

302 EARLY BABYLONIAN LIFE AND CUSTOMS

was shown by them to their own gods and goddesses.
Hammurabi gave directions in the first letter for the
conveyance of the goddesses to Babylon with all due
pomp and ceremony, sheep being supplied for sacrifice
upon the journey, and their usual rites being performed
by their own temple-women and priestesses. The king’s
voluntary restoration of the goddesses to their own
country may have been due to the fact that, after
their transference to Babylon, the army of the Baby-
lonians suffered defeat in Elam. This misfortune would
naturally have been ascribed by the king and the priests
to the anger of the Elamite goddesses at being detained
in a foreign land, and Hammurabi probably arrived at
his decision that they should be escorted back in the
hope of once more securing victory for the Babylonian
arms.

The care which the king exercised for the due wor-
ship of his own gods and the proper supply of their
temples is well illustrated from the letters that have
been recovered, for he superintended the collection of
the temple revenues, and the herdsmen and shepherds
attached to the service of the gods sent their reports
directly to him. He also took care that the observances
of religious rites and ceremonies were duly carried out,
and on one occasion he postponed the hearing of a law-
suit concerning the title to certain property which was
in dispute, as it would have interfered with the proper
observance of a festival in the city of Ur. The plaintiff
in the suit was the chief of the temple bakers, and it
was his duty to superintend the preparation of certain

THE KING AND THE PRIESTHOOD 303

offerings for the occasion. In order that he should not
have to leave his duties, the king put off the hearing of
the case until after the festival had been duly celebrated.
The king also exercised a strict control over the priests
themselves, and received reports from the chief priests
concerning their own subordinates, and it is probable
that the royal sanction was obtained for all the princi-
pal appointments. The guild of soothsayers was an
important religious class at this time, and they also
were under the king’s direct control. <A letter written
by Ammiditana, one of the later kings of the First
Dynasty, to three high officials of the city of Sippar,
contains directions with regard to certain duties to be
carried out by the soothsayers attached to the service
of the city, and indicates the nature of their functions.
Ammiditana wrote to the officials in question, stating
that there was a scarcity of corn in the city of Shagga,
and he therefore ordered them to send a supply thither.
But before the corn was brought into the city they were
told to consult the soothsayers, who were to divine the
future and ascertain whether the omens were favour-
able. If they proved to be so, the corn was to be brought
in. We may conjecture that the king took this precau-
tion, as he feared the scarcity of corn in Shagga was
due to the anger of some local deity or spirit, and that,
if this were the case, the bringing in of the corn would
only lead to fresh troubles. This danger it was the duty
of the soothsayers to prevent.

Another class of the priesthood, which we may infer
was under the king’s direct control, was the astrol-

304 EARLY BABYLONIAN LIFE AND CUSTOMS

ogers, whose duty it probably was to make reports to
the king of the conjunctions of the heavenly bodies, with
a view to ascertaining whether they portended good or
evil to the state. No astrological reports written in this
early period have been recovered, but at a later period
under the Assyrian empire the astrologers reported reg-
ularly to the king on such matters, and it is probable
that the practice was one long established. One of
Hammurabi’s letters proves that the king regulated the
calendar, and it is legitimate to suppose that he sought
the advice of his astrologers as to the times when inter-
calary months were to be inserted. The letter dealing
with the calendar was written to inform Sin-idinnam, the
governor of Larsam, that an intercalary month was to
be inserted. ‘‘ Since the year (?. e. the calendar) hath a
deficiency,’’ he writes, ‘‘ let the month which is now
beginning be registered as a second Elul,’’ and the king
adds that this insertion of an extra month will not
justify any postponement in the payment of the regular
tribute due from the city of Larsam, which had to be
paid a month earlier than usual to make up for the
month that was inserted. The intercalation of addi-
tional months was due to the fact that the Babylonian
months were lunar, so that the calendar had to be cor-
rected at intervals to make it correspond to the solar
year.

From the description already given of the code of
laws drawn up by Hammurabi it will have been seen
that the king attempted to incorporate and arrange a
set of regulations which should settle any dispute likely

THE ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE 305

to arise with regard to the duties and privileges of all
classes of his subjects. That this code was not a dead
letter, but was actively administered, is abundantly
proved by many of the letters of Hammurabi which have
been recovered. From these we learn that the king took
a very active part in the administration of justice in
the country, and that he exercised a strict supervision,
not only over the cases decided in the capital, but also
over those which were tried in the other great cities and
towns of Babylonia. Any private citizen was entitled
to make a direct appeal to the king for justice, if he
thought he could not obtain it in his local court, and
it is clear from Hammurabi’s letters that he always
listened to such an appeal and gave it adequate consid-
eration. The king was anxious to stamp out all cor-
ruption on the part of those who were invested with
authority, and he had no mercy on any of his officers
who were convicted of taking bribes. On one occasion
when he had been informed of a case of bribery in the
city of Dir-gurgurri, he at once ordered the governor
of the district in which Dir-gurgurri lay to investigate
the charge and send to Babylon those who were proved
to be guilty, that they might be punished. He also
ordered that the bribe should be confiscated and des-
patched to Babylon under seal, a wise provision which
must have tended to discourage those who were inclined
to tamper with the course of justice, while at the same
time it enriched the state. It is probable that the king
tried all cases of appeal in person when it was possible
to do so. But if the litigants lived at a considerable dis-

306 EARLY BABYLONIAN LIFE AND CUSTOMS

tance from Babylon, he gave directions to his local
officials on the spot to try the case. When he was con-
vineed of the justice of any claim, he would decide the
case himself and send instructions to the local authori-
ties to see that his decision was duly carried out. It
is certain that many disputes arose at this period in
consequence of the extortions of money-lenders. These
men frequently laid claim in a fraudulent manner to
fields and estates which they had received in pledge as
security for seed-corn advanced by them. In eases
where fraud was proved Hammurabi had no mercy, and
summoned the money-lender to Babylon to receive pun-
ishment, however wealthy and powerful he might be.
A subject frequently referred to in Hammurabi’s let-
ters is the collection of revenues, and it is clear that
an elaborate system was in force throughout the country
for the levying and payment of tribute to the state by
the principal cities of Babylonia, as well as for the col-
lection of rent and revenue from the royal estates and
from the lands which were set apart for the supply of
the great temples. Collectors of both secular and relig-
ious tribute sent reports directly to the king, and if
there was any deficit in the supply which was expected
from a collector he had to make it up himself; but
the king was always ready to listen to and investigate
a complaint and to enforce the payment of tribute or
taxes so that the loss should not fall upon the collector.
Thus, in one of his letters Hammurabi informs the gov-
ernor of Larsam that a collector named Sheb-Sin had
reported to him, saying ‘‘ Enubi-Marduk hath laid hands

THE COLLECTION OF TAXES 307:

upon the money for the temple of Bit-il-kittim (7. e.
the great temple of the Sun-god at Larsam) which is
due from the city of Dir-gurgurri and from the (region
round about the) Tigris, and he hath not rendered the
full sum; and Gimil-Marduk hath laid hands upon the
money for the temple of Bit-il-kittim which is due from
the city of Rakhabu and from the region round about
that city, and he hath not (paid) the full amount. But
the palace hath exacted the full sum from me.’’ It is
probable that both Enubi-Marduk and Gimil-Marduk
were money-lenders, for we know from another letter
that the former had laid claim to certain property on
which he had held a mortgage, although the mortgage
had been redeemed. In the present case they had prob-
ably lent money or seed-corn to certain cultivators of
land near Dir-gurgurri and Rakhabu and along the
Tigris, and in settlement of their claims they had seized
the crops and had, moreover, refused to pay to the king’s
officer the proportion of the crops that was due to the
state as taxes upon the land. The governor of Larsam,
the principal city in the district, had rightly, as the
representative of the palace (7. e. the king), caused the
tax-collector to make up the deficiency, but Hammurabi,
on receiving the subordinate officer’s complaint, referred
the matter back to the governor. The end of the letter
is wanting, but we may infer that Hammurabi con-
demned the defaulting money-lenders to pay the taxes
due, and fined them in addition, or ordered them to be
sent to the capital for punishment.

On another occasion Sheb-Sin himself and a second ©

308 EARLY BABYLONIAN LIFE AND CUSTOMS

tax-collector named Sin-mushtal appear to have been
in fault and to have evaded coming to Babylon when
summoned thither by the king. It had been their duty
to collect large quantities of sesame seed as well as taxes
paid in money. When first summoned, they had made
the excuse that it was the time of harvest and they
would come after the harvest was over. But as they
did not then make their appearance, Hammurabi wrote
an urgent letter insisting that they should be despatched
with the full amount of the taxes due, in the company
of a trustworthy officer who would see that they duly
arrived at the capital.

Tribute on flocks and herds was also levied by the
king, and collectors or assessors of the revenue were
stationed in each district, whose duty it was to report
any deficit in the revenue accounts. The owners of
flocks and herds were bound to bring the young cattle
and lambs that were due as tribute to the central city
of the district in which they dwelt, and they were then
collected into large bodies and added to the royal flocks
and herds; but, if the owners attempted to hold back
any that were due as tribute, they were afterwards
forced to incur the extra expense and trouble of driving
the beasts to Babylon. The flocks and herds owned by
the king and the great temples were probably enormous,
and yielded a considerable revenue in themselves apart
from the tribute and taxes due from private owners.
Shepherds and herdsmen were placed in charge of them,
and they were divided into groups under chief shep-
herds, who arranged the districts in which the herds

AGRICULTURAL INTERESTS 309

and flocks were to be grazed, distributing them when
possible along the banks and in the neighbourhood of
rivers and canals which would afford good pasturage
and a plentiful supply of water. The king received
reports from the chief shepherds and herdsmen, and it
was the duty of the governors of the chief cities and
districts of Babylonia to make tours of inspection and
see that due care was taken of the royal flocks and
sheep. The sheep-shearing for all the flocks that were
pastured near the capital took place in Babylon, and
the king used to send out summonses to his chief shep-
herds to inform them of the day when the shearing
would take place; and it is probable that the governors
of the other great cities sent out similar orders to the
shepherds of flocks under their charge. Royal and
priestly flocks were often under the same chief officer,
a fact which shows the very strict control the king exer-
cised over the temple revenues.

The interests of the agricultural population were
strictly looked after by the king, who secured a proper
supply of water for purposes of irrigation by seeing
that the canals and waterways were kept in a proper
state of repair and cleaned out at regular intervals.
There is also evidence that nearly every king of the
First Dynasty of Babylon cut new canals, and extended
the system of irrigation and transportation which had
been handed down to him from his fathers. The drain-
ing of the marshes and the proper repair of the canals
could only be carried out by careful and continuous
supervision, and it was the duty of the local governors

310 EARLY BABYLONIAN LIFE AND CUSTOMS

to see that the inhabitants of villages and owners of
land situated on the banks of a canal should keep it in
proper order. When this duty had been neglected com-
plaints were often sent to the king, who gave orders
to the local governor to remedy the defect. Thus on
one occasion it had been ordered that a canal at Erech
which had silted up should be deepened, but the dredg-
ing had not been earried out thoroughly, so that the
bed of the canal soon silted up again and boats were
prevented from entering the city. In these circum-
stances Hammurabi gave pressing orders that the ob-
struction was to be removed and the canal made navi-
gable within three days.

Damage was often done to the banks of canals by
floods which followed the winter rains, and a letter of
Abéshu’ gives an interesting account of a sudden rise
of the water in the Irnina canal so that it overflowed
its banks. The king was building a palace at the city
of Kar-Irnina, which was supplied by the Irnina canal,
and every year it was possible to put so much work
into the building. But one year, when little more than
a third of the year’s work was done, the building opera-
tions were stopped by flood, the canal having overflowed
its banks so that the water rose right up to the wall
of the town. In return for the duty of keeping the
canals in order, the villagers along the banks had the
privilege of fishing in its waters in the portion which
was in their charge, and any poaching by other villagers
in this part of the stream was strictly forbidden. On
one oc¢asion, in the reign of Samsu-iluna, Hammurabi’s

THE KING’S OFFICIALS 311

son and successor, the fishermen of the district of Rabim
went down in their boats to the district of Shakanim
and caught fish there contrary to the law. So the
inhabitants of Shakanim complained of this poaching
to the king, who sent a palace official to the authorities
of Sippar, near which city the districts in question lay,
with orders to inquire into the matter and take steps
to prevent all such poaching for the future.

The regulation of transportation on the canals was
also under the royal jurisdiction. The method of reck-
oning the size of ships has already been described, and
there is evidence that the king possessed numerous ves-
sels of all sizes for the carrying of grain, wool, and
dates, as well as for the wood and stone employed in
his building operations. Each ship seems to have had
its own crew, under the command of a captain, and it
is probable that officials who regulated the transporta-
tion from the centres where they were stationed were
placed in charge of separate sections of the rivers and
of the canals.

It is obvious, from the account that has been given
of the numerous operations directly controlled and
superintended by the king, that he had need of a very
large body of officials, by whose means he was enabled
to carry out successfully the administration of the coun-
try. In the course of the account we have made mention
of the judges and judicial officers, the assessors and
collectors of revenue, and the officials of the palace who
were under the king’s direct orders. It is also obvious
that different classes of officers were in charge of all

312 EARLY BABYLONIAN LIFE AND CUSTOMS

the departments of the administration. Two classes
of officials, who were placed in charge of the public
works and looked after and controlled the public slaves,
and probably also had a good deal to do with the col-
lection of the revenue, had special privileges assigned
to them, and special legislation was drawn up to protect
them in the enjoyment of the same. As payment for
their duties they were each granted land with a house
and garden, they were assigned the use of certain sheep
and cattle with which to stock their land, and in addi-
tion they received a regular salary. They were in a
sense personal retainers of the king and were liable to
be sent at any moment on a special mission to carry
out the king’s commands. Disobedience was severely
punished; for, if such an officer, when detailed for a
special mission, did not go but hired a substitute, he
was liable to be put to death and the substitute he had
hired could take his office. Sometimes an officer was
sent for long periods some distance from his home to
take charge of a garrison, and when this was done his
home duties were performed by another man, who tem-
porarily occupied his house and land, but gave it back
to the officer on his return. If such an officer had a
son old enough to perform his duty in his father’s
absence, he was allowed to do so and to till his father’s
lands; but if the son was too young, the substitute who
took the officer’s place had to pay one-third of the prod-
uce of the land to the child’s mother for his education.
Before departing on his journey to the garrison it was
the officer’s duty to arrange for the proper cultivation

PRIVILEGES AND DUTIES OF OFFICIALS 313

of his land and the discharge of his local duties during
his absence. If he omitted to do so and left his land
and duties neglected for more than a year, and another
had meanwhile taken his place, on his return he could
not reclaim his land and office. It will be obvious, there-
fore, that his position was a specially favoured one and
much sought after, and these regulations ensured that
the duties attaching to the office were not neglected.
In the course of his garrison duty or when on special
service, these officers ran some risk of being captured
by the enemy, and in that event regulations were drawn
up for their ransom. If the captured officer was wealthy
and could pay for his own ransom, he was bound
to do so, but if he had not the necessary means his
ransom was to be paid out of the local temple treasury,
and, when the funds in the temple treasury did not suf-
fice, he was to be ransomed by the state. It was spe-
cially enacted that his land and garden and house were
in no case to be sold in order to pay for his ransom.
These were inalienably attached to the office which he
held, and he was not allowed to sell them or the sheep
and cattle with which they were stocked. Moreover,
he was not allowed to bequeath any of this property to
his wife or daughter, so that his office would appear to
have been hereditary and the property attached to it
to have been entailed on his son if he succeeded him.
Such succession would not, of course, have taken place
if the officer by his own neglect or disobedience had for-
feited his office and its privileges during his lifetime.
It has been suggested with considerable probability

314 EARLY BABYLONIAN LIFE AND CUSTOMS

that these officials were originally personal retainers
and follows of Sumu-abu, the founder of the First Dy-
nasty of Babylon. They were probably assigned lands
throughout the country in return for their services to
the king, and their special duties were to preserve order
and uphold the authority of their master. In the course
of time their duties were no doubt modified, but they
retained their privileges and they must have continued
to be a very valuable body of officers, on whose personal
loyalty the king could always rely. In the preceding
chapter we have already seen how grants of considerable
estates were made by the Kassite kings of the Third
Dynasty to followers who had rendered conspicuous
services, and at the same time they received the privi-
lege of holding such lands free of all liability to forced
labour and the payment of tithes and taxes. We may
conclude that the class of royal officers under the kings
of the First Dynasty had a similar origin.

In the present chapter, from information recently
made available, we have given some account of the sys-
tem of administration adopted by the early kings of
Babylon, and we have described in some detail the vari-
ous classes of the Babylonian population, their occupa-
tions, and the conditions under which they lived. In
the two preceding chapters we have dealt with the polit-
ical history of Western Asia from the very earliest
period of the Sumerian city-states down to the time of
the Kassite kings. In the course of this account we
have seen how Mesopotamia in the dawn of history was
in the sole possession of the Sumerian race and how

FALL OF THE SECOND DYNASTY _ 315

afterwards it fell in turn under the dominion of the
Semites and the kings of Elam. The immigration of
fresh Semitic tribes at the end of the third millennium
before Christ resulted in the establishment in Babylon
of the Semitic kings who are known as First Dynasty
kings; and under the sway of Hammurabi, the greatest
of this group of kings, the empire thus established in
Western Asia had every appearance of permanence. AI-
though Elam no longer troubled Babylon, a great danger
arose from-a new and unexpected quarter. In the Coun-
try of the Sea—which comprised the districts in the
extreme south of Babylonia on the shores of the Persian
Gulf—the Sumerians had rallied their forces, and they
now declared themselves independent of Babylonian
control. A period of conflict followed between the kings
of the First Dynasty and the kings of the Country of
the Sea, in which the latter more than held their own;
and, when the Hittite tribes of Syria invaded Northern
Babylonia in the reign of Samsu-ditana, Babylon’s
power of resistance was so far weakened that she
fell an easy prey to the Kassite hordes from Elam.
But the reappearance of the Sumerians in the role of
leading race in Western Asia was destined not to last
long, and was little more than the last flicker of vitality
exhibited by this ancient and exhausted race. Thus the
Second Dynasty fell in its turn before the onslaught
of the Kassite tribes who descended from the mountain-
ous districts in the west of Elam, and, having overrun
the whole of Mesopotamia, established a new dynasty
at Babylon, and adopted Babylonian civilization.

316 EARLY BABYLONIAN LIFE AND CUSTOMS

With the advent of the Kassite kings a new chapter
opens in the history of Western Asia. Up to that time
Egypt and Babylon, the two chief centres of ancient
civilization, had no doubt indirectly influenced one an-
other, but they had not come into actual contact. Dur-
ing the period of the Kassite kings both Babylon and
Assyria established direct relations with Egypt, and
from that time forward the influence they exerted upon
one another was continuous and unbroken. We have
already traced the history of Babylon up to this point
in the light of recent discoveries, and a similar task
awaits us with regard to Assyria. Before we enter into
a discussion of Assyria’s origin and early history in
the light of recent excavation and research, it is neces-
sary that we should return once more to Egypt, and
describe the course of her history from the period when
Thebes succeeded in displacing Memphis as the capital
city.

CHAPTER VII
TEMPLES AND TOMBS OF THEBES

have seen that it was in the Theban period that
Egypt emerged from her isolation, and for the first
time came into contact with Western Asia. This grand
turning-point in Egyptian history seemed to be the
appropriate place at which to pause in the description
of our latest knowledge of Egyptian history, in order
to make known the results of archeological discovery
in Mesopotamia and Western Asia generally. The de-
scription has been carried down past the point of con-
vergence of the two originally isolated paths of Egyp-
tian and Babylonian civilization, and what new informa-
tion the latest discoveries have communicated to us on
this subject has been told in the preceding chapters.
We now have to retrace our steps to the point where
we left Egyptian history and resume the thread of our
Egyptian narrative.

The Hyksos conquest and the rise of Thebes are
practically contemporaneous. The conquest took place
perhaps three or four hundred years after the first ad-

317

318 TEMPLES AND TOMBS OF THEBES

vancement of Thebes to the position of capital of Egypt,
but it must be remembered that this position was not
retained during the time of the XIIth Dynasty. The
kings of that dynasty, though they were Thebans, did
not reign at Thebes. Their royal city was in the North,
in the neighbourhood of Lisht and Médtim, where their
pyramids were erected, and their chief care was for the
lake province of the Fayyiim, which was largely the
creation of Amenemhat III, the Moeris of the Greeks.
It was not till Thebes became the focus of the national
resistance to the Hyksos that its period of greatness
began. Henceforward it was the undisputed capital of
Egypt, enlarged and embellished by the care and munifi-
cence of a hundred kings, enriched by the tribute of a
hundred conquered nations.

But were we to confine ourselves to the considera-
tion only of the latest discoveries of Theban greatness
after the expulsion of the Hyksos, we should be omitting
much that is of interest and importance. For the Egyp-
tians the first grand climacteric in their history (after
the foundation of the monarchy) was the transference
of the royal power from Memphis and Herakleopolis to
a Theban house. The second, which followed soon after,
was the Hyksos invasion. The two are closely connected
in Theban history; it is Thebes that defeated Herakle-
opolis and conquered Memphis; it is Theban power that

was overthrown by the Hyksos; it is Thebes that ex-
| pelled them and initiated the second great period of
Egyptian history. We therefore resume our narrative
at a point before the great increase of Theban power at

DISCOVERIES AT THEBES 319

the time of the expulsion of the Hyksos, and will trace
this power from its rise, which followed the defeat of
Herakleopolis and Memphis. It is upon this epoch—
the beginning of Theban power—that the latest dis-
coveries at Thebes have thrown some new light.

‘More than anywhere else in Egypt excavations have
been carried on at Thebes, on the site of the ancient
capital of the country. And here, if anywhere, it might
have been supposed that there was nothing more to be
found, no new thing to be exhumed from the soil, no
new fact to be added to our knowledge of Egyptian
history. Yet here, no less than at Abydos, has the
archeological exploration of the last few years been
especially successful, and we have seen that the ancient
city of Thebes has a great deal more to tell us than
we had expected.

The most ancient remains at Thebes were discovered
by Mr. Newberry in the shape of two tombs of the VIth
Dynasty, cut upon the face of the well-known hill of
Shékh Abd el-Kiirna, on the west bank of the Nile oppo-
site Luxor. Every winter traveller to Egypt knows well
the ride from the sandy shore opposite the Luxor tem-
ple, along the narrow pathway between the gardens and
the canal, across the bridges and over the cultivated land
to the Ramesseum, behind which rises Shékh Abd el-
Karna, with its countless tombs, ranged in serried rows
along the scarred and scarped face of the hill. This hill,
which is geologically a fragment of the plateau behind
which some gigantic landslip was sent sliding in the
direction of the river, leaving the picturesque gorge and

320 TEMPLES AND TOMBS OF THEBES

cliffs of Dér el-Bahari to mark the place from which
it was riven, was evidently the seat of the oldest Theban
necropolis. Here were the tombs of the Theban chiefs
in the period of the Old Kingdom, two of which have
been found by Mr. Newberry. In later times, it would
seem, these tombs were largely occupied and remod-
elled by the great nobles of the XVIIIth Dynasty, so
that now nearly all the tombs extant on Shékh Abd
el-Kiirna belong to that dynasty.

Of the Thebes of the [Xth and Xth Dynasties, when
the Herakleopolites ruled, we have in the British Mu-
seum two very remarkable statues—one of which is here
illustrated—of the steward of the palace, Mera. The
tomb from which they came is not known. Both are
very beautiful examples of the Egyptian sculptor’s art,
and are executed in a style eminently characteristic of
the transition period between the work of the Old and
Middle Kingdoms. As specimens of the art of the
Hierakonpolite period, of which we have hardly any
examples, they are of the greatest interest. Mera is
represented wearing a different head-dress in each fig-
ure; in one he has a short wig, in the other a skull-
cap.

When the Herakleopolite dominion was finally over-
thrown, in spite of the valiant resistance of the princes
of Asytit, and the Thebans assumed the Pharaonic dig-
nity, thus founding the XIth Dynasty, the Theban
necropolis was situated in the great bay in the cliffs,
immediately north of Shékh Abd el-Kirna, which is
known as Dér el-Bahari. In this picturesque part of

Statue of Mera.

The Chief Steward, [Xth Dynasty; about 2800 B.C. From Thebes. British
Museum. Photograph by Messrs. Mansell & Co.

DISCOVERY OF XIrx DYNASTY TEMPLE 391

Western Thebes, in many respects perhaps the most
picturesque place in Egypt, the greatest king of the
XIth Dynasty, Neb-hapet-Ra Mentuhetep, excavated his
tomb and built for the worship of his ghost a funerary
temple, which he called Akh-aset, ‘‘ Glorious-is-its-Sit-
uation,’? a name fully justified by its surroundings.
This temple is an entirely new discovery, made by Prof.
Naville and Mr. Hall in 1903. The results obtained up
to date have been of very great importance, especially
with regard to the history of Egyptian art and archi-
tecture, for our sources of information were few and
Wwe were previously not very well informed as to the
condition of art in the time of the XIth Dynasty.

The new temple lies immediately to the south of the
great XVIIIth Dynasty temple at Dér el-Bahari, which
has always been known, and which was excavated first
by Mariette and later by Prof. Naville, for the Egypt
Exploration Fund. To the results of the later excava-
tions we shall return. When they were finally com-
pleted, in the year 1898, the great XVIIIth Dynasty
temple, which was built by Queen Hatshepsu, had been
entirely cleared of débris, and the colonnades had been
partially restored (under the care of Mr. Somers
Clarke) in order to make a roof under which to protect
the sculptures on the walls. The whole mass of débris,
consisting largely of fallen talus from the cliffs above,
which had almost hidden the temple, was removed; but :
a large tract lying to the south of the temple, which
was also covered with similar mounds of débris, was
not touched, but remained to await further investiga-

322 TEMPLES AND TOMBS OF THEBES

tion. It was here, beneath these heaps of débris, that
the new temple was found when work was resumed by
the Egypt Exploration Fund in 1903. The actual tomb
of the king has not yet been revealed, although that of
Neb-hetep Mentuhetep, who may have been his immedi-
ate predecessor, was discovered by Mr. Carter in 1899.
It was known, however, and still uninjured in the reign
of Ramses LX of the XXth Dynasty. Then, as we learn
from the report of the inspectors sent to examine the
royal tombs, which is preserved in the Abbott Papyrus,
they found ‘‘ the pyramid-tomb of King Neb-hapet-ha
which is in Tjesret (the ancient Egyptian name for Dér
el-Bahari); it was intact.’’ We know, therefore, that
it was intact about 1000 B.c. The description of it as
a pyramid-tomb is interesting, for in the inscription of
Tetu, the priest of Akh-aset, who was buried at Abydos,
Akh-aset is said to have been a pyramid. That the
newly discovered temple was called Akh-aset we know
from several inscriptions found in it. And the most
remarkable thing about this temple is that in its centre
there was a pyramid. This must be the pyramid-tomb
which was found intact by the inspectors, so that the
tomb itself must be close by. But it does not seem to
have been beneath the pyramid, below which is only
solid rock. It is perhaps a gallery cut in the cliffs at
the back of the temple.

The pyramid was then a dummy, made of rubble
within a revetment of heavy flint nodules, which was
faced with fine limestone. It was erected on a pyloni-
form base with heavy cornice of the usual Egyptian

XIrH DYNASTY MASONRY 323°

pattern. This central pyramid was surrounded by a
roofed hall or ambulatory of small octagonal pillars,
the outside wall of which was decorated with coloured
reliefs, depicting various scenes connected with the sed-
heb or jubilee-festival of the king, processions of the
warriors and magnates of the realm, scenes of hus-
bandry, boat-building, and so forth, all of which were
considered appropriate to the chapel of a royal tomb at »
that period. Outside this wall was an open colonnade
of square pillars. The whole of this was built upon an
artificially squared rectangular platform of natural rock,
about fifteen feet high. To north and south of this were
open courts. The southern is bounded by the hill; the
northern is now bounded by the Great Temple of Hat-
shepsu, but, before this was built, there was evidently
a very large open court here. The face of the rock plat-
form is masked by a wall of large rectangular blocks
of fine white limestone, some of which measure six feet
by three feet six inches. They are beautifully squared
‘and laid in bonded courses of alternate sizes, and the
walls generally may be said to be among the finest yet
‘found in Egypt. We have already remarked that the
architects of the Middle Kingdom appear to have been
specially fond of fine masonry in white stone. The con-
trast between these splendid XIth Dynasty walls, with
their great base-stones of sandstone, and the bad rough
masonry of the XVIIIth Dynasty temple close by, is
striking. The XVIIith Dynasty architects and masons
had degenerated considerably from the standard of the
Middle Kingdom.

324 TEMPLES AND TOMBS OF THEBES

This rock platform was approached from the east
in the centre by an inclined plane or ramp, of which
part of the original pavement of wooden beams remains
m situ. To right and left of this ramp are colonnades,
each of twenty-two square pillars, all inscribed with the

« XIth DYNASTY WALL: DER EL- BAHARI.
Excavated by Mr. Hall, 1904, for the Egypt Exploration Fund.

name and titles of Mentuhetep. The walls masking the
platform in these colonnades were sculptured with vari-
ous scenes, chiefly representing boat processions and
campaigns against the Aamu or nomads of the Sinaitic
peninsula. The design of the colonnades is the same
as that of the Great Temple, and the whole plan of

ARCHITECTURE OF DIFFERENT DYNASTIES 325

this part, with its platform approached by a ramp
flanked by colonnades, is so like that of the Great Tem-
ple that we cannot but assume that the peculiar design
of the latter, with its tiers of platforms approached by
ramps flanked by colonnades, is not an original idea,

XvIlIth DYNASTY WALL, DER EL - BAHARI.
Excavated by M. Naville, 1896; repaired by Mr, Howard Carter, 1904.

but was directly copied by the XVIIIth Dynasty ar-
chitects from the older XIth Dynasty temple which
they found at Dér el-Bahari when they began their
work.

The supposed originality of Hatshepsu’s temple is
then non-existent; it was a copy of the older design, in

326 TEMPLES AND TOMBS OF THEBES

fact, a magnificent piece of archaism. But Hatshepsu’s
architects copied this feature only; the actual arrange-
ments on the platforms in the two temples are as differ-
ent as they can possibly be. In the older we have a
central pyramid with a colonnade round it, in the newer

EXCAVATION OF THE NORTH LOWER COLONNADE OF THE Xith
DYNASTY TEMPLE, DER EL-BAHARI, 1904.

may be found an open court in front of rock-cave
shrines.

Before the XIth Dynasty temple was set up a series
of statues of King Mentuhetep and of a later king,
Amenhetep I, in the form of Osiris, like those of Usert-
sen (Senusret) I at Lisht already mentioned. One of
these statues is in the British Museum. In the south
court were discovered six statues of King Usertsen

STATUES OF USERTSEN III 327

(Senusret) III, depicting him at different periods of
his life. Four of the heads are preserved, and, as the
expression of each differs from that of the other, it is

THE GRANITE THRESHOLD AND OCTAGONAL SANDSTONE PILLARS OF THE XIth DYNASTY
TEMPLE AT DER EL - BAHARI.

About 2500 B.c.

quite evident that some show him as a young, others
as an old, man. The face is of the well-known hard
and lined type which is seen also in the portraits of
Amenemhat III, and was formerly considered to be that

328 TEMPLES AND TOMBS OF THEBES

of the Hyksos. Messrs. Newberry and Garstang, as we
have seen, consider it to be so, indirectly, as they regard
the type as having been introduced into the XIIth Dy-
nasty by Queen Nefret, the mother of Usertsen (Sen-
usret) III. This queen, they think, was a Hittite prin-
cess, and the Hittites were practically the same thing

EXCAVATION OF THE TOMB OF A PRIESTESS, ON THE PLATFORM OF
THE XIth DYNASTY TEMPLE, DER EL-BAHARI, 1904.

as the Hyksos. We have seen, however, that there is
very little foundation for this view, and it is more than
probable that this peculiar physiognomy is of a type
purely Egyptian in character.

— On the platform, around the central pyramid, were
buried in small chamber-tombs a number of priestesses
of the goddess Hathor, the mistress of the desert and
special deity of Dér el-Bahari. They were all members

TOMBS OF. THE PRIESTESSES . 329

of the king’s harim, and they bore the title of ‘‘ King’s
Favourite.’’ As told in a previous chapter, all were
buried at one time, before the final completion of the
temple, and it is by no means impossible that they were
strangled at the king’s death and buried round him in
order that their ghosts might accompany him in the next
world, just as the slaves were buried around the graves
(or secondary graves) of the Ist Dynasty kings at Aby-
dos. They themselves, as also already related, took with
tnem to the next world little waxen figures which when
called upon could by magic be turned into ghostly
slaves. These images were ushabtiu, ‘‘ answerers,’’ the
predecessors of the little figures of wood, stone, and
pottery which are found buried with the dead in later
times. The priestesses themselves were, so to speak,
human ushabtiu, for royal use only, and accompanied
the kings to their final resting-place.

With the priestesses was buried the usual funerary
furniture characteristic of the period. This consisted
of little models of granaries with the peasants bringing
in the corn, models of bakers and brewers at work, boats
with their crews, etc., just as we find them in the XIth
and XIIth Dynasty tombs at el-Bersha and Beni Hasan.
These models, too, were supposed to be transformed
by magic into actual workmen who would work for the
deceased, heap up grain for her, brew beer for her, ferry
her over the ghostly Nile into the tomb-world, or per-
form any other services required.

Some of the stone sarcophagi of the priestesses are
very elaborately decorated with carved and painted

330 TEMPLES AND TOMBS OF THEBES

reliefs depicting each deceased receiving offerings from
priests, one of whom milks the holy cows of Hathor to
give her milk. The sarcophagi were let down into the
tomb in pieces and there joined together, and they have
been removed in the same way. ‘The finest is a unique

CASES OF ANTIQUITIES LEAVING DER EL-BAHARI FOR TRANSPORT TO CAIRO.

example of XIth Dynasty art, and it is now preserved
in the Museum of Cairo.

In memory of the priestesses there were erected on
the platform behind the pyramid a number of small
shrines, which were decorated with the most delicately
coloured carvings in high relief, representing chiefly
the same subjects as those on the sarcophagi. The

TOMBSTONE OF AN EGYPTIAN ARTIST 331

peculiar style of these reliefs was previously unknown.
In connection with them a most interesting possibility
presents itself. We know the name of the chief artist
of Mentuhetep’s reign. He was called Mertisen, and he
thus describes himself on his tombstone from Abydos,
now in the Louvre: ‘‘ I was an artist skilled in my art.

SHIPPING CASES OF ANTIQUITIES ON BOARD THE NILE STEAMER
AT LUXOR, FOR THE EGYPT EXPLORATION FUND.

I knew my art, how to represent the forms of going
forth and returning, so that each limb may be in its
proper place. I knew how the figure of a man should
walk and the carriage of a woman, the poising of the
arm to bring the hippopotamus low, the going of the
runner. I knew how to make amulets, which enable

302 TEMPLES AND TOMBS OF THEBES

us to go without fire burning us and without the flood
washing us away. No man could do this but I, and the
eldest son of my body. Him has the god decreed to
excel in art, and I have seen the perfections of the work
of his hands in every kind of rare stone, in gold and
silver, in ivory and ebony.’’ Now since Mertisen and
his son were the chief artists of their day, it is more
than probable that they were employed to decorate their
king’s funerary chapel. So that in all probability the
XIth Dynasty reliefs from Dér el-Bahari are the work
of Mertisen and his son, and in them we see the actual
‘‘ forms of going forth and returning, the poising of the
arm to bring the hippopotamus low, the going of the
runner,’’ to which he refers on his tombstone. This adds
a note of personal interest to the reliefs, an interest
which is often sadly wanting in Egypt, where we rarely
know the names of the great artists whose works we
admire so much. We have recovered the names of the
sculptor and painter of Seti I’s temple at Abydos and
that of the sculptor of some of the tombs at Tell el-
Amarna, but otherwise very few names of the artists
are directly associated with the temples and tombs
which they decorated, and of the architects we know
little more. The great temple of Dér el-Bahari was,
however, we know, designed by Senmut, the chief archi-
tect to Queen Hatshepsu.

It is noticeable that Mertisen’s art, if it is Mertisen’s,
is of a peculiar character. It is not quite so fully devel-
oped as that of the succeeding XIIth Dynasty. The
drawing of the figures is often peculiar, strange lanky

A REVIVAL OF ART 333

forms taking the place of the perfect proportions of the
IVth-VIth and the XIIth Dynasty styles. Great elab-
oration is bestowed upon decoration, which is again of
a type rather archaic in character when compared with
that of the XIIth Dynasty. We are often reminded of
the rude sculptures which used to be regarded as typical
of the art of the XIth Dynasty, while at the same time
we find work which could not be surpassed by the best
XIth Dynasty masters. In fact, the art of N eb-hapet-
Ra’s reign was the art of a transitional period. Under
the decadent Memphites of the VIIth and VIIIth Dy-
nasties, Egyptian art rapidly fell from the high estate
which it had attained under the Vth Dynasty, and,
though good work was done under the Hierakonpolites,
the chief characteristic of Egyptian art at the time of
the Xth and early XIth Dynasties is its curious rough-
ness and almost barbaric appearance. When, however,
the kings of the XIth Dynasty reunited the whole land
under one sceptre, and the long reign of N eb-hapet-Ra
Mentuhetep enabled the reconsolidation of the realm to
be carried out by one hand, art began to revive, and,
Just as to Neb-hapet-Ra must be attributed the renas-
cence of the Egyptian state under the hegemony of
Thebes, so must the revival of art in his reign be attrib-
uted to his great artists, Mertisen and his son. They
carried out in the realm of art what their king had
carried out in the political realm, and to them must be
attributed the origin of the art of the Middle Kingdom
which under the XIIth Dynasty attained so high a pitch
of excellence. The sculptures of the king’s temple at

334 TEMPLES AND TOMBS OF THEBES

Dér el-Bahari, then, are monuments of the renascence of
Egyptian art, after the state of decadence into which
it had fallen during the long civil wars between South
and North; it is a reviving art, struggling out of bar-
barism to regain perfection, and therefore has much
about it that seems archaic, stiff, and curious when com-
pared with later work. To the XVIIIth Dynasty Egyp-
tian it would no doubt have seemed hopelessly old-fash-
ioned and even semi-barbarous, and he had no qualms
about sweeping it aside whenever it appeared in the
way of the work of his own time; but to us this very
strangeness gives additional charm and interest, and we
ean only be thankful that Mertisen’s work has lasted
(in fragments only, it is true) to our own day, to tell
us the story of a little known chapter in the history of
ancient Egyptian art.

From this description it will have been seen that
the temple is an important monument of the Egyptian
art and architecture of the Middle Kingdom. It is the
only temple of that period of which considerable traces
have been found, and on that account the study of it will
be of the greatest interest. It is the best preserved of
the older temples of Kgypt, and at Thebes it is by far
the most ancient building recovered. Historically it has
given us a new king of the XIth Dynasty, Sekhaen-Ra
Mentuhetep, and the name of the queen of Neb-hapet-
Ra Mentuhetep, Aasheit, who seems to have been an
Ethiopian, to judge from her portrait, which has been
discovered. It is interesting to note that one of the
priestesses was a negress.

CHRONOLOGICAL CONCLUSIONS 335

The name Neb-hapet-Ra may be unfamiliar to those
readers who are acquainted with the lists of the Egyp-
tian kings. It is a correction of the former reading,
‘* Neb-kheru-Ra,’’ which is now known from these exca-
vations to be erroneous. Neb-hapet-Ra (or, as he used
to be called, Neb-kheru-Ra) is Mentuhetep III of Prof.
Petrie’s arrangement. With him there seem to have
come the kings Neb-hapet-Ra II (who is also com-
memorated in this temple) and Neb-taui-Ra; after him,
Sekhaen-Ra Mentuhetep IV and Seankhkara Mentu-
hetep V, accompanied by an Antef, bearing the hawk-
name Uah-ankh and others. These kings were fol-
lowed by Amenemhat I, the first king of the XIIth
Dynasty. Antef Uah-inkh may be numbered Antef I,
as the prince Antefa, who founded the XIth Dynasty,
did not assume the title of king.

Other kings of the name of Antef also ruled over
Egypt, and they used to be regarded as belonging to
the XIth Dynasty; but Prof. Steindorff has now proved
that they really reigned after the XIIIth Dynasty, and
immediately before the Sekenenras, who were the fight-
ers of the Hyksos and predecessors of the XVIIIth
Dynasty. The second names of Antef III (Seshes-Ra-
up-maat) and Antef IV (Seshes-Ra-her-her-maat) are
exactly similar to those of the XIIIth Dynasty kings and
quite unlike those of the Mentuheteps; also at Koptos
a decree of Antef IT (Nub-kheper-Ra) has been found
inscribed on a doorway of Usertsen (Senusret) I; so
that he cannot have preceded him. Prof. Petrie does
not yet accept these conclusions, and classes all the

336 TEMPLES AND TOMBS OF THEBES

Antefs together with the Mentuheteps in the XIth Dy-
nasty. He considers that he has evidence from Herakle-
opolis that Antef Nub-kheper-Ra (whom he numbers
Antef V) preceded the XIIth Dynasty, and he supposes
that the decree of Nub-kheper-Ra at Koptos is a later
copy of the original and was inscribed during the XIIth
Dynasty. But this is a difficult saying. The probabil-
ities are that Prof. Steindorff is right. Antef Uah-ankh
must, however, have preceded the XIIth Dynasty, since
an official of that period refers to his father’s father as
having lived in Uah-ankh’s time.

The necropolis of Dér el-Bahari was no doubt used
all through the period of the XIth and XIIth Dynasties,
and many tombs of that period have been found there.
A large number of these were obliterated by the build-
ing of the great temple of Queen Hatshepsu, in the
northern part of the cliff-bay. We know of one queen’s
tomb of that period which runs right underneath this
temple from the north, and there is another that is
entered at the south side which also runs down under-
neath it. Several tombs were likewise found in the court
between it and the XIth Dynasty temple. We know
that the X VITIth Dynasty temple was largely built over
this court, and we can see now the XIth Dynasty mask-
wall on the west of the court running northwards under-
neath the mass of the X VIIIth Dynasty temple. In all
probability, then, when the temple of Hatshepsu was
built, the larger portion of the Middle Kingdom necrop-
olis (of chamber-tombs reached by pits), which had filled
up the bay to the north of the Mentuhetep temple, was

DECADENCE OF ART 337

covered up and obliterated, just as the older VIth Dy-
nasty gallery tombs of Shékh Abd el-Kiirna had been
appropriated and altered at the same period.

The kings of the XIIth and XIIIth Dynasties were
not buried at Thebes, as we have seen, but in the North,
at Dashitr, Lisht, and near the Fayytim, with which their
royal city at Itht-taui had brought them into contact.
But at the end of the XIIIth Dynasty the great inva-
sion of the Hyksos probably occurred, and all Northern
Egypt fell under the Arab sway. The native kings
were driven south from the Fayyfim to Abydos, Koptos,
and Thebes, and at Thebes they were buried, in a
new necropolis to the north of Dér el-Bahari (prob-
ably then full), on the flank of a long spur of hill
which is now called Dra’ Abu-’l-Negga, ‘‘ Abu-’l-Neg-
ga’s Arm.’’ Here the Theban kings of the period be-
tween the XIIIth and XVIIth Dynasties, Upuantemsaf,
Antef Nub-kheper-Ra, and his descendants, Antefs III
and IV, were buried. In their time the pressure of
foreign invasion seems to have been felt, for, to judge
from their coffins, which show progressive degeneration
of style and workmanship, poverty now afflicted Upper
Egypt and art had fallen sadly from the high standard
which it had reached in the days of the XIth and XIIth
Dynasties. Probably the later Antefs and Sebekemsafs
were vassals of the Hyksos. Their descendants of the
XVIIth Dynasty were buried in the same necropolis
of Dra’ Abu-’l-Negga, and so were the first two kings
of the XVIIIth Dynasty, Aahmes and Amenhetep I.
The tombs of the last two have not yet been found, but

338 TEMPLES AND TOMBS OF THEBES

we know from the Abbott Papyrus that Amenhetep’s
was here, for, like that of Mentuhetep III, it was found
intact by the inspectors. It was a gallery-tomb of very
great length, and will be a most interesting find when
it is discovered, as it no doubt. eventually will be.
Aahmes had a tomb at Abydos, which was discovered
by Mr. Currelly, working for the Egypt Exploration
Fund. This, however, like the Abydene tomb of Usert-
sen (Senusret) III, was in all likelihood a sham or
secondary tomb, the king having most probably been
buried at Thebes, in the Dra’ Abu-’l-Negga. The Aby-
dos tomb is of interesting construction. The entrance —
is by a simple pit, from which a gallery runs round in
a curving direction to a great hall supported by eighteen
square pillars, beyond which is a further gallery which
was never finished. Nothing was found in the tomb.
On the slope of the mountain, due west of and in a line
with the tomb, Mr. Currelly found a terrace-temple anal-
ogous to those of Dér el-Bahari, approached not by
means of a ramp but by stairways at the side. It was
evidently the funerary temple of the tomb.

The secondary tomb of Usertsen (Senusret) IIT at
Abydos, which has already been mentioned, was discov-
ered in the preceding year by Mr. A. E. P. Weigall,
and excavated by Mr. Currelly in 1903. It lies north of
the Aahmes temple, between it and the main cemetery
of Abydos. It is a great bab or gallery-tomb, like those
of the later kings at Thebes, with the usual apparatus
of granite plugs, barriers, pits, etc., to defy plunderers.
The tomb had been plundered, nevertheless, though it

STATUE OF QUEEN TETA-SHERA.

Grandmother of Aahmes, the conqueror of the Hyksos and founder of the X VIIIth Dynasty.
About 1700 B. C. British Museum. From the photograph by Messrs. Mansell & Co.

SECONDARY TOMBS 339,

is probable that the robbers were vastly disappointed
with what they found in it. Mr. Currelly ascribes the
absence of all remains to the plunderers, but the fact
is that there probably never was anything in it but an
empty sarcophagus. Near the tomb Mr. Weigall dis-
covered some dummy mastabas, a find of great interest.
Just as the king had a secondary tomb, so secondary
mastabas, mere dummies of rubble like the XIth Dy-
nasty pyramid at Dér el-Bahari, were erected beside it
to look like the tombs of his courtiers. Some curious
sinuous brick walls which appear to act as dividing lines
form a remarkable feature of this sham cemetery. In
a line with the tomb, on the edge of the cultivation, is
the funerary temple belonging to it, which was found
by Mr. Randall-MaclIver in 1900. Nothing remains but
the bases of the fluted limestone columns and some brick
walls. <A headless statue of Usertsen was found.

We have an interesting example. of the custom of
building a secondary tomb for royalties in these two
necropoles of Dra’ Abu-’l-Negga and Abydos. Queen
Teta-shera, the grandmother of Aahmes, a beautiful
statuette of whom may be seen in the British Mu-
seum, had a small pyramid at Abydos, eastward of
and in a line with the temple and secondary tomb of
Aahmes. In 1901 Mr. Mace attempted to find the cham-
_ ber, but could not. In the next year Mr. Currelly found
between it and the Aahmes tomb a small chapel, contain-
ing a splendid stele, on which Aahmes commemorates
his grandmother, who, he says, was buried at Thebes
and had a mer-ahat at Abydos, and he records his deter-

340 - TEMPLES AND TOMBS OF THEBES

mination to build her also a pyramid at Abydos, out
of his love and veneration for her memory. It thus
appeared that the pyramid to the east was simply a
dummy, like Usertsen’s mastabas, or the Mentuhetep
pyramid at Dér el-Bahari. Teta-shera was actually
buried at Dra’ Abu-’l-Negga. Her secondary pyramid,
like that of Aahmes himself, was in the ‘‘ holy ground ”’
at Abydos, though it was not an imitation bab, but a
dummy pyramid of rubble. This well illustrates the
whole custom of the royal primary and secondary tombs,
which, as we have seen, had obtained in the case of royal
personages from the time of the Ist Dynasty, when Aha
had two tombs, one at Nakada and the other at Abydos.
It is probable that all the Ist Dynasty tombs at Abydos
are secondary, the kings being really buried elsewhere.
After their time we know for certain that Tjeser and
Snefru had duplicate tombs, possibly also Unas, and cer-
tainly Usertsen (Senusret) III, Amenemhat ILI, and
Aahmes; while Mentuhetep III and Queen ‘Teta-shera
had dummy pyramids as well as their tombs. Ramses
III also had two tombs, both at Thebes. The reasons
for this custom were two: first, the desire to elude plun-
derers, and second, the wish to give the ghost a pied-a-
terre on the sacred soil of Abydos or Sakkara.

As the inscription of Aahmes which records the
building of the dummy pyramid of Teta-shera is of
considerable interest, it may here be translated. The
text reads: “‘ It came to pass that when his Majesty
the king, even the king of South and North, Neb-
vehti-Ra, Son of the Sun, Aahmes, Giver of Life, was

A PICTURESQUE INSCRIPTION 341

taking his pleasure in the tjadu-hall, the hereditary
princess greatly favoured and greatly prized, the king’s
daughter, the king’s sister, the god’s wife and great wife
of the king, Nefret-ari-Aahmes, the living, was in the
presence of his Majesty. And the one spake unto the
other, seeking to do honour to Those There,’ which con-
sisteth in the pouring of water, the offering upon the
altar, the painting of the stele at the beginning of each
season, at the Festival of the New Moon, at the feast
of the month, the feast of the going-forth of the Sem-
priest, the Ceremonies of the Night, the Feasts of the
Fifth Day of the Month and of the Sixth, the Hak-
festival, the Uag-festival, the feast of Thoth, the begin-
ning of every season of heaven and earth. And his
sister spake, answering him: ‘ Why hath one remem-
bered these matters, and wherefore hath this word been
said? Prithee, what hath come into thy heart?’ The
king spake, saying: ‘ As for me, I have remembered the
mother of my mother, the mother of my father, the
king’s great wife and king’s mother Teta-shera, de-
ceased, whose tomb-chamber and mer-dhdt are at this
moment upon the soil of Thebes and Abydos. I have
spoken thus unto thee because my Majesty desireth to
cause a pyramid and chapel to be made for her in the
Sacred Land, as a gift of a monument from my Majesty,
and that its lake should be dug, its trees planted, and
its offerings prescribed; that it should be provided with
slaves, furnished with lands, and endowed with cattle,
with hen-ka priests and kher-heb priests performing
1 A polite periphrasis for the dead.

342 TEMPLES AND TOMBS OF THEBES

their duties,.each man knowing what he hath to do.’
Behold! when his Majesty had thus spoken, these things
were immediately carried out. His Majesty did these
things on account of the greatness of the love which
he bore her, which was greater than anything. Never
had ancestral kings done the like for their mothers.
Behold! his Majesty extended his arm and bent his
hand, and made for her the king’s offering to Geb, to
the Ennead of Gods, to the lesser Ennead of Gods...
[to Anubis] in the God’s Shrine, thousands of offerings
of bread, beer, oxen, geese, cattle ... to [the Queen
Teta-shera].’’ This is one of the most intéresting in-
scriptions discovered in Egypt in recent years, for the
picturesqueness of its diction is unusual.

As has already been said, the king Amenhetep I was
also buried in the Dra’ Abu-’l-Negga, but the tomb has
not yet been found. Amenhetep I and his mother, Queen
Nefret-ari-Aahmes, who is mentioned in the inscription
translated above, were both venerated as_ tutelary
demons of the Western Necropolis of Thebes after their
deaths, as also was Mentuhetep III. At Dér el-Bahari
both kings seem to have been worshipped with Hathor,
the Mistress of the Waste. The worship of Amen-Ra
in the XVIIIth Dynasty temple of Dér el-Bahari was
a novelty introduced by the priests of Amen at that
time. But the worship of Hathor went on side by side
with that of Amen in a chapel with a rock-cut shrine
at the side of the Great Temple. Very possibly this
was the original cave-shrine of Hathor, long before Men-
tuhetep’s time, and was incorporated with the Great

THE GREAT TEMPLE 343

Temple and beautified with the addition of a pillared
hall before it, built over part of the XIth Dynasty north
court and wall, by Hatshepsu’s architects. _

The Great Temple, the excavation of which for the
Egypt. Exploration Fund was successfully brought to
an end by Prof. Naville in 1898, was erected by
Queen Hatshepsu in honour of Amen-Ra, her father
Thothmes I, and her brother-husband Thothmes IJ, and
received a few additions from Thothmes III, her suc-
cessor. He, however, did not complete it, and it fell
into disrepair, besides suffering from the iconoclastic
zeal of the heretic Akhunaten, who hammered out some
of the beautifully painted scenes upon its walls. These
were badly restored by Ramses II, whose painting is
easily distinguished from the original work by the dul-
ness and badness of its colour.

The peculiar plan and other remarkable character-
istics of this temple are well known. Its great terraces,
with the ramps leading up to them, flanked by colon-
nades, which, as we have seen, were imitated from the
design of the old XIth Dynasty temple at its side, are
familiar from a hundred illustrations, and the marvel-
lously preserved colouring of its delicate reliefs is known
to every winter visitor to Egypt, and can be realized
by those who have never been there through.the medium
of Mr. Howard Carter’s wonderful coloured reproduc-
tions, published in Prof. Naville’s edition of the temple
by the Egypt Exploration Fund. The Great Temple
stands to-day clear of all the débris which used to cover
it, a lasting monument to the work of the greatest of

344 TEMPLES AND TOMBS OF THEBES

the societies which busy themselves with the unearthing
of the relics of the ancient world. The two temples of
Dér el-Bahari will soon stand side by side, as they orig-
inally stood, and will always be associated with the name

THE TWO TEMPLES OF DER EL -BAHARI.

Excavated by Prof. Naville, 1893 - 8 and 1903 - 6, for the Egypt Exploration Fund.

of the society which rescued them from oblivion, and
gave us the treasures of the royal tombs at Abydos.
The names of the two men whom the Egypt Exploration
Fund commissioned to excavate Dér el-Bahari and Aby-
dos, and for whose work it exclusively, supplied the

A SCENE OF ARID BEAUTY 345

funds, Profs. Naville and Petrie, will live chiefly in con-
nection with their work at Dér el-Bahari and Abydos.
The Egyptians called the two temples T'jeserti, ‘‘ the
two holy places,’’ the new building receiving the name
of Tyjeser-tjesru, ‘‘ Holy of Holies,’’ and the whole tract
of Dér el-Bahari the appellation Tjesret, ‘ the Holy.”’
The extraordinary beauty of the situation in which they
are placed, with its huge cliffs and rugged hillsides, may
be appreciated from the photograph which is taken from
a Steep path half-way up the cliff above the Great Tem-
ple. In it we see the Great Temple in the foreground
with the modern roofs of two of its colonnades, devised
in order to protect the sculptures beneath them, the
great trilithon gate leading to the upper court, and the
entrance to the cave-shrine of Amen-Ra, with the niches
of the kings on either side, immediately at the foot of
the cliff. In the middle distance is the duller form of
the XIth Dynasty temple, with its rectangular platform,
the ramp leading up to it, and the pyramid in the centre
of it, surrounded by pillars, half-emerging from the
great heaps of sand and débris all around. The back-
ground of cliffs and hills, as seen in the photograph,
will serve to give some idea of the beauty of the sur-
roundings,—an arid beauty, it is true, for all is desert.
There is not a blade of vegetation near; all is salmon-
red in colour beneath a sky of ineffable blue, and against
the red cliffs the white temple stands out in vivid
contrast. .
The second illustration gives a nearer view of the
great trilithon gate in the upper court, at the head of

346 TEMPLES AND TOMBS OF THEBES

the ramp. The long hill of Dra’ Abu-’l-Negga is seen
bending away northward behind the gate. This is
the famous gate on which the jealous Thothmes IIL

THE UPPER COURT AND TRILITHON GATE OF THE XVIIIth DYNASTY TEMPLE AT
DER EL- BAHARI.

About 1500 B.c.

chiselled out Hatshepsu’s name in the royal cartouches
and inserted his own in its place; but he forgot to
alter the gender of the pronouns in the accompanying

SHRINE OF HATHOR { 347

inscription, which therefore reads ‘‘ King Thothmes ITI,
she made this monument to her father Amen.”

Among Prof. Naville’s discoveries here one of the
most important is that of the altar in a small court to
the north, which, as the inscription says, was made in
honour of the god Ra-Harmachis “‘ of beautiful white
stone of Anu.”’ It is of the finest white limestone
known. Here also were found the carved ebony doors
of a shrine, now in the Cairo Museum. One of the most
beautiful parts of the temple is the Shrine of Anubis,
with its splendidly preserved paintings and perfect col-
umns and roof of white limestone. The effect of the
pure white stone and simplicity of architecture is almost
Hellenic. '

The Shrine of Hathor has been known since the time
of Mariette, but in connection with it some interesting
‘discoveries have been made during the excavation of
the XIth Dynasty temple. In the court between the
two temples were found a large number of small votive
offerings, consisting of scarahs, beads, little figures of
cows and women, etc., of blue glazed faience and rough
pottery, bronze and wood, and blue glazed ware ears,
eyes, and plaques with figures of the sacred cow, and
other small objects of the same nature. These are evi-
dently the ex-votos of the XVIIIth Dynasty fellahin to
the goddess Hathor in the rock-shrine above the court.
When the shrine was full or the little ex-votos broken,
the sacristans threw them over the wall into the court
below, which thus became a kind of dust-heap. Over
this heap the sand and débris gradually collected, and

348 TEMPLES AND TOMBS OF THEBES

thus they were preserved. The objects found are of
considerable interest to anthropological science.

The Great Temple was built, as we have said, in
honour of Thothmes I and II, and the deities Amen-Ra
and Hathor. More especially it was the funerary chapel
of Thothmes I. His tomb was excavated, not in the
Dra’ Abu-’l-Negga, which was doubtless now too near
the capital city and not in a sufficiently dignified posi-
tion of aloofness from the common herd, but at the end
of the long valley of the Wadiyén, behind the cliff-hill
above Dér el-Bahari. Hence the new temple was ori-
ented in the direction of his tomb. Immediately behind
the temple, on the other side of the hill, is the tomb
which was discovered by Lepsius and cleared in 1904 for
Mr. Theodore N. Davis by Mr. Howard Carter, then
chief inspector of antiquities at Thebes. Its gallery is
of very small dimensions, and it winds about in the hill
in corkscrew fashion like the tomb of Aahmes at Aby-
dos. Owing to its extraordinary length, the heat and
foul air in the depths of the tomb were almost insup-
portable and caused great difficulty to the excavators.
When the sarcophagus-chamber was at length reached,
it was found to contain the empty sarcophagi of
Thothmes I and of Hatshepsu. The bodies had been
removed for safe-keeping in the time of the XXIst Dy-
nasty, that of Thothmes I having been found with those
of Seti I and Ramses IT in the famous pit at Dér el-
Bahari, which was discovered by M. Maspero in 1881.
Thothmes I seems to have had another and more elab-
orate tomb (No. 38) in the Valley of the Tombs of the

-THE TOMBS OF THE KINGS 349

Kings, which was discovered by M. Loret in 1898. Its
frescoes had been destroyed by the infiltration of
water.

The fashion of royal burial in the great valley behind
Dér el-Bahari was followed during the X VIIIth, X1IXth,
and XXth Dynasties. Here in the eastern branch of
the Wadiyén, now called the Bibdn el-Mulik, “ the
Tombs of the Kings,’’ the greater number of the might-
iest Theban Pharaohs were buried. In the western val-
ley rested two of the kings of the XVIIIth Dynasty,
who desired even more remote burial-places, Amenhe-
tep III and Ai. The former chose for his last home
a most kingly site. Ancient kings had raised great
pyramids of artificial stone over their graves. Amen-
hetep, perhaps the greatest and most powerful Pharaoh
of them all, chose to have a natural pyramid for his
grave, a mountain for his tumulus. The illustration
shows us the tomb of this monarch, opening out of the
side of one of the most imposing hills in the Western
Valley. No other king but Amenhetep rested beneath
this hill, which thus marks his grave and his only.

It is in the Eastern Valley, the Valley of the Tombs
of the Kings properly speaking, that the tombs of
Thothmes I and Hatshepsu lie, and here the most recent
discoveries have been made. It is a desolate spot. As
we come over the hill from Dér el-Bahari we see below
us in the glaring sunshine a rocky cafon, with sides
sometimes sheer cliff, sometimes sloped by great falls
of rock in past ages. At the bottom of these slopes
the square openings of the many royal tombs can be

350 TEMPLES AND TOMBS OF THEBES

descried.' Far below we see the forms of tourists and
the tomb-guards accompanying them, moving in and out
of the openings like ants going in and out of an ants’
nest. Nothing is heard but the occasional ery of a kite
_and the ceaseless rhythmical throbbing of the exhaust-

THE TOMB-MOUNTAIN OF AMENHETEP Ill, IN THE WESTERN VALLEY, THEBES.

pipe of the electric light engine in the unfinished
tomb of Ramses XI. Above and around are the red
desert hills. The Egyptians called it ‘‘ The Place of
Eternity.”’

In this valley some remarkable discoveries have been
made during the last few years. In 1898 M. Grébaut

1See illustration.

A ROYAL MUMMY ON EXHIBITION 351

discovered the tomb of Amenhetep II, in which was
found the mummy of the king, intact, lying in its sar-
cophagus in the depths of the tomb. The royal body
now lies there for all to see. The tomb is lighted with
electricity, as are all the principal tombs of the kings.
At the. head of the sarcophagus is a single lamp, and,
when the party of visitors is collected in silence around
the place of death, all the lights are turned out, and
then the single light is switched on, showing the royal
head uluminated against the surrounding blackness.
The effect is indescribably weird and impressive. The
body has only twice been removed from the tomb since
its burial, the second time when it was for a brief space
taken up into the sunlight to be photographed by Mr.
Carter, in January, 1902. The temporary removal was
carefully carried out, the body of his Majesty being
borne up through the passages of the tomb on the
shoulders of the Italian electric light workmen, pre-
ceded’ and followed by impassive Arab candle-bearers.
The workmen were most reverent in their handling of
the body of ‘‘ a gran ré,’’ as they called him.

In the tomb were found some very interesting ob-
jects, including a model boat (afterwards stolen), across
which lay the body of a woman. This body now lies,
with others found close by, in a side chamber of the
tomb. One may be that of Hatshepsu. The walls of
_ the tomb-chamber are painted to resemble papyrus, and
on them are written chapters of the ‘‘ Book of What
Is in the Underworld,’’ for the guidance of the royal
ghost.

352 TEMPLES AND TOMBS OF THEBES

In 1902-3 Mr. Theodore Davis excavated the tomb
of Thothmes IV. It yielded a rich harvest of antiquities
belonging to the funeral state of the king, including a
chariot with sides of embossed and gilded leather, dec-
orated with representations of the king’s warlike deeds,
and much fine blue pottery, all of which are now in the
Cairo Museum. The tomb-gallery returns upon itself,
describing a curve. An interesting point with regard
to it is that it had evidently been violated even in the
short time between the reigns of its owner and Horem-
heb, probably in the period of anarchy which prevailed
at ‘Thebes during the reign of the heretic Akhunaten;
for in one of the chambers is a hieratic inscription
recording the repair of the tomb in the eighth year of
Horemheb by Maya, superintendent of works in the
Tombs of the Kings. It reads as follows: ‘‘ In the
eighth year, the third month of summer, under the
Majesty of King Tjeser-khepru-Ra Sotp-n-Ra, Son of
the Sun, Horemheb Meriamen, his Majesty (Life, health,
and wealth unto him!) commanded that orders should be
sent unto the Fanbearer on the King’s Left Hand, the
King’s Scribe and Overseer of the Treasury, the Over-
seer of the Works in the Place of Eternity, the Leader
of the Festivals of Amen in Karnak, Maya, son of the
judge Aui, born of the Lady Ueret, that he should
renew the burial of King Men-khepru-Ra, deceased, in
the August Habitation in Western Thebes.’? Men-
khepru-Ra was the prenomen or throne-name of
Thothmes IV. Tied round a pillar in the tomb is still
a length of the actual rope used by. the thieves for

EVIDENCE OF LAVISH WEALTH 353

crossing the chasm, which, as in many of the tombs
here, was left open in the gallery to bar the way to
plunderers. The mummy of the king was found in the
tomb of Amenhetep II, and is now at Cairo.

The discovery of the tomb of Thothmes I and Hat-
shepsu has already been described. In 1905 Mr. Davis
made his latest find, the tomb of Iuaa and Tuaa, the
father and mother of Queen Tii, the famous consort of |
Amenhetep III and mother of Akhunaten the heretic.
Readers of Prof. Maspero’s history will remember that
Iuaa and Tuaa are mentioned on one of the large
memorial scarabs of Amenhetep III, which commem-
orates his marriage. The tomb has yielded an almost
incredible treasure of funerary furniture, besides the
actual mummies of Tii’s parents, including a chariot
overlaid with gold. Gold overlay of great thickness is
found on everything, boxes, chairs, ete. It was no won-
der that Egypt seemed the land of gold to the Asiatics,
and that even the King of Babylon begs this very Pha-
raoh Amenhetep to send him gold, in one of the letters
found at Tell el-Amarna, ‘“ for gold is as water in thy
land.’’ It is probable that Egypt really attained the
height of her material wealth and prosperity in the
reign of Amenhetep III. Certainly her dominion reached
its farthest limits in his time, and his influence was
felt from the Tigris to the Sudan. He hunted lions
for his pleasure in Northern Mesopotamia, and he built
temples at Jebel Barkal beyond Dongola. We see the
evidence of lavish wealth in the furniture of the tomb
of Iuaa and Tuaa. Yet, fine as are many of these

354 TEMPLES AND TOMBS OF THEBES

gold-overlaid and overladen objects of the XVIIIth
Dynasty, they have neither the good taste nor the charm
of the beautiful jewels from the XIIth Dynasty tombs
at Dashtr. It is mere vulgar wealth. There is too
much gold thrown about. ‘‘ For gold is as water in
thy land.’’ In three hundred years’ time Egypt was
to know what poverty meant, when the poor priest-
kings of the XXIst Dynasty could hardly keep body
and soul together and make a comparatively decent
show as Pharaohs of Egypt. Then no doubt the latter-
day Thebans sighed for the good old times of the
XVIIIth Dynasty, when their city ruled a considerable
part of Africa and Western Asia and garnered their
riches into her coffers. But the days of: the XIIth
Dynasty had really been better still. Then there was
not so much wealth, but what there was (and there was
as much gold then, too) was used sparingly, tastefully,
and simply. The XIIth Dynasty, not the X VIIIth, was
the real Golden Age of Egypt.

From the funeral panoply of a tomb like that of
Iuaa and Tuaa we can obtain some idea of the pomp
and state of Amenhetep IIT. But the remains of his
Theban palace, which have been discovered and exca-
vated by Mr. C. Tytus and Mr. P. E. Newberry, do not
bear out this idea of magnificence. It is quite possible
that the palace was merely a pleasure house, erected
very hastily and destined to fall to pieces when its owner
tired of it or died, like the many palaces of the late
Khedive Ismail. It stood on the border of an artificial
lake, whereon the Pharaoh and his consort Tii sailed

A THEBAN PALACE 355

to take their pleasure in golden barks. This is now
the cultivated rectangular space of land known as the
Birket Habit, which is still surrounded by the remains
of the embankment built to retain its waters, and be-
comes a lake during the inundation. On the western
shore of this lake Amenhetep erected the “ stately
pleasure dome,’’ the remains of which still cover the
sandy tract known as el-Malkata, ‘the Salt- -pans,”’
south of the great temple of Medinet Habt. These
remains consist merely of the foundations and lowest
wall-courses of a complicated and rambling building of
many chambers, constructed of common unburnt brick
and plastered with white stucco on walls and floors, on
which were painted beautiful frescoes of fighting bulls,
birds of the air, water-fowl, fish-ponds, ete., in much
the same style as the frescoes of Tell el-Amarna exe-
cuted in the next reign. There were small pillared halls,
the columns of which were of wood, mounted on bases
of white limestone. The majority still remain in posi-
tion. In several chambers there are small daises, and
in one the remains of a throne, built of brick and mud
covered with plaster and stucco, upon which the Pha-
raoh Amenhetep sat. This is the palace of him whom
the Greeks called Memnon, who ruled Egypt when Israel
was in bondage and when the dynasty of Minos reigned
in Crete. Here by the side of his pleasure-lake the
most powerful of Egyptian Pharaohs whiled away his
time during the summer heats. Evidently the building
was intended to be of the lightest construction, and
never meant to last; but to our ideas it seems odd that

356 TEMPLES AND TOMBS OF THEBES

an Egyptian Pharaoh should live in a mud palace. Such
a building is, however, quite suited to the climate of
Egypt, as are the modern crude brick dwellings of the
fellahin. In the ruins of the palace were found several
small objects of interest, and close by was an ancient
glass manufactory of Amenhetep III’s time, where much

THE TOMB-HILL OF SHEKH ’ABD EL-KO®RNA, THEBES.

of the characteristic beautifully coloured and variegated
opaque glass of the period was made.

The tombs of the magnates of Amenhetep III’s reign
and of the reigns of his immediate predecessors were
excavated, as has been said, on the eastern slope of the
hill of Shékh ’Abd el-Kiirna, where was the earliest
Theban necropolis. No doubt many of the early tombs

TIME’S REVENGE 357

of the time of the VIth Dynasty were appropriated and
remodelled by the XVIIIth Dynasty magnates. We
have an instance of time’s revenge in this matter, in
the case of the tomb of Imadua, a great priestly official
of the time of the XXth Dynasty. This tomb previously
belonged to an XVIIIth Dynasty worthy, but Imadua
appropriated it three hundred years later and covered
up all its frescoes with the much begilt decoration fash-
ionable in his period. Perhaps the XVIIIth Dynasty
owner had stolen it from an original owner of the time
of the VIth Dynasty. The tomb has lately been cleared
out by Mr. Newberry.

Much work of the same kind has been done here of
late years by Messrs. Newberry and R. L. Mond, in
succession. 'T'o both we are indebted for the excavation
of many known tombs, as well as for the discovery of
many others previously unknown. Among the former
was that of Sebekhetep, cleared by Mr. Newberry. Se-
bekhetep was an official of the time of Thothmes III.
From his tomb, and from others in the same hill, came
many years ago the fine frescoes shown in the illustra-
tion, which are among the most valued treasures of the
Egyptian department of the British Museum. They are
typical specimens of the wall-decoration of an X VIIIth
Dynasty tomb. On one may be seen a bald-headed peas-
ant, with staff in hand, pulling an ear of corn from
the standing crop in order to see if it is ripe. He is the
‘* Chief Reaper,’’ and above him is a prayer that the
‘* oreat god in heaven ’’ may increase the crop. To the
right of him is a charioteer standing beside a car and

358 TEMPLES AND TOMBS OF THEBES

reining back a pair of horses, one black, the other bay.
Below is another charioteer with two white horses. He
sits on the floor of the car with his back to them, eating
or resting, while they nibble the branches of a tree close
by. Another scene is that of a scribe keeping tally of
offerings brought to the tomb, while fellahin are bring-
ing flocks of geese and other fowl, some in crates. The
inscription above is apparently addressed by the goose-
herd to the man with the crates. It reads: ‘* Hasten
thy feet because of the geese! Hearken! thou knowest
not the next minute what has been said to thee! ”’
Above, a reis with a stick bids other peasants squat
on the ground before addressing the scribe, and he is
saying to them: ‘* Sit ye down to talk.’’ The third scene
is in another style; on it may be seen Semites bringing
offerings of vases of gold, silver, and copper to the royal
presence, bowing themselves to the ground and kissing
the dust before the throne. The fidelity and accuracy
with which the racial type of the tribute-bearers is
given is most extraordinary; every face seems a por-
trait, and each one might be seen any day now in the
Jewish quarters of Whitechapel.

The first two paintings are representative of a very
common style of fresco-pictures in these tombs. The
eare with which the animals are depicted is remarkable.
Possibly one of the finest Egyptian representations
of an animal is the fresco of a goat in the tomb of
Gen-Amen, discovered by Mr. Mond. There is even an
attempt here at chiaroscuro, which is unknown to Egyp-
tian art generally, except at Tell el-Amarna. Evidently

"OF 2Y ]JesueyA] “sussaq,y &q ydei8oj044 ‘unesnyA] Yysnug
‘soqoay | UI9}SO ‘eulny-[2 PqV. qyAe24S 3e quo | Re woly suyguied-e \\

FRESCOES IN THE TOMBS 359

the Egyptian painters reached the apogee of their art
towards the end of the XVIIIth Dynasty. The third,
the representation of tribute-bearers, is of a type also
well known at this period. In all the chief tombs we
have processions of Egyptians, Westerners, Northerners,
HKasterners, and Southerners, bringing tribute to the
Pharaoh. The North is represented by the Semites, the
East by the Punites (when they occur), the South by
negroes, the West by the Keftiu or people of Crete and
Cyprus. The representations of the last-named people
have become of the very highest interest during the last
few years, on account of the discoveries in Crete, which
have revealed to us the state and civilization of these
very Keftiu. Messrs. Evans and Halbherr have discov-
ered at Knossos and Phaistos the cities and palace-_
temples of the king who sent forth their ambassadors
to far-away Egypt with gifts for the mighty Pharaoh; |
these ambassadors were painted in the tombs of their
hosts as representative of the quarter of the world from
which they came. |

The two chief Egyptian representations of these
people, who since they lived in Greece may be called
Greeks, though their more proper title would be ‘‘ Pe-
lasgians,’’ are to be found in the tombs of Rekhmara
and Senmut, the former a vizier under Thothmes III,
the latter the architect of Hatshepsu’s temple at Dér
el-Bahari. Senmut’s tomb is a new rediscovery. It was
known, as Rekhmara’s was, in the early days of Egyp-
tological science, and Prisse d’Avennes copied its paint-
ings. It was afterwards lost sight of until rediscovered

360 TEMPLES AND TOMBS OF THEBES

by Mr. Newberry and Prof. Steindorff. The tomb of
Rekhmara (No. 35) is well known to every visitor to-
Thebes, but it is difficult to get at that of Senmut

FRESCO IN THE TOMB OF SENMUT AT THEBES.
About 1500 B. ©,

(No. 110); it lies at the top of the hill round to the
left and overlooking Dér el-Bahari, — an appropriate
place for it, by the way. *In some ways Senmut’s

MYCENAAN FRESCOES 361

representations are more interesting than Rekhmara’s.
They are more easily seen, since they are now in the
open air, the fore hall of the tomb having been ruined;
and they are better preserved, since they have not been
subjected to a century of inspection with naked candles
and pawing with greasy hands, as have Rekhmara’s
frescoes. Further, there is no possibility of mistaking
what they represent. From right to left, walking in
procession, we see the Minoan gift-bearers from Crete,
carrying in their hands and on their shoulders great
cups of gold and silver, in shape like the famous gold
cups found at Vaphio in Lakonia, but much larger, also
a ewer of gold and silver exactly like one of bronze
discovered by Mr. Evans two years ago at Knossos,
and a huge copper jug with four ring-handles round
the sides. All these vases are specifically and definitely
Mycenean, or rather, following the new terminology,
Minoan. They are of Greek manufacture and are car-
ried on the shoulders of Pelasgian Greeks. The bearers
wear the usual Mycenzan costume, high boots and a gaily
ornamented kilt, and little else, just as we see it de-
picted in the fresco of the Cupbearer at Knossos and
in other Greek representations. The coiffure, possibly
the most characteristic thing about the Mycenean
Greeks, is faithfully represented by the Egyptians both
here and in Rekhmara’s tomb. The Mycenean men
allowed their hair to grow to its full natural length,
like women, and wore it partly hanging down the back,
partly tied up in a knot or plait (the xépas of the dandy
Paris in the Iliad) on the crown of the head. This was

poe TEMPLES AND TOMBS OF THEBES

the universal fashion, and the Keftiu are consistently
depicted by the XVIIIth Dynasty Egyptians as follow-
ing it. The faces in the Senmut fresco are not so well por-
trayed as those in the Rekhmara fresco. There it is evi-
dent that the first three ambassadors are faithfully de-
picted, as the portraits are marked. The procession ad-
vances from left to right. The first man, ‘‘ the Great
Chief of the Kefti and the Isles of the Green Sea,” 1

young, and has a remarkably small mouth with an amia-
ble expression. His complexion is fair rather than dark,
but his hair is dark brown. His heutenant, the next in
order, is of a different type,—elderly, with a most for-
bidding visage, Roman nose, and nutcracker jaws. Most
of the others are very much alike,—young, dark in com-
plexion, and with long black hair hanging below their
waists and twisted up into fantastic knots and curls on
the tops of their heads. One, carrying on his shoulder a
great silver vase with curving handles and in one hand a
dagger of early European Bronze Age type, is looking
back to hear some remark of his next companion. Any
one of these gift-bearers might have sat for the portrait
of the Knossian Cupbearer, the fresco discovered by Mr.
Evans in the palace-temple of Minos; he has the same -
ruddy brown complexion, the same long black hair
dressed in the same fashion, the same parti-coloured kilt,
and he bears his vase in much the same way. We
have only to allow for the difference of Egyptian and
Mycenean ways of drawing. There is no doubt what-
ever that these Keftiu of the Egyptians were Oretans
of the Minoan Age. They used to be considered Phoo-

AN IMPORTANT DISCOVERY 363

nicians, but this view was long ago exploded. They
are not Semites, and that is quite enough. Neither are
they Asiatics of any kind. They are purely and simply
Mycenzan, or rather Minoan, Greeks of the pre-Hel-
lenic period—Pelasgi, that is to say.

Probably no discovery of more far-reaching impor-
tance to our knowledge of the history of the world gen-
erally and of our own culture especially has ever been
made than the finding of Mycene by Schliemann, and
the further finds that have resulted therefrom, culminat-
ing in the discoveries of Mr. Arthur Evans at Knossos.
Naturally, these discoveries are of extraordinary inter-
est to us, for they have revealed the beginnings and first
bloom of the European civilization of to-day. For our
culture-ancestors are neither the Egyptians, nor the
Assyrians, nor the Hebrews, but the Hellenes, and they,
the Aryan-Greeks, derived most of their civilization
from the pre-Hellenic people whom they found in the
land before them, the Pelasgi or ‘‘ Mycenzan ”’ Greeks,
‘* Minoans,’’ as we now call them, the Keftiu of the
Egyptians. These are the ancient Greeks of the Heroic
Age, to which the legends of the Hellenes refer; in their
day were fought the wars of Troy and of the Seven
against Thebes, in their day the tragedy-of the Atride
was played out to its end, in their day the wise Minos
ruled Knossos and the Aigean. And of all the events
which are at the back of these legends we know nothing.
The hieroglyphed tablets of the pre-Hellenic Greeks lie
before us, but we cannot read them; we can only see
that the Minoan writing in many ways resembled the

364 TEMPLES AND TOMBS OF THEBES

Egyptian, thus again confirming our impression of the
original early conneeétion of the two cultures.’

In view of this connection, and the known close rela-
tions between Crete and Egypt, from the end of the
XIIth Dynasty to the end of the XVIIIth, we might
have hoped to recover at Knossos a bilingual inscription
in Cretan and Egyptian hieroglyphs which would give us
the key to the Minoan script and tell us what we so
dearly wish to know. But this hope has not yet been
realized. Two Egyptian inscriptions have been found
at Knossos, but no bilingual one. A list of Keftian
names is preserved in the British Museum upon an
Egyptian writing-board from Thebes with what is per-
haps a copy of a single Cretan hieroglyph, a vase; but
again, nothing bilingual. A list of ‘‘ Keftian words ”’
occurs at the head of a papyrus, also in the British
Museum, but they appear to be nonsense, a mere imita-
tion of the sounds of a strange tongue. Still we need
not despair of finding the much desired Cretan-Egyp-
tian bilingual inscription yet. Perhaps the double text
of a treaty between Crete and Egypt, like that of
Ramses II with the Hittites, may come to light. Mean-
while we can only do our best with the means at our
hand to trace out the history of the relations of the
oldest European culture with the ancient civilization of
Egypt. The tomb-paintings at Thebes are very impor-
tant material. For it is due to them that the voice of
the doubter has finally ceased to be heard, and that now
no archeologist questions that the Egyptians were in

1 See above, p. 128.

MYCENHAN AND EGYPTIAN. CONNECTION 365

direct communication with the Cretan Mycenzans in the
time of the XVIIIth Dynasty, some fifteen hundred
years before Christ, for no one doubts that the pictures
of the Keftiu are pictures of Mycenzans.

As we have seen, we know that this connection was
far older than the time of the XVIIIth Dynasty, but
it is during that time and the Hyksos period that we
have the clearest documentary proof of its existence,
from the statuette of Abnub and the alabastron lid of
King Khian, found at Knossos, down to the Mycenxan
pottery fragments found at Tell el-Amarna, a site which
has been utterly abandoned since the time of the heretic
Akhunaten (8. c. 1480), so that there is no possibility
of anything found there being later than his time. That
the connection existed as late as the time of the XXth
Dynasty we know from the representations of golden
Bigelkannen or false-necked vases of Mycenean form
in the tomb of Ramses III in the Biban el-Multik, and
of golden cups of Vaphio type in the tomb of Imadua,
already mentioned. This brings the connection down to
about 1050 B. c.

After that date we cannot hope to find any certain
evidence of connection, for by that time the Mycenean
civilization had probably come to an end. In the days
of the XIIth and XVITIth Dynasties a great and splen-
did power evidently existed in Crete, and sent its peace-
ful ambassadors, the Keftiu who are represented in
the Theban tombs, to Egypt. But with the XIXth
Dynasty the name of the Keftiu disappears from Egyp-
tian records, and their place is taken by a congeries

366 TEMPLES AND TOMBS OF THEBES

of warring seafaring tribes, whose names as given by
the Egyptians seem to be forms of tribal and place
names well known to us in the Greece of later days.
We find the Akaivasha (Ayaol, Achaians), Shakalsha
(Sagalassians of Pisidia), Tursha (Tylissians of Crete?),
and Shardana (Sardians) allied with the Libyans and
Mashauash (Maxyes) in a land attack upon Egypt in
the days of Meneptah, the successor of Ramses I[—just
as in the later days of the XX VIth Dynasty the North-
ern pirates visited the. African shore of the Mediter-
ranean, and in alliance with the predatory Libyans
attacked Egypt.

Prof. Petrie has lately* proffered an alternative view,
which would make all these tribes Tunisians and Alge-
rians, thus disposing of the identification of the Akai-
vasha with the Achaians, and making them the ancient
representatives of the town of el-Aghwat (Roman
Agbia) in Tunis. But several difficulties might be
pointed out which are in the way of an acceptance of
this view, and it is probable that the older identifica-
tions with Greek tribes must still be retained, so that
Meneptah’s Akaivasha are evidently the ancient repre-
sentatives of the Achai(v)ans, the Achivi of the Roman
poets. The terminations sha and na, which appear in
these names, are merely ethnic and locative affixes be-
longing to the Asianic language system spoken by these
tribes at that time, to which the language of the Minoan
Cretans (which is written in the Knossian hieroglyphs)
belonged. They existed in ancient Lycian in the forms

1 History of Egypt, iii, pp. 111, 112.

EGYPTIAN TERMINOLOGY 367

azet and fia, and we find them enshrined in the Asia
Minor place-names terminating in assos and nda, as
Halikarnassos, Sagalassos (Shakalasha in Meneptah’s
Inscription), Oroanda, and Labraunda (which, as we
have seen, is the same as the Greek AaBvpwOos, a word of
pre-Hellenic origin, both meaning ‘‘ Place of the Double
Axe’’). The identification of these sha and na termi-
nations in the Egyptian transliterations of the foreign
names, with the Lycian affixes referred to, was made
some five years ago,’ and is now generally accepted.
We have, then, to find the equivalents of these names,
to strike off the final termination, as in the case of
Akaiva-sha, where Akaiva only is the real name, and
this seems to be the Egyptian equivalent of A-yaiol,
Achivi. It is strange to meet with this great name on
an Egyptian monument of the thirteenth century B. c.
But yet not so strange, when we recollect that it is pre-
cisely to that period that Greek legend refers the war
of Troy, which was an attack by Greek tribes from all
parts of the Aigean upon the Asianic city at Hissarlik
in the Troad, exactly parallel to the attacks of the
Northerners on Egypt. And Homer preserves many
a reminiscence of early Greek visits, peaceful and the
reverse, to the coast of Egypt at this period. The reader
will have noticed that one no longer treats the siege
of Troy as a myth. To do so would be to exhibit a
most uncritical mind; even the legends of King Arthur
have a historic foundation, and those of the Nibelungen
are still more probable.
1See Hall, Oldest Civilization of Greece, p. 178 f.

368 TEMPLES AND TOMBS OF THEBES

In the eighth year of Ramses LIT the second North-
ern attack was made, by the Pulesta (Pelishtim, Philis-
tines), Tjakaray, Shakalasha (Sagalassians), Vashasha,
and Danauna or Daanau, in alliance with North Syrian
tribes. The Danauna are evidently the ancient repre-
sentatives of the Aavaol, the Danaans who formed the
bulk of the Greek army against Troy under the leader-
ship of the long-haired Achaians, xapnxopudwvtes ’Ayatod
(like the Keftiu). The Vashasha have been identified
by the writer with the Axians, the fagéo. of Crete.
Prof, Petrie compares the name of the Tjakaray with
that of the (modern) place Zakro in Crete. Identifica-
tions with modern place-names are of doubtful value;
for instance, we cannot but hold that Prof. Petrie errs
greatly in identifying the name of the Pidasa (another
tribe mentioned in Ramses II’s time) with that of the
river Pidias in Cyprus. ‘‘ Pidias’’ is a purely modern
corruption of the ancient Pedizus, which means the
‘* plain-river ’’ (because it flows through the central
plain of the island), from the Greek zedov. If, then,
we make the Pidasa Cypriotes we assume that pure
Greek was spoken in Cyprus as early as 1100 8B. c., which
is highly improbable. The Pidasa were probably Le-
leges (Pedasians); the name of Pisidia may be the same,
by metathesis. Pedasos is a name always connected
with the much wandering tribe of the Leleges, where-
ever they are found in Lakonia or in Asia Minor. We
believe them to have been known to the Egyptians as
Pidasa. The identification of the Tjakaray with Zakro
is very tempting. The name was formerly identified

IDENTIFICATION OF NAMES 369

with that of the Teukrians, but the v in the word Tevxpou
has always been a stumbling-block in the way. Perhaps
Zakro is neither more nor less than the Tev«pos-name,
since the legendary Teucer, the archer, was connected
with the eastern or Eteokretan end of Crete, where
Zakro lies. In Mycenean times Zakro was an impor-
tant place, so that the Tjakaray may be the Teukroi,
after all, and Zakro may preserve the name. At any
rate, this identification is most alluring and, taken in
conjunction with the other cumulative identifications,
is very probable; but the identification of the Pidasa
with the river Pedizus in Cyprus is neither alluring
nor probable.

In the time of Ramses IT some of these Asia Minor
tribes had marched against Egypt as allies of the Hit-
tites. We find among them the Luka or Lycians, the
Dardenui (Dardanians, who may possibly have been at
that time in the Troad, or elsewhere, for all these
tribes were certainly migratory), and the Masa (perhaps
the Mysians). With the Cretans of Ramses III’s time
must be reckoned the Pulesta, who are certainly the
Philistines, then most probably in course of their tra-
ditional migration from Crete to Palestine. In Philistia
recent excavations by Mr. Welch have disclosed the
unmistakable presence of a late Mycenzan culture, and
we can only ascribe this to the Philistines, who were
of Cretan origin.

Thus we see that all these Northern tribal names hold
together with remarkable persistence, and in fact refuse
to be identified with any tribes but those of Asia Minor

370 TEMPLES AND TOMBS OF THEBES

and the Aigean. In them we see the broken remnants
of the old Minoan (Keftian) power, driven hither and
thither across the seas by intestinal feuds, and ‘‘ wind-
ing the skein of grievous wars till every man of them
perished,’’ as Homer says of the heroes after the siege
of Troy. These were in fact the wanderings of the
heroes, the period of Sturm und Drang which succeeded
the great civilized epoch of Minos and his thalassocracy,
of Knossos, Phaistos, and the Keftius. On the walls
of the temple of Medinet Habit, Ramses IIT depicted the
portraits of the conquered heroes who had fallen before
the Egyptian onslaught, and he called them heroes, tuher
in Egyptian, fully recognizing their Berserker gallantry.
Above all in interest are the portraits of the Philistines,
those Greeks who at this very time seized part of Pal-
estine (which takes its name from them), and continued
to exist there as a separate people (like the Normans
in France) for at least two centuries. Goliath the giant
was, then, a Greek; certainly he was of Cretan descent,
and so a Pelasgian. :

Such are the conclusions to which modern discovery
in Crete has impelled us with regard to the pictures of
the Keftiu at Shékh ’Abd el-Kifirna. It is indeed a new
chapter in the history of the relations of ancient Egypt
with the outside world that Dr. Arthur Evans has
opened for us. And in this connection some American
work must not be overlooked. An expedition sent out
by the University of Pennsylvania, under Miss Harriet
Boyd, has discovered much of importance to Mycenean
study in the ruins of an ancient town at Gournia in

THE TOMBS OF THE QUEENS 371

Crete, east of Knossos. Here, however, little has been
found that will bear directly on the question of relations
between Mycenean Greece and Egypt.

The Theban necropoles of the New Empire are by
no means exhausted by a description of the Tombs of
the Kings and Shékh ’Abd el-Kiirna; but few new dis-
coveries have been*made anywhere except in the pic-
turesque valley of the Tombs of the Queens, south of
Shékh ’Abd el-Kirna. Here the Italian Egyptologist,
Prof. Schiaparelli, has lately discovered and excavated
some very fine tombs. of the XT Xth and XXth Dynasties.
The best is that of Queen Nefertari, one of the wives of
Ramses II. The colouring of the reliefs upon these walls
is extraordinarily bright, and the portraits of the queen,
who has a very beautiful face, with aquiline nose, are
wonderfully preserved. She was of the dark type, while
another queen, Titi by name, who was buried close by,
was fair, and had a retroussé nose. Prof. Schiaparelli
also discovered here the tombs of some princes of the
XXth Dynasty, who died young. All the tombs are
much alike, with a single short gallery, on the walls
of which are mythological scenes, figures of the prince
and of his father, the king, etc., painted in a crude style,
which shows a great degeneration from that of the
XVIIIth Dynasty tombs.

We now leave the great necropolis and turn to the
later temples of the Western Bank at Thebes. These
were of a funerary character, like those of Dér el-Bahari,
already described. The most imposing of all in some

respects is the Ramesseum, where lies the huge granite

372 TEMPLES AND TOMBS OF THEBES

colossus of Ramses II, prostrate and broken, which
Diodorus knew as the statue of Osymandyas. This name
is a late corruption of Ramses I1’s throne-name, User-
maat-Ra, pronounced Usimare. The temple has been

THE VALLEY OF THE TOMBS OF THE QUEENS AT THEBES.
In which Prof. Schiaparelli discovered the tomb of Ramses II’s wife (1904).

cleared by Mr. Howard Carter for the Egyptian gov-
ernment, and the small town of priests’ houses, maga-
zines, and cellars, to the west of it, has been excavated
by him. This is quite a little Pompeii, with its small
streets, its houses with the stucco still clinging to the

TEMPLE OF LUXOR 373

walls, its public altar, its market colonnade, and its
gallery of statues. The statues are only of brick like
the walls, and roughly shaped and plastered, but they
were portraits, undoubtedly, of celebrities of the time,
though we do not know of whom. On either side are
the long magazines in which were kept the possessions
of the priests of the Ramesseum, the grain from the
lands with which they were endowed, and everything
meet to be offered to the ghost of the king whom they
served. The plan of the place had evidently been altered
after the time of Ramses II, as remains of overbuilding
were found here and there. The magazines were first
investigated in 1896 by Prof. Petrie, who also found
in the neighbourhood the remains of a number of small
royal funerary temples of the XVIIIth Dynasty, all
looking in the direction of the hill, beyond which lay
the tombs of the kings.

We may now turn to Luxor, where immediately above
the landing-place of the steamers and dahabiyas rise the
stately coloured colonnades of the Temple of Luxor, Un-
fortunately, modern excavations have not been allowed
to pursue their course to completion here, as in the first
great colonnaded court, which was added by Ramses IL
to the original building of Amenhetep III, Tutankha-
men, and Horemheb, there still remains the Mohamme-
dan Mosque of Abu-’l-Haggag, which may not be re-
moved. Abu-’l-Haggdg, ‘‘ the Father of Pilgrims ”’ (so
called on account of the number of pilgrims to his
shrine), was a very holy shékh, and his memory is held
in the greatest reverence by the Luksuris. It is unlucky

374 TEMPLES AND TOMBS OF THEBES

that this mosque was built within the court of the Great
Temple, and it cannot be removed till Moslem religious
prejudices become at least partially ameliorated, and
then the work of completely excavating the Temple of
Luxor may be carried out.

- Between Luxor and Karnak lay the temple of the
goddess Mut, consort of Amen and protectress of

THE NILE - BANK AT LUXOR, WITH A DAHABIYA AND A STEAMER
OF THE ANGLO- AMERICAN NILE COMPANY.

Thebes. It stood in the part of the city known as
Asheru. This building was cleared in 1895 at the ex-
pense and under the supervision of two English ladies,
Miss Benson and Miss Gourlay. The temple had always
been remarkable on account of the prodigious num-
ber of seated figures of the lioness-headed goddess
Sekhemet, or Pakhet, which it contains, dedicated by

TEMPLE OF KARNAK 375

Amenhetep III and Sheshenk I; most of those in the
British Museum were brought from this temple. The
excavators found many more of them, and also some
very interesting portrait-statues of the late period which
had been dedicated there. The most important of these
was the head and shoulders of a statue of Mentuemhat, |
governor of Thebes at the time of the sack of the city by
Ashur-bani-pal of Assyria in 668 B.c. In Miss Benson’s
interesting book, The Temple of Mut wm Asher, it is
suggested, on the authority of Prof. Petrie, that his
facial type is Cypriote, but this speculation is a dan-
gerous one, as is also the similar speculation that the
wonderful portrait-head of an old man found by Miss
Benson’ is of Philistine type. We have only to look at
the faces of elderly Egyptians to-day to see that the
types presented by Mentuemhat and Miss Benson’s
“¢ Philistine ’’ need be nothing but pure Egyptian. The
whole work of the clearing was most efficiently carried
out, and the Cairo Museum obtained from it some val-
uable specimens of Egyptian sculpture.

The Great Temple of Karnak is one of the chief
eares of the Egyptian Department of Antiquities. Its
paramount importance, so to speak, as the cathedral
temple of Egypt, renders its preservation and explora-
tion a work of constant necessity, and its great extent
makes this work one which is always going on and
which probably will be going on for many years to come.
The Temple of Karnak has cost the Egyptian govern-
ment much money, yet not a piastre of this can be

1 Plate vii of her book.

376 TEMPLES AND TOMBS OF THEBES

grudged. For several years past the works have been
under the charge of M. Georges Legrain, the well-known
engineer and draughtsman who was associated with

THE GREAT TEMPLE OF KARNAK.

The left-hand obelisk is the eee War bees raat aie | Hatshepsu; the right-hand
M. de Morgan in the work at Dashir. His task is
to clear out the whole temple thoroughly, to discover
in it what previous investigators have left undiscovered,
and to restore to its original position what has fallen.

PARTIAL RUIN OF TEMPLE 377

No general work of restoration is contemplated, nor
would this be in the slightest degree desirable. Up
to the present M. Legrain has certainly carried out all
three branches of his task with great success. An un-
foreseen event has, however, considerably complicated
and retarded the work. In October, 1899, one of the
columns of the side aisles of the great Hypostyle Hall
fell, bringing down with it several others. The whole
place was a chaotic ruin, and for a moment it seemed
as though the whole of the Great Hall, one of the won-
ders of the world, would collapse. The disaster was
due to the gradual infiltration of water from the Nile
beneath the structure, whose foundations, as is usual
in Egypt, were of the flimsiest description. Even the
most imposing Egyptian temples have jerry-built foun-
dations; usually they are built on the top of the wall-
stumps of earlier buildings of different plan, filled in
with a confused mass of earlier slabs and weak rubbish
of all kinds. Had the Egyptian buildings been built on
sure foundations, they would have been preserved to a
much greater extent even than they are. In such a
climate as that of Egypt a stone building well built
should last for ever.

M. Legrain has for the last five years been busy
repairing the damage. All the fallen columns are now
restored to the perpendicular, and the capitals and archi-
traves are in process of being hoisted into their original
positions. The process by which M. Legrain carries
out this work has been already described. He works
in the old Egyptian fashion, building great inclines or

378 TEMPLES AND TOMBS OF THEBES

ramps of earth up which the pillar-drums, the capitals,
and the architrave-blocks are hauled by manual labour,
and then swung into position. This is the way in which
the Egyptians built Karnak, and in this way, too, M. Le-
grain is rebuilding it. It is a slow process, but a sure
one, and now it will not be long before we shall see
the hall, except its roof, in much the same condition as
it was when Seti built it. Lovers of the picturesque
will, however, miss the famous leaning column, hanging »
poised across the hall, which has been a main feature
in so many pictures and photographs of Karnak. This
fell in the catastrophe of 1899, and naturally it has not
been possible to restore it to its picturesque, but dan-
gerous, position.

The work at Karnak has been distinguished during
the last two years by two remarkable discoveries. Out-
side the main temple, to the north of the Hypostyle Hall,
M. Legrain found a series of private sanctuaries or
shrines, built of brick by personages of the XVIIIth
Dynasty and later, in order to testify their devotion
to Amen. In these small cells were found some remark-
able statues, one of which is illustrated. It is one of
the most perfect of its kind. A great dignitary of the
XVITIth Dynasty is seen seated with his wife, their
daughter standing between them. Round his neck are
four chains of golden rings, with which he had been
decorated by the Pharaoh for his services. It is a
remarkable group, interesting for its style and work-
manship as well as for its subject. As an example of
the formal hieratic type of portraiture it is very fine.

AMAZING DISCOVERIES 379

The other and more important discovery of the two
was made by M. Legrain on the south side of the Hypo-
style Hall. Tentative excavations, begun in an unoccu-

M. LEGRAIN’S EXCAVATION OF THE KARNAK STATUES IN PROGRESS.

pied tract under the wall of the hall, resulted in the
discovery of parts of statues; the place was then regu-
larly excavated, and the result has been amazing. The

380 TEMPLES AND TOMBS OF THEBES

ground was full of statues, large and small, at some
unknown period buried pell-mell, one on the top of an-
other. Some are broken, but the majority are perfect,
which is in itself unusual, and is due very much to the
soft, muddy soil in which they have lain. Statues found
on dry desert land are often terribly cracked, especially
when they are of black granite, the crystals of which
seem to have a greater tendency to disintegration than
have those of the red syenite. The Karnak statues are
figures of pious persons, who had dedicated portraits
of themselves in the temple of Amen, together with
those of great men whom the king had honoured by
ordering their statues placed in the temple during their
lives.
Of this number was the great sage Amenhetep, son
of Hapi, the founder of the little desert temple of
Dér el-Medina, near Dér el-Bahari, who was a sort of
prime minister under Amenhetep ITI, and was venerated
in later days as a demigod. His statue was found with
the others by M. Legrain. Among them is a figure made
entirely of green felspar, an unusual material for so
large a statuette. A fine portrait of Thothmes III was
also found. The illustration shows this wonderfully
fruitful excavation in progress, with the diggers at work
in the black mud soil, in the foreground the basket-
boys carrying away the rubbish on their shoulders, and
the massive granite walls of the Great Hypostyle Hall
of Seti in the background. The huge size of the roof-
blocks is noticeable. These are not the actual upper-
most roof-blocks, but only the architraves from pillar

CONSTRUCTION OF A TEMPLE 381

to pillar; the original roof consisted of similar blocks
laid across in the transverse direction from architrave
to architrave. An Egyptian granite temple was in fact

PORTRAIT -GROUP OF A GREAT NOBLE AND HIS WIFE, OF THE TIME OF THE XVIIIth
DYNASTY.

Discovered by M. Legrain at Karnak.

built upon the plan of a child’s box of bricks; it was
but a modified and beautified Stonehenge.
Other important discoveries have been made by

382 TEMPLES AND TOMBS OF THEBES

M. Legrain in the course of his work. Among them are
statues of the late Middle Kingdom, including one of
King Usertsen (Senusret) IV of the XIIIth Dynasty.
There are also reliefs of the reign of Amenhetep I, which |
are remarkable for the delicacy of their workmanship
and the sureness of their technique. We know that the

A TOMB FITTED UP AS AN EXPLORER’S RESIDENCE.

The Tomb of Pentu (No. 5) at Tell el-Amarna, inhabited by Mr.
de G. Davies during his work for the Archzxological Survey of
Egypt (Egypt Exploration Fund). About 1400 B.c.

temple was built as early as the time of Usertsen, for
in it have been found one or two of his blocks; and no
doubt the original shrine, which was rebuilt in the time
of Philip Arrhidzeus, was of the same period, but hith-
erto no remains of the centuries between his time and
that of Hatshepsu had been found. With M. Legrain’s
work in the greatest temple of Thebes we finish our

THE DISK-WORSHIP HERESY 383

account of the new discoveries in the chief city of an- ©
cient Egypt, as we began it with the work of M. Naville
in the oldest temple there.

One of the most interesting questions connected with
the archeology of Thebes is that which asks whether
the heretical disk-worshipper Akhunaten (Amenhe-
tep IV) erected buildings there, and whether any trace
of them has ever been discovered. To those who are
interested in Egyptian history and religion the transi-
tory episode of the disk-worship heresy is already famil- °
iar. The precise character of the heretical dogma, which
Amenhetep IV proclaimed and desired his subjects to
accept, has lately been well explained by Mr. de Garis
Davies in his volumes, published by the ‘‘ Archeological
Survey of Egypt ’”’ branch of the Egypt Exploration
Fund, on the tombs of el-Amarna. He shows that the
heretical doctrine was a monotheism of a very high
order. Amenhetep IV (or as he preferred to call him-
self, Akhunaten, ‘‘ Glory of the Disk ’’) did not, as has
usually been supposed, merely worship the Sun-disk
itself as the giver of life, and nothing more. He ven-
erated the glowing disk merely as the visible emanation
of the deity behind it, who dispensed heat and life to
all living things through its medium. The disk was,
so to speak, the window in heaven through which the
unknown God, the ‘‘ Lord of the Disk,’’ shed a portion
of his radiance on the world. Now, given an ignorance
of the true astronomical character of the sun, we see
how eminently rational a religion this was. In effect,
the sun is the source of all life upon this earth, and

384 TEMPLES AND TOMBS OF THEBES

so Akhunaten caused its rays to be depicted each with
a hand holding out the sign of life to the earth. The
monotheistic worship of the sun alone is certainly the
highest form of pagan religion, but Akhunaten saw fur-
ther than this. His doctrine was that there was a deity
behind the sun, whose glory shone through it and gave
us life. This deity was unnamed and unnamable; he
was ‘‘ the Lord of the Disk.’’ We see in his heresy,
therefore, the highest attitude to which religious ideas
had attained before the days of the Hebrew prophets.

This religion seems to have been developed out of
the philosophical speculations of the priests of the Stn
at Heliopolis. Akhunaten with unwise iconoclastic zeal
endeavoured to root out the worship of the ancient gods
of Egypt, and especially that of Amen-Ra, the ruler of
the Egyptian pantheon, whose primacy in the hearts of
the people made him the most redoubtable rival of the
new doctrine. But the name of the old Sun-god Ra-
Harmachis was spared, and it is evident that Akhunaten
regarded him as more or less identical with his god.

It has been supposed by Prof. Petrie that Queen Tii,
the mother of Akhunaten, was of Mitannian (Armenian)
origin, and that she brought the Aten religion to Egypt
from her native land, and taught it to her son. Cer-
tainly it seems as though the new doctrine had made
some headway before the death of Amenhetep III, but
we have no reason to attribute it to Ti, or to suppose
that she brought it with her from abroad. There is no
proof whatever that she was not a native Egyptian, and
the mummies of her parents, Iuaa and Tuaa, are purely

AKHUNATEN THE PHILOSOPHER 385

Egyptian in facial type. It seems undoubted that the
Aten cult was a development of pure Egyptian religious
thought. |

At first Akhunaten tried to establish his religion at
Thebes alongside that of Amen and his attendant pan-
theon. He seems to have built a temple to the Aten
there, and we see that his courtiers began to make tombs
for themselves in the new realistic style of sculptural
art, which the king, heretical in art as in religion, had
introduced. The tomb of Rames at Shékh ’Abd el-
Ktirna has on one side of the door a representation of
the king in the old regular style, and on the other side
one in the new realistic style, which depicts him in all
the native ugliness in which this strange truth-loving
man seems to have positively gloried. We find, too, that
he caused a temple to the Aten to be erected in far-away
Napata, the capital of Nubia, by Jebel Barkal in the
Sudan. The facts as to the Theban and Napata temples
have been pointed out by Prof. Breasted, of Chicago.

But the opposition of the Theban priesthood was too
strong. Akhunaten shook the dust of the capital off
his feet and retired to the isolated city of Akhet-aten,
** the Glory of the Disk,’’ at the modern Tell el-Amarna,
where he could philosophize in peace, while his king-
dom was left to take care of itself. He and his wife
Nefret-iti, who seems to have been a faithful sharer of
his views, reigned over a select court of Aten-worship-
ping nobles, priests, and artists. The artists had under
Akhunaten an unrivalled opportunity for development,
of which they had already begun to take considerable

386 TEMPLES AND TOMBS OF THEBES

advantage before the end of his reign and the restora-
tion of the old order of ideas. Their style takes on
itself an almost bizarre freedom, which reminds us
strongly of the similar characteristic in Mycenean art.
There is a strange little relief in the Berlin Museum
of the king standing cross-legged, leaning on a staff,
and languidly smelling a flower, while the queen stands
by with her garments blown about by the wind. The
artistic monarch’s graceful attitude is probably a faith-
ful transcript of a characteristic pose.

We see from this what an Egyptian artist could do
when his shackles were removed, but unluckily Egypt
never produced another king who was at the same time
an original genius, an artist, and a thinker. When
Akhunaten died, the Egyptian artists’ shackles were
riveted tighter than ever. The reaction was strong.
The kingdom had fallen into anarchy, and the foreign
empire which his predecessors had built up had prac-
tically been thrown to the winds by Akhunaten. The
whole is an example of the confusion and disorganiza-
tion which ensue when a philosopher rules. Not long
after the heretic’s death the old religion was fully re-
stored, the cult of the disk was blotted out, and the
Egyptians returned joyfully to the worship of their
myriad deities. Akhunaten’s ideals were too high for ’
them. The débris of the foreign empire was, as usual
in such cases, put together again, and customary law
and order restored by the conservative reactionaries who
succeeded him. Henceforth Egyptian civilization runs
an uninspired and undeveloping course till the days of -

CONSERVATIVE REACTION 387

the Saites and the Ptolemies. This point in the history
of Egypt, therefore, forms a convenient stopping-place
at which to pause, while we turn once more to Western
Asia, and ascertain to what extent recent excavations
and research have thrown new light upon the problems
connected with the rise and history of the Assyrian and
Neo-Babylonian Empires.

CHAPTER VII

THE ASSYRIAN AND NEO-BABYLONIAN EMPIRES IN THE
LIGHT OF RECENT RESEARCH

HE early history of Assyria has long been a subject

on which historians were obliged to trust largely to
conjecture, in their attempts to reconstruct the stages
by which its early rulers obtained their independence
and laid the foundations of the mighty empire over
which their successors ruled. That the land was colo-
nized from Babylonia and was at first ruled as a depend-
ency of the southern kingdom have long been regarded
as established facts, but until recently little was known
of its early rulers and governors, and still less of the
condition of the country and its capital during the early
periods of their existence. Since the excavations car-
ried out by the British Museum at Kala Sherghat, on
the western bank of the Tigris, it has been known that
the mounds at that spot mark the site of the city of
Ashur, the first capital of the Assyrians, and the monu-
ments and records recovered during those excavations

have hitherto formed our principal source of information
388

EXCAVATIONS IN ASSYRIA 389

for the early history of the country.*’ Some of the oldest
records found in the course of these excavations were
short votive texts inscribed by rulers who bore the title
of ishshakku, corresponding to the Sumerian and early
Babylonian title of patesi, and with some such meaning
as ‘‘ viceroy.’’ It was rightly conjectured from the title
which they bore that these early rulers owed allegiance
to the kings of Babylon and were their nominees, or at
any rate their tributaries. The names of a few of these
early viceroys were recovered from their votive inscrip-
tions and from notices in later historical texts, but it
was obvious that our knowledge of early Assyrian his-
tory would remain very fragmentary until systematic
excavations in Assyria were resumed. Three years ago
(1902) the British Museum resumed excavations at
Kuyunjik, the site of Nineveh. The work was begun
and carried out under the direction of Mr. L. W.
King, but since last summer has been continued by
Mr. R. C. Thompson. Last year, too, excavations
were reopened at Sherghat by the Deutsch-Orient Ge-
sellschaft, at first under the direction of Dr. Koldewey,
and afterwards under that of Dr. Andrae, by whom
they are at present being carried on. This renewed
activity on the sites of the ancient cities of Assyria is
already producing results of considerable interest, and
the veil which has so long concealed the earlier periods
in the history of that country is being lifted.

Shortly before these excavations in Assyria were

1 For the texts and translations of these documents, see Budge and King,
Annals of the Kings of Assyria, pp. i ff.

390 ASSYRIAN AND NEO-BABYLONIAN EMPIRES

set on foot an indication was obtained from an early
Babylonian text that the history of Assyria as a depend-
ent state or province of Babylon must be pushed back
-to a far more remote period than had hitherto been sup-
posed. In one of Hammurabi’s letters to Sin-idinnam,
governor of the city of Larsam, to which reference has
already been made,’ directions are given for the despatch
to the king of ‘‘ two hundred and forty men of ‘ the
King’s Company ’ under the command of Nannar-iddina

. who have left the country of Ashur and the dis-
trict of Shitullum.’’ From this most interesting refer-
ence it followed that the country to the north of Baby-
lonia was known as Assyria at the time of the kings
of the First Dynasty of Babylon, and the fact that Baby-
lonian troops were stationed there by Hammurabi
proved that the country formed an integral part of the
Babylonian empire.

These conclusions were soon after strikingly con-
firmed by two passages in the introductory sections of
Hammurabi’s code of laws which was discovered at
Susa.2, Here Hammurabi records that he ‘* restored his
(i.e. the god Ashur’s) protecting image unto the city
of Ashur,’’ and a few lines farther on he describes him-
self as the king ‘‘ who hath made the names of Ishtar
glorious in the city of Nineveh in the temple of H-mish-
mish.’’ That Ashur should be referred to at this period
is what we might expect, inasmuch as it was known
to have been the earliest capital of Assyria; more strik-
ing is the reference to Nineveh, proving as it does that

1See above, p. 301. 2See above, p. 267.

PROOFS OF NINEVEH’S GREAT AGE 391

it was a flourishing city in Hammurabi’s time and that
. the temple of Ishtar there had already been long estab-
lished. It is true that Gudea, the Sumerian patesi of
Shirpurla, records that he rebuilt the temple of the god-
dess Ninni (Ishtar) at a place called Nina. Now Nina
may very probably be identified with Nineveh, but many
writers have taken it to be a place in Southern Baby-
lonia and possibly a district of Shirpurla itself. No
such uncertainty attaches to Hammurabi’s reference to
Nineveh, which is undoubtedly the Assyrian city of that
name, Although no account has yet been published of
the recent excavations carried out at Nineveh by the
British Museum, they fully corroborate the inference
drawn with regard to the great age of the city. The
series of trenches which were cut deep into the lower
strata of Kuyunjik revealed numerous traces of very
early habitations on the mound.

Neither in Hammurabi’s letters, nor upon the stele
inscribed with his code of laws, is any reference made
to the contemporary governor or ruler of Assyria, but
on a contract tablet preserved in the Pennsylvania Mu-
seum a name has been recovered which will probably |
be identified with that of the ruler of Assyria in Ham-
murabi’s reign. In legal and commercial documents of
the period of the First Dynasty of Babylon the con-
tracting parties frequently swore by the names of two
gods (usually Shamash and Marduk) and also that of
the reigning king. Now it has been found by Dr. Ranke
that on this document in the Pennsylvania Museum the
contracting parties swear by the name of Hammurabi

392 ASSYRIAN AND NEO-BABYLONIAN EMPIRES

and also by that of Shamshi-Adad. As only gods and
kings are mentioned in the oath formule of this period,
it follows that Shamshi-Adad was a king, or at any rate
a patesi or ishshakku. Now from its form the name
Shamshi-Adad must be that of an Assyrian, not that
of a Babylonian, and, since he is associated in the oath
formula with Hammurabi, it is legitimate to conclude
that he governed Assyria in the time of Hammurabi
as a dependency of Babylon. An early Assyrian ish-
shakku of this name, who was the son of Ishme-Dagan,
is mentioned by Tiglath-Pileser I, but he cannot be iden-
tified with the ruler of the time of Hammurabi, since,
according to Tiglath-Pileser, he ruled too late, about
1800 8. c. A brick-inscription of another Shamshi-Adad,
however, the son of Igur-kapkapu, is preserved in the
British Museum, and it is probable that we may identify
him with Hammurabi’s Assyrian viceroy. Erishum and
his son Ikunum, whose inscriptions are also preserved
in the British Museum, should certainly be assigned to
an early period of Assyrian history.

The recent excavations at Sherghat are already yield-
ing the names of other early Assyrian viceroys, and,
although the texts of the inscriptions in which their
names occur have not yet been published, we may briefly
enumerate the more important of the discoveries that
have been made. Last year a small cone or cylinder
was found which, though it bears only a few lines of
inscription, restores the names of no less than seven
early Assyrian viceroys whose existence was not pre-
viously known. The cone was inscribed by Ashir-rim-

EARLY ASSYRIAN VICEROYS 393

nishéshu, who gives his own genealogy and records the
restoration of the wall of the city of Ashur, which he
states had been rebuilt by certain of his predecessors
on the throne. The principal portion of the inscription
reads as follows: ‘‘ Ashir-rim-nishéshu, the viceroy of
the god Ashir, the son of Ashir-nirari, the viceroy of
the god Ashir, the son of Ashir-rabi, the viceroy. The
city wall which Kikia, Ikunum, Shar-kenkate-Ashir, and
Ashir-nirari, the son of Ishme-Dagan, my forefathers,
had built, was fallen, and for the preservation of my
life ... I rebuilt it.”” Perhaps no inscription has yet
been recovered in either Assyria or Babylonia which
contained so much new information packed into so small
a space. Of the names of the early viceroys mentioned
in it only one was previously known, i.e. the name of
Ikunum, the son of Erishum, is found in a late copy of
a votive text preserved in the British Museum. Thus
from these few lines the names of three rulers in direct
succession have been recovered, viz., Ashir-rabi, Ashir-
nirari, and Ashur-rim-nishéshu, and also those of four
earlier rulers, viz., Kikia, Shar-kenkate-Ashir, Ishme-
Dagan, and his son Ashir-nirari. Another interesting
point about the inscription is the spelling of the name
of the national god of the Assyrians. In the later peri-
ods it is always written Ashur, but at this early time
we see that the second vowel is changed and that at first
the name was written Ashir, a form that was already
known from the Cappadocian cuneiform inscriptions.
The form Ashir is a good participial construction and
signifies ‘‘ the Beneficent,’’ ‘‘ the Merciful One.”’

394 ASSYRIAN AND NEO-BABYLONIAN EMPIRES

Another interesting find, which was also made last
year, consists of four stone tablets, each engraved with
the same building-inscription of Shalmaneser I, a king
who reigned over Assyria about 1300 B.c. In recording
his rebuilding of E-kharsag-kurkura, the temple of the
god Ashur in the city of Ashur, he gives a brief sum-
mary of the temple’s history with details as to the
length of time which elapsed between the different peri-
ods during which it had been previously restored. The
temple was burned in Shalmaneser’s time, and, when
recording this fact and the putting out of the fire, he
summarizes the temple’s history in a long parenthesis,
as will be seen from the following translation of the
extract: ‘‘ When E-kharsag-kurkura, the temple of
Ashur, my lord, which Ushpia (variant Aushpia), the
priest of Ashur, my forefather, had built aforetime,—
and it fell into decay and Erishu, my forefather, the
priest of Ashur, rebuilt it; 159 years passed by after
the reign of Erishu, and that temple fell into decay,
and Shamshi-Adad, the priest of Ashur, rebuilt it; (dur-
ing) 580 years that temple which Shamshi-Adad, the
priest of Ashur, had built, grew hoary and old— (when)
fire broke out in the midst thereof... , at that time
I drenched that temple (with water) in (all) its cir-
outs”

From this extract it will be seen that Shalmaneser
gives us, in Ushpia or Aushpia, the name of a very early
Assyrian viceroy, who in his belief was the founder of
the great temple of the god Ashur. He also tells us
that 159 years separated Erishu from a viceroy named

INACCURACY IN ASSYRIAN RECKONING 395

Shamshi-Adad, and that 580 years separated Shamshi-
Adad from his own time. When these inscriptions were
first found they were hailed with considerable satisfac-
tion by historians, as they gave what seemed to be valu-
able information for settling the chronology of the early
patesis. But confidence in the accuracy of Shalmaneser’s
reckoning was somewhat shaken a few months after-
wards by the discovery of a prism of Esarhaddon, who
gave in it a history of the same temple, but ascribed
totally different. figures for the periods separating the
reigns of Hrishu and Shamshi-Adad, and the temple’s
destruction by fire. Esarhaddon agrees with Shalma-
neser in ascribing the founding of the temple to Ushpia,
but he states that only 126 years (instead of 159 years)
separated Erishu (whom he spells Irishu), the son of
Tlu-shumma, from Shamshi-Adad, the son of Bél-kabi;
and he adds that 434 years (instead of 580 years) elapsed
between Shamshi-Adad’s restoration of the temple and
the time when it was burned down. As Shalmaneser I
lived over six hundred years earlier than Esarhaddon,
he was obviously in a better position to ascertain the
periods at which the events recorded took place, but
the discrepancy between the figures he gives and those
of Esarhaddon is disconcerting. It shows that Assyrian
scribes could make bad mistakes in their reckoning, and
it serves to cast discredit on the absolute accuracy of
the chronological notices contained in other late Assyr-
ian inscriptions. So far from helping to settle the un-
solved problems of Assyrian chronology, these two
recent finds at Sherghat have introduced fresh confusion,

396 ASSYRIAN AND NEO-BABYLONIAN EMPIRES

and Assyrian chronology for the earlier periods is once
more cast into the melting pot.

In addition to the recovery of the names of hitherto
unknown early rulers of Assyria, the recent excavations
at Sherghat have enabled us to ascertain the true read-
ing of the name of Shalmaneser I’s grandfather, who
reigned a considerable time after Assyria had gained
her independence. The name of this king has hitherto
been read as Pudi-ilu, but it is now shown that the
signs composing the first part of the name are not to
be taken phonetically, but as ideographs, the true read-
ing of the name being Arik-dén-ilu, the signification of
which is ‘‘ Long (7. e. far-reaching) is the judgment of
God.’’ Arik-dén-ilu was a great conqueror, as were
his immediate descendants, all of whom extended the
territory of Assyria. By strengthening the country and
increasing her resources they enabled Arik-dén-ilu’s
great-grandson, Tukulti-Ninib I, to achieve the conquest
of Babylon itself. Concerning Tukulti-Ninib’s reign
and achievements an interesting inscription has re-
cently been discovered. This is now preserved in
the British Museum, and before describing it we may
briefly refer to another phase of the excavations at
Sherghat.

The mounds of Sherghat rise a considerable height
above the level of the plain, and are to a great extent
of natural and not of artificial formation. In fact, the
existence of a group of high natural mounds at this
point on the bank, of the Tigris must have led to its
selection by the early Assyrians as the site on which

Stone Object Bearing a Votive Inscription of Arik-dén-ilu.

An early independent King of Assyria, who reigned about B.C. 1350. Photograph
by Messrs. Mansell & Co.

Ky cee
Be casa

beavis

THE MOUNDS OF SHERGHAT 397

to build their first stronghold. The mounds were al-
ready so high, from their natural formation, that there
was no need for the later Assyrian kings to increase their
height artificially (as they raised the chief palace-mound
at Nineveh), and the remains of the Assyrian buildings
of the early period are thus only covered by a few feet
of débris and not by masses of unburnt brick and arti-

ENTRANCE INTO ONE OF THE GALLERIES OR TUNNELS CUT
INTO THE PRINCIPAL MOUND AT SHERGHAT.

ficially piled up soil. This fact has considerably facili-
tated the systematic uncovering of the principal mound
that is now being carried out by Dr. Andrae. Work has
hitherto been confined to the northwest corner of the
mound around the ziggurat, or temple tower, and al-
ready considerable traces of Assyrian buildings have
been laid bare in this portion of the site. The city wall
on the northern side has been uncovered, as well as
quays with steps leading down to the water along the

398 ASSYRIAN AND NEO-BABYLONIAN EMPIRES

river front. Part of the great temple of the god Ashur
has been excavated, though a considerable portion of it
must be still covered by the modern Turkish fort at
the extreme northern point of the mounds; also part
of a palace erected by Ashur-nasir-pal has been identi-
fied. In fact, the work at Sherghat promises to add
considerably to our knowledge of ancient Assyrian ar-
chitecture.

The inscription of Tukulti-Ninib I, which was re-
ferred to above as having been recently acquired by
the trustees of the British Museum, affords valuable
information for the reconstruction of the history of
Assyria during the first half of the thirteenth cen-
tury Bec.’ It is seen from the facts summarized that
for our knowledge of the earlier history of the country
we have to depend to a large extent on short brick-
inscriptions and votive texts supplemented by histori-
eal references in inscriptions of the later period. The .
only historical inscription of any length belonging to
the early Assyrian period, which had been published
up to a year ago, was the famous memorial slab con-
taining an inscription of Adad-nirari I, which was
acquired by the late Mr. George Smith some thirty years
ago. Although purchased in Mosul, the slab had been
found by the natives in the mounds at Sherghat, for
the text engraved upon it in archaic Assyrian charac-
ters records the restoration of a part of the temple of
the god Ashur in the ancient city of Ashur, the first

1For the text and translation of the inscription, see King, Studies in
Eastern History, i (1904).

ASSYRIAN MEMORIAL SLAB 399

capital of the Assyrians, now marked by the mounds
of Sherghat, which have already been described. 'The
object of Adad-nirari in causing the memorial slab to
be inscribed was to record the restoration of the portion
of the temple which he had rebuilt, but the most im-
portant part of the inscription was contained in the
introductory phrases with which the text opens. They
recorded the conquests achieved not only by Adad-
nirari but by his father Arik-dén-ilu, his grandfather
Bél-nirari, and his ereat-grandfather Ashur-uballit.
They thus enabled the historian to trace the gradual
extension and consolidation of the Assyrian empire dur-
ing a critical period in its early history.

The recently recovered memorial slab of Tukulti-
Ninib I is similar to that of his grandfather Adad-
nirari IJ, and-ranks in importance with it for the light
it throws on the early struggles of Assyria. Tukulti-
Ninib’s slab, like that of Adad-nirari, was a foundation
memorial intended to record certain building operations
carried out by order of the king. The building so com-
memorated was not the restoration of a portion of a
temple, but the founding of a new city, in which the
king erected no less than eight temples dedicated to
various deities, while he also records that he built a
palace therein for his own habitation, that he protected
the city by a strongly fortified wall, and that he cut
a canal from the Tigris by which he ensured a contin-
uous supply of fresh water. These were the facts which
the memorial was primarily intended to record, but, like
the text of Adad-nirari I, the most interesting events

4

400 ASSYRIAN AND NEO-BABYLONIAN EMPIRES

for the historian are those referred to in the introduc-
tory portions of the inscription. Before giving details
concerning the founding of the new city, named Kar-
Tukulti-Ninib, ‘‘ the Fortress of Tukulti-Ninib,”’ the
king supplies an account of the military expeditions
which he had conducted during the course of his reign
up to the time when the foundation memorial was in-
scribed. These introductory paragraphs record how the
king gradually conquered the peoples to the north and
northeast of Assyria, and how he finally undertook a
successful campaign against Babylon, during which he
‘captured the city and completely subjugated both North-
ern and Southern Babylonia. Tukulti-Ninib’s reign thus
marks an epoch in the history of his country.

We have already seen how, during the early ages
of her history, Assyria had been merely a subject prov-
ince of the Babylonian empire. Her rulers had been
viceroys owing allegiance to their overlords in Baby-
lon, under whose orders they administered the country,
while garrisons of Babylonian soldiers, and troops com-
manded by Babylonian officers, served to keep the coun-
try in a state of subjection. Gradually, however, the
country began to feel her feet and long for independence.
The conquest of Babylon by the kings of the Country
of the Sea’ afforded her the opportunity of throwing
off the Babylonian yoke. In the fifteenth century the
Assyrian kings were powerful enough to have independ-
ent relations with the kings of Egypt, and, during the
two centuries which preceded Tukulti-Ninib’s reign,

1See above, Chapter V, p. 251.

ADVANCE OF ASSYRIAN POWER 401

Assyria’s relations with Babylon were the cause of con-
stant friction due to the northern kingdom’s growth in
power and influence. The frontier between the two
countries was constantly in dispute, and, though some-
times rectified by treaty, the claims of Assyria often
led to war between the two countries. The general
result of these conflicts was that Assyria gradually
extended her authority farther southwards, and en-
croached upon territory which had previously been
Babylonian. ‘The successes gained by Ashur-uballit,
Bél-nirari, and Adad-nirari I against the contemporary
Babylonian kings had all resulted in the cession of fresh
territory to Assyria and in an increase of her inter-
national importance. Up to the time of Tukulti-Ninib
no Assyrian king had actually seated himself upon
the Babylonian throne. This feat was achieved by
Tukulti-Ninib, and his reign thus marks an important
step in the gradual advance of Assyria to the position
which she later occupied as the predominant power in
Western Asia.

Before undertaking his campaign against Babylon, |
Tukulti-Ninib secured himself against attack from other
quarters, and his newly discovered memorial inscrip-
tion supplies considerable information concerning the
steps he took to achieve this object. In his inscription
the king does not number his military expeditions, and,
with the exception of the first one, he does not state
the period of his reign in which they were undertaken.
The results of his campaigns are summarized in four
paragraphs of the text, and it is probable that they are

402 ASSYRIAN AND NEO-BABYLONIAN EMPIRES

not described in chronological order, but are arranged
rather according to the geographical position of the
districts which he invaded and subdued. Tukulti-Ninib
records that his first campaign took place at the begin-
ning of his sovereignty, in the first year of his reign,
and it was directed against the tribes and peoples in-
habiting the territory on the east of Assyria. Of the
tribes which he overran and conquered on this occasion
the most important was the Kuti, who probably dwelt
in the districts to the east of the Lower Zab. They were
a turbulent race and they had already been conquered
by Arik-dén-ilu and Adad-nirari I, but on neither occa-
sion had they been completely subdued, and they had
soon regained their independence. Their subjugation
by Tukulti-Ninib was a necessary preliminary to any
conquest in the south, and we can well understand why
it was undertaken by the king at the beginning of his
reign. Other conquests which were also made in the
same region were the Ukumani and the lands of Elkhu-
nia, Sharnida, and Mekhri, mountainous districts which
probably lay to the north of the Lower Zab. The coun-
try of Mekhri took its name from the mekhru-tree, a
kind of pine or fir, which grew there in abundance upon
the mountainsides, and was highly esteemed by the
Assyrian kings as affording excellent wood for puild-
ing purposes. Ata later period Ashur-nasir-pal invaded
the country in the course of his campaigns and brought
back beams of mekhru-wood, which he used in the con-
struction of the temple dedicated to the goddess Ishtar
in Nineveh.

TUKULTI-NINIB’S CONQUESTS 403

The second group of tribes and districts enumerated
by Tukulti-Ninib as having been subdued in his early
years, before his conquest of Babylon, all lay probably
to the northwest of Assyria. The most powerful among
these peoples were the Shubari, who, like the Kuti on
the eastern border of Assyria, had already been con-
quered by Adad-nirari I, but had regained their inde-
pendence and were once more threatening the border on
this side. The third group of his conquests consisted
of the districts ruled over by forty kings of the lands
of Na’iri, which was a general term for the mountain-
ous districts to the north of Assyria, including territory —
to the west of Lake Van and extending eastwards to
the districts around Lake Urmi. The forty kings in
this region whom Tukulti-Ninib boasts of having sub-
dued were little more than chieftains of the mountain
tribes, each one possessing authority over a few villages
scattered among the hills and valleys. But the men of
Na’iri were a warlike and hardy race, and, if left long
in undisturbed possession of their native fastnesses, they
were tempted to make raids into the fertile plains
of Assyria. It was therefore only politic for Tukulti-
Ninib to traverse their country with fire and sword, and,
by exacting heavy tribute, to keep the fear of Assyrian
power before their eyes. From the king’s records we
thus learn that he subdued and crippled the semi-inde-
pendent races living on his borders to the north, to the
northwest, and to the east. On the west was the desert,
from which region he need fear no organized attack
when he concentrated his army elsewhere, for his

404 ASSYRIAN AND NEO-BABYLONIAN EMPIRES

permanent garrisons were strong enough to repel and
punish any incursion of nomadic tribes. He was thus in
a position to try conclusions with his hereditary foe in
the south, without any fear of leaving his land open to
invasion in his absence.

The campaign against Babylon was the most impor-
tant one undertaken by Tukulti-Ninib, and its success-
ful issue was the crowning point of his military career.
The king relates that the great gods Ashur, Bél, and
Shamash, and the goddess Ishtar, the queen of heaven
and earth, marched at the head of his warriors when
he set out upon the expedition. After crossing the
border and penetrating into Babylonian territory he
seems to have had some difficulty in forcing Bitiliashu,
the Kassite king who then occupied the throne of Baby-
lon, to a decisive engagement. But by a skilful dis-
position of his forces he succeeded in hemming him in,
so that the Babylonian army was compelled to engage
in a pitched battle. The result of the fighting was a
complete victory for the Assyrian arms. Many of the
Babylonian warriors fell fighting, and Bitiliashu himself
was captured by the Assyrian soldiers in the midst of
the battle. Tukulti-Ninib boasts that he trampled his
lordly neck beneath his feet, and on his return to As-
syria he carried his captive back in fetters to present
him with the spoils of the campaign before Ashur, the
national god of the Assyrians.

Before returning to Assyria, however, Tukulti-Ninib
marched. with his army throughout the length and
breadth of Babylonia, and achieved the subjugation of

SUBJUGATION OF BABYLON 405

the whole of the Sumer and Akkad. He destroyed the
fortifications of Babylon to ensure that they should not
again be used against himself, and all the inhabit-
ants who did not at once submit to his decrees he put
to the sword. He then appointed’ his own officers to
rule the country and established his own system of
administration, adding to his previous title of ‘‘ King
of Assyria,’’ those of ‘‘ King of Karduniash (?. e. Baby-
lonia) ’’ and ‘‘ King of Sumer and Akkad.”’ It was
probably from this period that he also adopted the
title of ‘‘ King of the Four Quarters of the World.”’
As a mark of the complete subjugation of their ancient
foe, Tukulti-Ninib and his army carried back with
them to Assyria not only the captive Babylonian king,
but also the statue of Marduk, the national god of Baby-
lon. This they removed from E-sagila, his sumptuous
temple in Babylon, and they looted the sacred treasures
from the treasure-chambers, and carried them off =
gether with the spoil of the city.

Tukulti-Ninib no doubt left a sufficient proportion
of his army in Babylon to garrison the city and support
the governors and officials into whose charge he com-
mitted the administration of the land, but he himself
returned to Assyria with the rich spoil of the campaign,
and it was probably as a use for this large increase of
wealth and material that he decided to found another
city which should bear his own name and perpetuate it
for future ages. The king records that he undertook
this task at the bidding of Bél (7.e. the god Ashur),
who commanded that he should found a new city and

406 ASSYRIAN AND NEO-BABYLONIAN EMPIRES

build a dwelling-place for him therein. In accordance
with the desire of Ashur and the gods, which was thus
conveyed to him, the king founded the city of Kar-.
Tukulti-Ninib, and he erected therein temples dedicated
not only to Ashur, but also to the gods Adad, and Sha-
mash, and Ninib, and Nusku, and Nergal, and Imina-bi,
and the goddess Ishtar. The spoils from Babylon and
the temple treasures from E-sagila were doubtless used
for the decoration of these temples and the adornment
of their shrines, and the king endowed the temples and
appointed regular offerings, which he ordained should
be their property for ever. He also built a sumptuous
palace for his own abode when he stayed in the city,
which he constructed on a mound or terrace of earth,
faced with brick, and piled high above the level of the
city. Finally, he completed its fortification by the erec-
tion of a massive wall around it, and the completion of
this wall was the occasion on which his memorial tablet
was inscribed.

‘The memorial tablet was buried and bricked up
within the actual structure of the wall, in order that
in future ages it might be read by those who found it,
and so it might preserve his name and fame. After
finishing the account of his building operations in the
new city and recording the completion of the city wall
from its foundation to its coping stone, the king makes
an appeal to any future ruler who should find it, in the
following words: ‘‘ In the days that are to come, when
this wall shall have grown old and shall have fallen
into ruins, may a future prince repair the damaged

CONSPIRACY AND REVOLT 407

parts thereof, and may he anoint my memorial tablet
with oil, and may he offer sacrifices and restore it unto
its place, and then Ashur will hearken unto his prayers.
But whosoever shall destroy this wall, or shall remove
my memorial tablet or my name that is inscribed
thereon, or shall leave Kar-Tukulti-Ninib, the city of
my dominion, desolate, or shall destroy it, may the lord
Ashur overthrow his kingdom, and may he break his
weapons, and may he cause his warriors to be defeated,
and may he diminish his boundaries, and may he ordain
that his rule shall be cut off, and on his days may he
bring sorrow, and his years may he make evil, and may
he blot out his name and his seed from the land! ”’

By such blessings and curses Tukulti-Ninib hoped
to ensure the preservation of his name and the rebuild-
ing of his city, should it at any time be neglected and
fall into decay.’ Curiously enough, it was in this very
city that Tukulti-Ninib met his own fate less than seven
years after he had founded it. At that time one of his
own sons, who bore the name of Ashur-nasir-pal, con-
spired against his father and stirred up the nobles to
revolt. The insurrection was arranged when Tukulti-
Ninib was absent from his capital and staying in Kar-
Tukulti-Ninib, where he was probably protected by only
a small bodyguard, the bulk of his veteran warriors
remaining behind in garrison at Ashur. The insurgent
nobles, headed by Ashur-nasir-pal, fell upon the king
without warning when he was passing through the city
without any suspicion of risk from a treacherous attack.
The king defended himself and sought refuge in a neigh-

408 ASSYRIAN AND NEO-BABYLONIAN EMPIRES

bouring house, but the conspirators surrounded the
building and, having forced an entrance, slew him with
the sword. Thus Tukulti-Ninib perished in the city he
had built and beautified with the spoils of his campaigns,
where he had looked forward to passing a peaceful and
secure old age. Of the fate of the city itself we know
little except that its site is marked to-day by a few
mounds which rise slightly above the level of the sur-
rounding desert. The king’s memorial tablet only has
survived. For some 3,200 years it rested undisturbed
in the foundations of the wall of unburnt brick, where
it was buried by Tukulti-Ninib on the completion of
the city wall. Thence it was removed by the hands of
modern Arabs, and it is now preserved in the British
Museum, where the characters of the inscription may
be seen to be as sharp and uninjured as on the day when
the Assyrian graver inscribed them by order of the
king. |

In the account of his first campaign, which is pre-
served upon the memorial tablet, it is stated that the
peoples conquered by Tukulti-Ninib brought their yearly
tribute to the city of Ashur. This fact is of considerable
interest, for it proves that Tukulti-Ninib restored the
capital of Assyria to the city of Ashur, removing it from
Calah, whither it had been transferred by his father
Shalmaneser I. The city of Calah had been founded
and built by Shalmaneser I in the same way that his son
Tukulti-Ninib built the city of Kar-Tukulti-Ninib, and
the building of both cities is striking evidence of the
rapid growth of Assyria and her need of expansion

Stone Tablet.
Bearing an inscription of Tukulti-Ninib I, King of Assyria, about B.C. 1275.

RAPID GROWTH OF ASSYRIA 409

around fresh centres prepared for administration and
defence. The shifting of the Assyrian capital to Calah
by Shalmaneser I was also due to the extension of As-
syrian power in the north, in consequence of wee there
was need of having
the capital nearer
the centre of the
country so enlarged.
Ashur’s recovery of
her old position un-
der Tukulti-Ninib I
was only a tempo-
rary check to this
movement north-
wards, and, so long
as Babylon re-
mained a conquered
province of the As-
syrian empire, obvi-
ously the need for
a capital farther
forth. Uban Aatimy. . OP rian ones cme ee
would not have been

pressing. But with Tukulti-Ninib’s death Babylon re-
gained her independence and freed herself from Assyr-
ian control, and the centre of the northern kingdom
was once more subject to the influences which eventu-
ally resulted in the permanent transference of her capi-
tal to Nineveh. To the comparative neglect into which
Ashur and Calah consequently fell, we may probably

410 ASSYRIAN AND NEO-BABYLONIAN EMPIRES

trace the extensive remains of buildings belonging to
the earlier periods of Assyrian history which have been
recovered and still remain to be found, in the mounds
that mark their sites.

We have given some account of the results already
achieved from the excavations carried out during the
last two years at Sherghat, the site of the city of Ashur.
That much remains to be done on the site of Calah,
the other early capital of Assyria, is evident from even
a cursory examination of the present condition of the
mounds that mark the location of the city. These
mounds are now known by the name of Nimriid and are
situated on the left or eastern bank of the Tigris, a
short distance above the point at which it is joined by
the stream of the Upper Zab, and the great mound
which still covers the remains of the ziggurat, or temple
tower, can be seen from a considerable distance across
the plain. During the excavations formerly carried out
here for the British Museum, remains of palaces were
recovered which had been built or restored by Shal-
maneser I, Ashur-nasir-pal, Shalmaneser II, Tiglath-
pileser III, Sargon, Esarhaddon, and Ashur-etil-ilani.
After the conclusion of the diggings and the removal
of many of the sculptures to England, the site was
covered again with earth, in order to protect the re-
mains of Assyrian buildings which were left in place.
Since that time the soil has sunk and been washed
away by the rains so that many of the larger sculp-
tures are now protruding above the soil, an example
of which is seen in the two winged bulls in the palace

REVELATIONS OF ASSYRIAN BUILDINGS 411

of Ashur-nasir-pal. It is improbable that the mounds
of Nimriid will yield such rich results as Sherghat, but
the site would probably well repay prolonged and sys-
tematic excavation.

We have hitherto summarized and described the
principal facts, with regard to the early history of
Babylonia and Assyria and the neighbouring countries,
which have been obtained from the excavations con-
ducted recently on the sites of ancient cities. From
the actual remains of the buildings that have been un-
earthed we have secured information with regard to
the temples and palaces of ancient rulers and the plans
on which they were designed. From the objects of daily
life and of religious use which have been recovered, such
aS weapons of bronze and iron, and vessels of metal,
stone, and clay, it is possible for the archeologist to
draw conclusions with regard to the customs of these
early peoples; while from a study of their style and
workmanship and of such examples of their sculpture
as have been brought to light, he may determine the
stage of artistic development at which they had arrived.
The clay tablets and stone monuments that have been
recovered reveal the family life of the people, their
commercial undertakings, their system of legislation
and land tenure, their epistolary correspondence, and
the administration under which they lived, while the
royal inscriptions and foundation-memorials throw light
on the religious and historical events of the period in
which they were inscribed. Information on all these
points has been acquired as the result of excavation,

412 ASSYRIAN AND NEO-BABYLONIAN EMPIRES

and is based on the discoveries in the ruins of early
cities which have remained buried beneath the soil for .
some thousands of years. But for the history of As-
syria and of the other nations in the north there is still
another source of information to which reference must
now be made.

The kings of Assyria were not content with record-
ing their achievements on the walls of their buildings,
on stele set up in their palaces and temples, on their
tablets of annals preserved in their archive-chambers,
and on their cylinders and foundation-memorials con-
cealed within the actual structure of the buildings them-
selves. They have also left records graven in the living
rock, and these have never been buried, but have been
exposed to wind and weather from the moment they
were engraved. Records of irrigation works and mili-
tary operations successfully undertaken by Assyrian
kings remain to this day on the face of the mountains
to the north and east of Assyria. The kings of one
great mountain race that had its capital at Van bor-
rowed from the Assyrians this method of recording
their achievements, and, adopting the Assyrian char-
acter, have left numerous rock-inscriptions in their own
language in the mountains of Armenia and Kurdistan.
In some instances the action of rain and frost has nearly
if not quite obliterated the record, and a few have been
defaced by the hand of man. But as the majority are
engraved in panels cut on the sheer face of the rock,
and are inaccessible except by means of ropes and
tackle, they have escaped mutilation. The photograph

ROCK - INSCRIPTIONS 413

reproduced will serve to show the means that must be
adopted for reaching such rock-inscriptions in order
to examine or copy them. The inscription shown in
the photograph is one of those cut by Sennacherib in

WORK IN PROGRESS ON ONE OF THE ROCK-INSCRIPTIONS OF
SENNACHERIB, IN THE GORGE OF THE RIVER GOMEL, NEAR
BAVIAN.

the gorge near Bavian, through which the river Gomel
flows, and can be reached only by climbing down ropes
fixed to the top of the cliff. The choice of such posi-
tions by the kings who caused the inscriptions to be

414 ASSYRIAN AND NEO-BABYLONIAN EMPIRES

engraved was dictated by the desire to render it diffi-
cult to destroy them, but it has also had the effect of
delaying to some extent their copying and decipherment
by modern workers. Considerable progress, however,

THE PRINCIPAL ROCK SCULPTURES IN THE GORGE OF THE
GOMEL NEAR BAVIAN IN ASSYRIA.

has recently been made in identifying and copying these
texts, and we may here give a short account of what has
been done and of the information furnished by the
Inscriptions that have been examined.

Recently considerable additions have been made to

THE EMPIRE OF VAN 415

our knowledge of the ancient empire of Van and of its
relation to the later kings of Assyria by the labours
of Prof. Lehmann and Dr. Belck on the inscriptions
which the kings of that period caused to be engraved

THE ROCK AND CITADEL OF VAN.

The flat roofs of the houses of the city of Van may be seen to the
left of the photograph nestling below the rock.

upon the rocks among the mountains of Armenia. The
centre and capital of this empire was the ancient city
which stood on the site of the modern town of Van at
the southwest corner of the lake which bears the same
name. The city was built at the foot of a natural rock

416 ASSYRIAN AND NEO-BABYLONIAN EMPIRES

which rises precipitously from the plain, and must have
formed an impregnable stronghold against the attack
of the foe.

In this citadel at the present day remain the
ancient galleries and staircases and chambers which
were cut in the living rock by the kings who made
it their fortress, and their inscriptions, engraved upon
the face of the rock on specially prepared and polished
surfaces, enable us to reconstruct in some degree the
history of that ancient empire. From time to time
there have been found and copied other similar texts,
which are cut on the mountainsides or on the massive
stones which formed part of the construction of their
buildings and fortifications. A complete collection of
these texts, together with translations, will shortly be
published by Prof. Lehmann. Meanwhile, this scholar
has discussed and summarized the results to be obtained
from much of his material, and we are thus already
enabled to sketch the principal achievements of the
rulers of this mountain race, who were constantly at
war with the later kings of Assyria, and for two cen-
turies at least disputed her claim to supremacy in this
portion of Western Asia.

The country occupied by this ancient people of Van
was the great table-land which now forms Armenia.
The people themselves cannot be connected with the
Armenians, for their language presents no character-
istics of those of the Indo-European family, and it is
equally certain that they are not to be traced to a
Semitic origin. It is true that they employed the

VAN’S RELATIONS WITH ASSYRIA 417

Assyrian method of writing their inscriptions, and their
art differs only in minor points from that of the As-
syrians, but in both instances this similarity of culture
was directly borrowed at a time when the less civilized

ANCIENT FLIGHT OF STEPS AND GALLERY ON THE FACE OF
THE ROCK -CITADEL OF VAN.

race, having its centre at Van, came into direct con-
tact with the Assyrians. The exact date at which this
influence began to be exerted is not certain, but we
have records of immediate relations with Assyria in
the second half of the ninth century before Christ. The

418 ASSYRIAN AND NEO - BABYLON IAN EMPIRES

district inhabited by the Vannic people was known to
the Assyrians by the name of Urartu, and although the
inscriptions of the earlier Assyrian kings do not record
expeditions against that country, they frequently make
mention of campaigns against princes and petty rulers
of the land of Na’iri. They must therefore for long
have exercised an indirect, if not a direct, influence on
the peoples and tribes which lay more to the north.
The earliest evidence of direct contact between the
Assyrians and the land of Urartu which we at present
possess dates from the reign of Ashur-nasir-pal, and in
the reign of his son Shalmaneser II three expeditions
were undertaken against the people of Van. The name
of the king of Urartu at this time was Arame, and his
capital city, Arzasku, probably lay to the north of Lake
Van. On all three occasions the Assyrians were vic-
torious, forcing Arame to abandon his capital and cap-
turing his cities as far as the sources of the Euphrates.
Subsequently, in the year 833 B. c., Shalmaneser II made
another attack upon the country, which at that time
was under the sway of Sarduris I. Under this mon-
- arch the citadel of Van became the great stronghold of
the people of Urartu, for he added to the natural
strength of the position by the construction of walls
built between the rock of Van and the harbour. The
massive blocks of stone of which his fortifications were
composed are standing at the present day, and they
bear eloquent testimony to the energy with which this
monarch devoted himself to the task of rendering his
new citadel impregnable. The fortification and strength-

FORTIFICATION OF VAN 419

ening of Van and its citadel was carried on during the
reigns of his direct successors and descendants, Ispui-
nis, Menuas, and Argistis I, so that when Tiglath-pile-
ser III brought fire and sword into the country and

PART OF THE ANCIENT FORTIFICATIONS OF THE CITY OF
VAN, BETWEEN THE CITADEL AND THE LAKE.

laid siege to Van in the reign of Sarduris II, he could
not capture the citadel. It was not difficult for the
Assyrian king to assault and capture the city itself,
which lay at the foot of the citadel as it does at the
present day, but the latter, within the fortifications of

420 ASSYRIAN AND NEO-BABYLONIAN EMPIRES

which Sarduris and his garrison withdrew, proved itself
able to withstand the Assyrian attack. The expedition
of Tiglath-pileser III did not succeed in crushing the
Vannic empire, for Rusas I, the son and successor of
Sarduris IJ, allied himself to the neighbouring moun-
tain races and gave considerable trouble to Sargon, the
Assyrian king, who was obliged to undertake an expe-
dition to check their aggressions.

It was probably Rusas I who erected the buildings
on Toprak Kala, the hill to the east of Van, traces of
which remain to the present day. He built a palace
and a temple, and around them he constructed a new
city with a reservoir to supply it with water, possibly
because the slopes of Toprak Kala rendered it easier
of defence than the city in the plain (beneath the rock
and citadel) which had fallen an easy prey to Tiglath-
pileser III. The site of the temple on Toprak Kala has
been excavated by the trustees of the British Museum,
and our knowledge of Vannic art is derived from the
shields and helmets of bronze and small bronze figures
and fittings which were recovered from this building.
One of the shields brought to the British Museum from
the Toprak Kala, where it originally hung with others
on the temple walls, bears the name of Argistis II, who
was the son and successor of Rusas I, and who at-
tempted to give trouble to the Assyrians by stirring the
inhabitants of the land of Kummukh (Kommagene) to
revolt against Sargon. His son, Rusas IT, was the con-
temporary of Hsarhaddon, and from some recently dis-
covered rock-inscriptions we learn that he extended the

INSCRIPTIONS OF SENNACHERIB 421

limits of his kingdom on the west and secured victories
against Mushki (Meshech) to the southeast of the Halys
and against the Hittites in Northern Syria. Rusas 1
rebuilt the temple on Toprak Kala, as we know from
an inscription of his on one of the shields from that
place in the British Museum. Both he and Sarduris III
were on friendly terms with the Assyrians, for we know
that they both sent embassies to Ashur-bani-pal.

By far the larger number of rock-inscriptions that
have yet been found and copied in the mountainous
districts bordering on Assyria were engraved by this
ancient Vannic people, and Drs. Lehmann and Belck
have done good service by making careful copies and
collations of all those which are at present known.
Work on other classes of rock-inscriptions has also been
carried on by other travellers. A new edition of the
inscriptions of Sennacherib in the gorge of the Gomel,
near the village of Bavian, has been made by Mr. King,
who has also been fortunate enough to find a number
of hitherto unknown inscriptions in Kurdistan on the
Judi Dagh and at the sources of the Tigris. The in-
scriptions at the mouth of the Nahr el-Kelb, ‘* the Dog
River,” in Syria, have been reéxamined by Dr. Knudt-
zon, and the long inscription which Nebuchadnezzar IL
eut on the rocks at Wadi Brissa in the Lebanon; for-
merly published by M. Pognon, has been recopied by
Dr. Weissbach. Finally, the great trilingual inscription
of Darius Hystaspes on the rock at Bisutun in Persia,
which was formerly copied by the late Sir Henry Raw-
linson and used by him for the successful decipherment

422 ASSYRIAN AND NEO-BABYLONIAN EMPIRES

of the cuneiform inscriptions, was completely copied
last year by Messrs. King and Thompson.!

The main facts of the history of Assyria under her
later kings and of Babylonia during the Neo-Babylonian
and Persian periods were many years ago correctly
ascertained, and recent excavation and research have
done little to add to our knowledge of the history of
these periods. It was hoped that the excavations con-
ducted by Dr. Koldewey at Babylon would result in
the recovery of a wealth of inscriptions and records
referring to the later history of the country, but unfor-
tunately comparatively few tablets or inscriptions have
been found, and those that have been recovered consist
mainly of building-inscriptions and votive texts. One
such building-inscription contains an interesting his-
torical reference. It occurs on a barrel-cylinder of clay
inscribed with a text of Nabopolassar, and it was found
in the temple of Ninib and records the completion and
restoration of the temple by the king. In addition to
recording the building operations he had carried out
in the temple, Nabopolassar boasts of his opposition to
the Assyrians. He says: ‘“‘ As for the Assyrians who
had ruled all peoples from distant days and had set the
people of the land under a heavy yoke, I, the weak and
humble man who worshippeth the Lord of Lords (1. e.
the god Marduk), through the mighty power of Nabi
and Marduk, my lords, held back their feet from the
land of Akkad and cast off their yoke.” |

'Messrs. King and Thompson are preparing a new edition of this in-
scription.

MISSING LINKS IN HISTORY 423

It is not yet certain whether the Babylonians under
Nabopolassar actively assisted Cyaxares and the Medes
in the siege and in the subsequent capture of Nineveh
in 606 B.c., but this newly discovered reference to the
Assyrians by Nabopolassar may possibly be taken to
imply that the Babylonians were passive and not active
allies of Cyaxares. If the cylinder were inscribed after
the fall of Nineveh we should have expected Nabopo-
lassar, had he taken an active part in the capture of
the city, to have boasted in more definite terms of his
achievement. On his stele which is preserved at Con-
stantinople, Nabonidus, the last king of the Neo-Baby-
lonian empire, who himself suffered defeat at the hands
of Cyrus, King of Persia, ascribed the fall of Nineveh
to the anger of Marduk and the other gods of Babylon
because of the destruction of their city and the spolia-
tion of their temples by Sennacherib in 689 B.c. We see
the irony of fate in the fact that Cyrus also ascribed the
defeat and deposition of Nabonidus and the fall of
Babylon to Marduk’s intervention, whose anger he al-
leges was aroused by the attempt of Nabonidus to con-
_eentrate the worship of the local city-gods in Babylon.

Thus it will be seen that recent excavation and
research have not yet supplied the data for filling in
such gaps as still remain in our knowledge of the later
history of Assyria and Babylon. The closing years of
the Assyrian empire and the military achievements of
the great Neo-Babylonian rulers, Nabopolassar, Nerig-
lissar, and Nebuchadnezzar II, have not yet been found
recorded in any published Assyrian or Babylonian

424 ASSYRIAN AND NEO-BABYLONIAN EMPIRES

inscription, but it may be expected that at any moment
some text will be discovered that will throw light upon
the problems connected with the history of those periods
which still await solution. Meanwhile, the excavations
at Babylon, although they have not added much to our
knowledge of the later history of the country, have been
of immense service in revealing the topography of the
city during the Neo-Babylonian period, as well as the
‘positions, plans, and characters of the principal build-
ings erected by the later Babylonian kings. The dis-
covery of the palaces of Nebuchadnezzar II on the
mound of the Kasr, of the small but complete temple
E-makh, of the temple of the goddess Nin-makh to the
northeast of the palaces, and of the sacred road divid-
ing them and passing through the Great Gate of Ishtar
(adorned with representations of lions, bulls, and drag-
ons in raised brick upon its walls) has enabled us to
form some conception of the splendour and magnificence
of the city as it appeared when rebuilt by its last native
rulers. Moreover, the great temple E-sagila, the famous
shrine of the god Marduk, has been identified and partly
excavated beneath the huge mound of Tell Amran ibn-
Ali, while a smaller and less famous temple of Ninib
has been discovered in the lower mounds which lie to
the eastward. Finally, the sacred way from E-sagila
to the palace mound has been traced and uncovered.
We are thus enabled to reconstitute the scene of the
most solemn rite of the Babylonian festival of the New
Year, when the statue of the god Marduk was carried
in solemn procession along this road from the temple

LITERARY ACTIVITY 425

to the palace, and the Babylonian king made his yearly
obeisance to the national god, placing his own hands
within those of Marduk, in token of his submission to
and dependence on the divine will.

Though recent excavations have not led to any start-
ling discoveries with regard to the history of Western

WITHIN THE SHRINE OF E-MAKH, THE TEMPLE OF THE GODDESS NIN - MAKH.

Asia during the last years of the Babylonian empire,
research among the tablets dating from the Neo-Baby-
lonian and Persian periods has lately added consider-
ably to our knowledge of Babylonian literature. These
periods were marked by great literary activity on the
part of the priests at Babylon, Sippar, and elsewhere,
who, under the royal orders, scoured the country for
all remains of the early literature which was preserved

426 ASSYRIAN AND NEO-BABYLONIAN EMPIRES

in the ancient temples and archives of the country, and
made careful copies and collections of all they found.
Many of these tablets containing Neo-Babylonian copies
of earlier literary texts are preserved in the British
Museum, and have been recently published, and we have
thus recovered some of the principal grammatical, relig-

© AMRAN IBN ALL, SHOWING A SECTION OF THE PAVED SACRED WAT.
ious, and magical compositions of the earlier Babylo-
nian period. Among the most interesting of such recent
finds is a series of tablets inscribed with the Babylonian
legends concerning the creation of the world and man,
which present many new and striking parallels to the
beliefs on these subjects embodied in Hebrew literature.
We have not space to treat this subject at greater length

UNIMPORTANT HISTORICAL RESULTS 427

in the present work, but we may here note that dis-
covery and research in its relation to the later empires
that ruled at Babylon have produced results of literary
rather than of historical importance. But we should
exceed the space at our disposal if we attempted even
to skim this fascinating field of study in which so much
has recently been achieved. For it is time we turned
once more to Egypt and directed our inquiry towards
ascertaining what recent research has to tell us with
regard to her inhabitants during the later periods of
her existence as a nation of the ancient world.

CHAPTER IX

THE LAST DAYS OF ANCIENT EGYPT

EFORE we turned from Egypt to summarize the
information, afforded by recent discoveries, upon the
history of Western Asia under the kings of the Assyrian
and Neo-Babylonian periods, we noted that the Asiatic
empire of Egypt was regained by the reactionary kings
of the XIXth Dynasty, after its temporary loss owing
to the vagaries of Akhunaten. Palestine remained
Egyptian throughout the period of the judges until
the foundation of the kingdom of Judah. With the
decline of military spirit in Egypt and the increasing
power of the priesthood, authority over Asia became less
and less a reality. Tribute was no longer paid, and the
tribes wrangled without a restraining hand, during the
reigns of the successors of Ramses III. By the time
of the priest-kings of Thebes (the XXIst Dynasty) the
authority of the Pharaohs had ceased to be exercised
in Syria. Egypt was itself divided into two kingdoms,
the one ruled by Northern descendants of the Ramessids

at Tanis, the other by the priestly monarchs at Thebes,
428

DECLINE OF POWER 429

who reigned by right of inheritance as a result of the
marriage of the daughter of Ramses with the high priest
Amenhetep, father of Herhor, the first priest-king. The
Thebans fortified Gebelén in the South and el-Hébi in
the North against attack, and evidently their relations
with the Tanites were not always friendly.

In Syria nothing of the imperial power remained.
The prestige of the god Amen of Thebes, however, was
still very great. We see this clearly from a very in-
teresting papyrus of the reign of Herhor, published in
1899 by Mr. Golenischeff, which describes the adven-
tures of Uenuamen, an envoy sent (about 1050 B.c.)
to Pheenicia to bring wood from the mountains of Leb-
anon for the construction of a great festival bark of
the god Amen at Thebes. In the course of his mission
he was very badly treated (We cannot well imagine
Thothmes III or Amenhetep ITI tolerating ill-treatment
of their envoy!) and eventually shipwrecked on the coast
of the land of Alashiya or Cyprus. He tells us in the
papyrus, which seems to be the official report of his
mission, that, having been given letters of credence to
the Prince of Byblos from the King of Tanis, ‘‘ to whom
Amen had given charge of his North-land,’’ he at length
reached Pheenicia, and after much discussion and argu-
ment was able to prevail upon the prince to have the
wood which he wanted brought down from Lebanon to
the seashore.

Here, however, a difficulty presented itself,—the har-
bour was filled with the piratical ships of the Cretan
Tjakaray, who refused to allow Uenuamen to return to

430 THE LAST DAYS OF ANCIENT EGYPT

Egypt. ‘‘ They said, ‘ Seize him; let no ship of his go
unto the land of Egypt!’ Then,’’ says Uenuamen in
the papyrus, ‘‘ I sat down and wept.’ The scribe of the
prince came out unto me; he said unto me, ‘ What ail-
eth thee?’ I replied, ‘ Seest thou not the birds which
fly, which fly back unto Egypt? Look at them, they go —
unto the cool canal, and how long do I remain aban-
doned here? Seest thou not those who would prevent
my return?’ He went away and spoke unto the prince,
who began to weep at the words which were told unto
him and which were so sad. He sent his seribe out
unto me, who brought me two measures of wine and
a deer. He sent me Tentnuet, an Egyptian singing-girl
who was with him, saying unto her, ‘ Sing unto him,
that he may not grieve!’ He sent word unto me, ‘ Hat,
drink, and grieve not! To-morrow shalt thou hear all
that I shall say.’ On the morrow he had the people
of his harbour summoned, and he stood in the midst
of them, and he said unto the Tjakaray, ‘ What aileth
you?’ They answered him, ‘ We will pursue the pirat-
ical ships which thou sendest unto Egypt with our un-
happy companions.’ He said unto them, ‘ I cannot seize
the ambassador of Amen in my land. Let me send him
away and then do ye pursue after him to seize him!’
He sent me on board, and he sent me away . . . to the
haven of the sea. The wind drove me upon the land
of Alashiya. The people of the city came out in order
to slay me. I was dragged by them to the place where
Hatiba, the queen of the city, was. I met her as she
was going out of one of her houses into the other. I

PAPYRUS OF THE REIGN OF HERHOR 431

greeted her and said unto the people who stood by her,
“Is there not one among you who understandeth the
speech of Egypt?’ One of them replied, ‘ I understand
it.” I said unto him, ‘ Say unto thy mistress: even as
far as the city in which Amen dwelleth (7. e. Thebes)
have I heard the proverb, ‘‘ In all cities is injustice
done; only in Alashiya is justice to be found,”’ and
now is injustice done here every day!’ She said, ‘ What
is it that thou sayest?’ I said unto her, ‘ Since the
sea raged and the wind drove me upon the land in which
thou livest, therefore thou wilt not allow them to seize
my body and to kill me, for verily I am an ambassador
of Amen. Remember that I am one who will be sought
for always. And if these men of the Prince of Byblos
whom they seek to kill (are killed), verily if their chief
finds ten men of thine, will he not kill them also?’ She
summoned the men, and they were brought before her.
She said unto me, ‘ Lie down and sleep .. .’”

At this point the papyrus breaks off, and we do
not know how Uenuamen returned to Egypt with his
wood. The description of his casting-away and landing
on Alashiya is quite Homeric, and gives a vivid picture
of the manners of the time. The natural impulse of the
islanders is to kill the strange castaway, and only the
fear of revenge and of the wrath of a distant foreign
deity restrains them. Alashiya is probably Cyprus,
which also bore the name Yantinay from the time of
Thothmes IIT until the seventh century, when it is
ealled Yatnan by the Assyrians. A king of Alashiva
corresponded with Amenhetep III in cuneiform on

432 THE LAST DAYS OF ANCIENT EGYPT

terms of perfect equality, three hundred years before:
‘¢ Brother,’’ he writes, ‘‘ should the small amount of the
copper which I have sent thee be displeasing unto thy
heart, it is because in my land the hand of Nergal my
lord slew all the men of my land (’. e. they died of the
plague), and there was no working of copper; and this
was, my brother, not pleasing unto thy heart. Thy
messenger with my messenger swiftly will I send, and
whatsoever amount of copper thou hast asked for, O
my brother, I, even I, will send it unto thee.’’ The
mention by Herhor’s envoy of Nesibinebdad (Smendes),
the King of Tanis, a powerful ruler who in reality con-
stantly threatened the existence of the priestly mon-_
archy at Thebes, as ‘‘ him to whom Amen has committed
the wardship of his North-land,’’ is distinctly amusing.
The hard fact of the independence of Lower Egypt had
to be glozed somehow.

The days of Theban power were coming to an end
and only the prestige of the god Amen remained
strong for two hundred years more. But the alliance
of Amen and his priests with a band of predatory and
destroying foreign conquerors, the Ethiopians (whose
rulers were the descendants of the priest-kings, who
retired to Napata on the succession of the powerful
Bubastite dynasty of Shishak to that of Tanis, aban-
doning Thebes to the Northerners), did much to destroy
the prestige of Amen and of everything connected with
him. An Ethiopian victory meant only an Assyrian
reconquest, and between them Ethiopians and Assyrians
had well-nigh ruined Egypt. Jn the Saite period Thebes

THE SAITE PERIOD 433

had declined greatly in power as well as in influence,
and all its traditions were anathema to the leading peo-
ple of the time, although not of course in Akhunaten’s
sense.

With the Saite period we seem almost to have re-
traced our steps and to have reéntered the age of
the Pyramid Builders. All the pomp and glory of
Thothmes, Amenhetep, and Ramses were gone. The
days of imperial Egypt were over, and the minds of
men, sickened of foreign war, turned for peace and
quietness to the simpler ideals of the IVth and Vth
Dynasties. We have already seen that an archaistic
revival of the styles of the early dynasties is charac-
teristic of this late period, and that men were buried
at Sakkara and at Thebes in tombs which recall in form
and decoration those of the courtiers of the Pyramid
Builders. Everywhere we see this fashion of archaism.
A Theban noble of this period named Aba was buried
at Thebes. Long ago, nearly three thousand years
before, under the VIth Dynasty, there had lived a great
noble of the same name, who was buried in a rock-tomb
at Dér el-Gebrawi, in Middle Egypt. This tomb was
open and known in the days of the second Aba, who
caused to be copied and reproduced in his tomb in the
Asasif at Thebes most of the scenes from the bas-relief
with which it had been decorated. The tomb of the
VIth Dynasty Aba has lately been copied for the Ar-
cheological Survey of Egypt (Egypt Exploration Fund)
by Mr. de Garis Davies, who has found the reliefs of
the XXVIth Dynasty Aba of considerable use to him

434 THE LAST DAYS OF ANCIENT EGYPT

in reconstituting destroyed portions of their ancient
originals,

During late years important discoveries of objects
of this era have been few. One of the most noteworthy
is that of a contemporary inscription describing the
battle of Momemphis, which is mentioned by Herodo-
tus (ii, 163, 169). We now have the official account of
this battle, and know that it took place in the third year
of the reign of Amasis—not before he became king.
This was the fight in which the unpatriotic king, Apries,
who had paid for his partiality for the Greeks of Nau-
kratis with the loss of his throne, was finally defeated.
As we see from this inscription, he was probably mur-
dered by the country people during his flight.

The following are the most important passages of
the inscription: ‘*‘ His Majesty (Amasis) was in the
Festival-Hall, discussing plans for his whole land, when
one came to say unto him, ‘ Haa-ab-Ra (Apries) is
rowing up; he hath gone on board the ships which have
crossed over. Haunebu (Greeks), one knows not their
number, are traversing the North-land, which is as if
it had no master to rule it; he (Apries) hath sum-
moned them, they are coming round him. It is he who
hath arranged their settlement in the Peh-an (the An-
dropolite name); they infest the whole breadth of
Egypt, those who are on thy waters fly before them! ’
... His Majesty mounted his chariot, having taken
lance and bow in his hand... (the enemy) reached
Andropolis; the soldiers sang with joy on the roads
. .. they did their duty in destroying the enemy. His

EGYPTIAN CLEMENCY 435

Majesty fought like a lion; he made victims among
them, one knows not how many. The ships and their
warriors were overturned, they saw the depths as do
the fishes. Like a flame he extended, making a feast of
fighting. His heart rejoiced. ... The third year, the
8th Athyr, one came to tell Majesty: ‘ Let their vile-
ness be ended! They throng the roads, there are thou-
sands there ravaging the land; they fill every road.
Those who are in ships bear thy terror in their hearts.
But it is not yet finished!’ Said his Majesty unto his

soldiers: ‘. .. Young men and old men, do this in the
cities and nomes! . . . Going upon every road, let not
a day pass without fighting their galleys!’ ... The

land was traversed as by the blast of a tempest, des-
troying their ships, which were abandoned by the crews.
The people accomplished their fate, killing the prince
(Apries) on his couch, when he had gone to repose in
his cabin. When he saw his friend overthrown .
his Majesty himself buried him (Apries), in order to
establish him as a king possessing virtue, for his Maj-
esty decreed that the hatred of the gods should be
removed from him.’’ | .
This is the event to which we have already re-
ferred in a preceding chapter, as proving the great
amelioration of Egyptian ideas with regard to the treat-
ment of a conquered enemy, as compared with those
of other ancient nations. Amasis refers to the deposed
monarch as his ‘‘ friend,’’ and buries him in a manner
befitting a king at the charges of Amasis himself. This
act warded off from the spirit of Apries the just anger

436 THE LAST DAYS OF ANCIENT EGYPT .

of the gods at his partiality for the ‘‘ foreign devils,’’
and ensured his reception by Osiris as a king neb
menkh, ‘‘ possessing virtues.”’

The town of Naukratis, where Apries established
himself, had been granted to the Greek traders by
Psametik I a century or more before. Mr. D. G.
Hogarth’s recent exploration of the site has led to a
considerable modification of our first ideas of the place,
which were obtained from Prof. Petrie’s excavations.
Prof. Petrie was the discoverer of Naukratis, and his
diggings told us what Naukratis was like in the first
instance, but Mr. Hogarth has shown that several of
his identifications were ‘erroneous and that the map
of the place must be redrawn. The chief error was in
the placing of the Hellenion (the great meeting-place
of the Greeks), which is now known to be in quite
a different position from that assigned to it by Prof.
Petrie. The ‘‘ Great Temenos ”’ of Prof. Petrie has now
been shown to be non-existent. Mr. Hogarth has also
pointed out that an old Egyptian town existed at Nau-
kratis long before the Greeks came there. This town
is mentioned on a very interesting stele of black basalt
(discovered at Tell Gaif, the site of Naukratis, and
now in the Cairo Museum), under the name of ‘‘ Per-
merti, which is called Nukrate.’”’ The first is the old
Egyptian name, the second the Greek name adapted
to Egyptian hieroglyphs. The stele was erected by
Nekhtnebf, the last native king of Egypt, to commem-
orate his gifts to the temples of Neith on the occasion
of his accession at Sais. It is beautifully cut, and the

WEALTH OF THE PTOLEMIES 487

inscription is written in a curious manner, with alpha-
betic spellings instead of ideographs, and ideographs
instead of alphabetic spellings, which savours fully of
the affectation of the learned pedant who drafted it;
for now, of course, in the fourth century before Christ,
nobedy but a priestly antiquarian could read _hiero-
glyphics. Demotic was the only writing for practical
purposes.

We see this fact well illustrated in the inscriptions
of the Ptolemaic temples. The accession of the Ptole-
mies marked a great increase in the material wealth
of Egypt, and foreign conquest again came in fashion.
Ptolemy Euergetes marched into Asia in the grand style
of a Ramses and brought back the images of gods which
had been carried off by Esarhaddon or Nebuchadnez-
zar II centuries before. He was received on his return
to Hgypt with acclamations as a true successor of the
Pharaohs. The imperial spirit was again in vogue, and
the archaistic simplicity and independence of the Saites
gave place to an archaistic imperialism, the first-fruits
of which were the repair and building of temples in the
great Pharaonic style. On these we see the Ptolemies
masquerading as Pharaohs, and the climax of absurdity
is reached when Ptolemy Auletes (the Piper) is seen
striking down Asiatic enemies in the manner of Amen-
hetep or Ramses! This scene is directly copied from
a Ramesside temple, and we find imitations of reliefs
of Ramses II so slavish that the name of the earlier
king is actually copied, as well as the relief, and appears
above the figure of a Ptolemy. The names of the nations

438 THE LAST DAYS OF ANCIENT EGYPT

who were conquered by Thothmes III are repeated
on Ptolemaic sculptures to do duty for the conquered
of Kuergetes, with all sorts of mistakes in spelling,
naturally, and also with later interpolations. Such an
inscription is that in the temple of Kom Ombo, which
Prof. Sayce has held to contain the names of ‘‘ Caphtor
and Casluhim ”’ and to prove the knowledge of the latter
name in the fourteenth century before Christ. The
name of Caphtor is the old Egyptian Keftiu (Crete);
that of Casluhim is unknown in real Old Egyptian
inscriptions, and in this Ptolemaic list at Kom Ombo
it may be quite a late interpolation in the lists, perhaps
no older than the Persian period, since we find the
names of Parsa (Persia) and Susa, which were certainly
unknown to Thothmes III, included in it. We see
generally from the Ptolemaic inscriptions that nobody
could read them but a few priests, who often made
mistakes. One of the most serious was the identifica-
tion of Keftiu with Pheenicia in the Stele of Canopus.
This misled modern archeologists down to the time of
Dr. Evans’s discoveries at Knossos, though how these
utterly un-Semitic looking Keftiu could have been Phee-
nicians was a puzzle to everybody. We now know, of
course, that they were Mycenean or Minoan Cretans,
and that the Ptolemaic antiquaries made a mistake in
identifying the land of Keftiu with Pheenicia.

We must not, however, say too much in dispraise of
the Ptolemaic Egyptians and their works. We have to
be grateful to them indeed for the building of the tem-
ples of Edfu and Dendera, which, owing to their later

MANUSCRIPT TREASURES 439

date, are still in good preservation, while the best pre-
served of the old Pharaonic fanes, such as Medinet
Habit, have suffered considerably from the ravages of
time. For these temples show us to-day what an old
Egyptian temple, when perfect, really looked like. They
are, so to speak, perfect mummies of temples, while of
the old buildings we have nothing but the disjointed
and damaged skeletons.

A good deal of repairing has been done to these build-
ings, especially to that at Edfu, of late years. But the
main archeological interest of Ptolemaic and Roman
times has been found in the field of epigraphy and the
study of papyri, with which the names of Messrs. Ken-
yon, Grenfell, and Hunt are chiefly connected. The
treasures which have lately been obtained by the Brit-
ish Museum in the shape of the manuscripts of Aris-
totle’s ‘‘ Constitution of Athens,’’ the lost poems of
Bacchylides, and the Mimes of Herondas, all of which
have been published for the trustees of that institution
by Mr. Kenyon, are known to those who are inter-
ested in these subjects. The long series of publications
of Messrs. Grenfell and Hunt, issued at the expense of
the Egypt Exploration Fund (Greco-Roman branch),
with the exception of the volume of discoveries at Teb-
tunis, which was issued by the University of California,
is also well known.

The two places with which Messrs. Grenfell and
Hunt’s work has been chiefly connected are the Fayytim
and Behnesa, the site of the ancient Pemje or Oxyr-
rhynehus. The lake-province of the Fayyim, which

440 THE LAST DAYS OF ANCIENT EGYPT

attained such prominence in the days of the XIIth Dy-
nasty, seems to have had little or no history during the
whole period of the New Empire, but in Ptolemaic times
it revived and again became one of the richest and most
important provinces of Egypt. The town of Arsinoé
was founded at Crocodilopolis, where are now the
mounds of Kom el-Faris (The Mound of the Horse-
man), near Medinet el-Fayytim, and became the capital
of the province. At Illahtin, just outside the entrance
to the Fayyim, was the great Nile harbour and entre-
pot of the lake-district, called Ptolemais Hormos.

The explorations of Messrs. Hogarth, Grenfell, and
Hunt in the years of 1895 - 6 and 1898 - 9 resulted in the
identification of the sites of the ancient cities of Karanis
(Kom Ushim), Bacchias (Umm el-’Atl), Euhemeria
(Kasr el-Banat), Theadelphia (Harit), and Philoteris
(Wadfa). The work for the University of California in
1899 - 1900 at Umm el-Baragat showed that this place
was Tebtunis. Dimé, on the northern coast of the
Birket Kartin, the modern representative of the ancient
Lake Moeris, is now known to be the ancient Sokno-
paiou Nesos (the Isle of Soknopaios), a local form of
Sebek, the crocodile-god of the Fayytiim. At Karanis
this god was worshipped under the name of Petesuchos
(‘‘ He whom Sebek has given ’’), in conjunction with
Osiris» Pnepherés (P-nefer-ho, ‘‘the beautiful of face’’) ;
at Tebtunis he became Seknebtunis, 7. ¢. Sebek-neb-
Teb-tunis (Sebek, lord of Tebtunis). This is a typical
example of the portmanteau pronunciations of the lat-
ter-day Egyptians.

GRACO-EGYPTIAN DOCUMENTS 441

Many very interesting discoveries were made during
the course of the excavations of these places (besides
Mr. Hogarth’s find of the temple of Petesuchos and
Pnepherés at Karanis), consisting of Roman pottery of
varied form and Roman agricultural implements, in-
cluding a perfect plough.1 The main interest of all,
however, lies, both here and at Behnesa, in the papyri.
They consist of Greek and Latin documents of all ages
from the early Ptolemaic to the Christian. In fact,
Messrs. Grenfell and Hunt have been unearthing and
sifting the contents of the waste-paper baskets of the
ancient Ptolemaic and Roman Egyptians, which had
been thrown out on to dust-heaps near the towns.
Nothing perishes in the dry climate and soil of Egypt,
so the contents of the ancient dust-heaps have been
preserved intact until our own day, and have been found
by Messrs. Grenfell and Hunt, just as the contents of
the houses of the ancient Indian rulers of Chinese Tur-
kestan, at Niya and Khotan, with their store of Kha-
roshthi documents, have been preserved intact in the
dry Tibetan desert climate and have been found by
Dr. Stein.? There is much analogy between the discov-
eries of Messrs. Grenfell and Hunt in Egypt and those
of Dr. Stein in Turkestan.

The Greco-Egyptian documents are of all kinds,
consisting of letters, lists, deeds, notices, tax-assess-
ments, receipts, accounts, and businessrecords of every
sort and kind, besides new fragments of classical authors

1]}ustrated on Plate TX of Faytim Towns and Their Papyri.
2See Dr. Stein’s Sand-buried Ruins of Khotan, London, 19038.

442 THE LAST DAYS OF ANCIENT EGYPT

and the important ‘‘ Sayings of Jesus,’”’ discovered at
Behnesa, which have been published in a special pop-
ular form by the Egypt Exploration Fund.!

These last fragments of the oldest Christian litera-
ture, which are of such great importance and interest
to all Christians, cannot be described or discussed here.
The other documents are no less important to the stu-
dent of ancient literature, the historian, and the soci-
ologist. The classical fragments include many texts
of lost authors, including Menander. We will give a
few specimens of the private letters and documents,
which will show how extremely modern the ancient
Egyptians were, and how little difference there actually
is between our civilization and theirs, except in the
matter of mechanical invention. They had no locomo-
tives and telephones; otherwise they were the same.
We resemble them much more than we resemble our
medieval ancestors or even the Elizabethans.

This'is a boy’s letter to his father, who would not
take him up to town with him to see the sights: ‘* Theon
to his father Theon, greeting. It was a fine thing of
you not to take me with you to the city! If you won’t
take me with you to Alexandria, I won’t write you a
letter, or speak to you, or say good-bye to you; and
if you go to Alexandria I won’t take your hand or ever
greet you again. That is what will happen if you won’t
take me. Mother said to Archelaus, ‘It quite upsets
him to be left behind.’ It was good of you to send me
presents on the 12th, the day you sailed. Send me a

1 Aovla"Tnood, 1897, and New Sayings of Jesus, 1904.

EGYPTIAN CORRESPONDENCE 443

lyre, I implore you. If you don’t, I won’t eat, I won’t
drink: there now!’’ Is not this more like the letter
of a spoiled child of to-day than are the solemnly dutiful
epistles of even our grandfathers and grandmothers
when young? The touch about ‘‘ Mother said to Arche-
laus, ‘ It quite upsets him to be left behind’ ”’ is de-
lightfully like the modern small boy, and the final re-
quest and threat are also eminently characteristic.

Here is a letter asking somebody to redeem the
writer’s property from the pawnshop: ‘‘ Now please
redeem my property from Sarapion. It is pledged for
two mine. I have paid the interest up to the month
Epeiph, at the rate of a stater per mina. There is a
casket of incense-wood, and another of onyx, a tunic,
a white veil with a real purple border, a handkerchief,
a tunic with a Laconian stripe, a garment of purple
linen, two armlets, a necklace, a coverlet, a figure of
Aphrodite, a cup, a big tin flask, and a wine-jar. From
Onetor get the two bracelets. They have been pledged
since the month Tybi of last year for eight ... at the
rate of a stater per mina. If the cash is insufficient
owing to the carelessness of Theagenis, if, I say, it is
insufficient, sell the bracelets and make up the money.’’

Here is an affectionate letter of invitation: ‘‘ Greet-
ing, my dear Serenia, from Petosiris. Be sure, dear,
to come up on the 20th for the birthday festival of the
god, and let me know whether you are coming by boat
or by donkey, that we may send for you accordingly.
Take care not to forget.’’

Here is an advertisement of a gymnastic display:

Add THE LAST DAYS OF ANCIENT EGYPT

‘‘'The assault-at-arms by the youths will take place
to-morrow, the 24th. Tradition, no less than the dis-
tinguished character of the festival, requires that they
should do their utmost in the gymnastic display. Two
performanees.’’ Signed by Dioskourides, magistrate of
Oxyrrhynchus.

Here is a report from a public physician to a magis-
trate: ‘* To Claudianus, the mayor, from Dionysos, pub-
lic physician. I was to-day instructed by you, through
Herakleides your assistant, to inspect the body of a
man who had been found hanged, named Hierax, and
to report to you my opinion of it. I therefore inspected
the body in the presence of the aforesaid Herakleides
at the house of Epagathus in the Broadway ward, and
found it hanged by a noose, which fact I accordingly
report.’’ Dated in the twelfth year of Marcus Aurelius
(ee ETS)

The above translations are taken, slightly modified,
from those in The Oxyrrhynchus Papyri, vol. i. The
next specimen, a quaint letter, is translated from the
text in Mr. Grenfell’s Greek Papyrt (Oxford, 1896),
p- 69: ‘* To Noumen, police captain and mayor, from
Pokas son of On6ds, unpaid policeman. I have been mal-
treated by Peadius the priest of the temple of Sebek
in Crocodilopolis. On the first epagomenal day of the
eleventh year, after having abused me about... in
the aforesaid temple, the person complained against
sprang upon me and in the presence of witnesses struck
me many blows with a stick which he had. And as
part of my body was not covered, he tore my shirt,

AN EGYPTIAN WILL 445

and this fact I called upon the bystanders to bear wit-
ness to. Wherefore I request that if it seems proper
you will write to Klearchos the headman to send him
to you, in order that, if what I have written is true,
I may obtain justice at your hands.”’

A will of Hadrian’s reign, taken from the Oxyrrhyn-
chus Papyri (i, p. 173), may also be of interest: ‘* This
is the last will and testament, made in the street (%. e.
at a street notary’s stand), of Pekysis, son of Hermes
and Didyme, an inhabitant of Oxyrrhynchus, being sane
and in his right mind. So long as I live, I am to have
powers over my property, to alter my will as I please.
But if I die with this will unchanged, I devise my
daughter Ammonous whose mother is Ptolema, if she
survive me, but if not then her children, heir to my
shares in the common house, court, and rooms situate
in the Cretan ward. All the furniture, movables, and
household stock and other property whatever that I
shall leave, I bequeath to the mother of my children
and my wife Ptolema, the freedwoman of Demetrius,
son of Hermippus, with the condition that she shall
have for her lifetime the right of using, dwelling in,
and building in the said house, court, and rooms. If
Ammonous should die without children and intestate,
the share of the fixtures shall belong to her half-brother

on the mother’s side, Anatas, if he survive, but if not,
to... No one shall violate the terms of this my will
under pain of paying to my daughter and heir Ammo-
nous a fine of 1,000 drachme and to the treasury an
equal sum.’’ Here follow the signatures of testator and

446 THE LAST DAYS OF ANCIENT EGYPT

witnesses, who are described, as in a passport, one of
them as follows: ‘‘I, Dionysios, son of Dionysios of
the same city, witness the will of Pekysis. I am forty-
six years of age, have a curl over my right temple, and
this is my seal of Dionysoplaton.”’

During the Roman period, which we have now
reached in our survey, the temple building of the Ptole-
mies was carried on with like energy. One of the best-
known temples of the Roman period is that at Phila,
which is known as the ‘‘ Kiosk,’’ or ‘‘ Pharaoh’s Bed.”’
Owing to the great picturesqueness of its situation, this
small temple, which was built in the reign of Trajan,
has been a favourite subject for the painters of the last
fifty years, and next to the Pyramids, the Sphinx, and
Karnak, it is probably the most widely known of all
Egyptian buildings. Recently it has come very much
to the front for an additional reason. Like all the other
temples of Phile, it had been archeologically surveyed
and cleared by Col. H. G. Lyons and Dr. Borchardt, but
further work of a far-reaching character was rendered
necessary by the building of the great Aswan dam,
below the island of Philw, one of the results of which
has been the partial submergence of the island and its
temples, including the picturesque Kiosk. The follow-
ing account, taken from the new edition (1907) of Mur-
ray’s Guide to Egypt and the Siddn, will suffice better
than any other description to explain what the dam is,
how it has affected Phile, and what work has been
done to obviate the possibility of serious damage to
the Kiosk and other buildings.

THE GREAT NILE DAM 447

‘Tn 1898 the Egyptian government signed a con-
tract with Messrs. John Aird & Co. for the construc-
tion of the great reservoir and dam at Shellal, which
serves for the storage of water at the time of the flood
Nile. The river is ‘ held up’ here sixty-five feet above
its old normal level.
A great masonry
dyke, 150 feet high
in places, has been
carried across the
Bab el-Kebir of the
First Cataract, and
a canal and four
locks, two hundred
feet long and thirty
et garieyolloynecieaes, «UAE ont Seeae ate
the passage of traffic
up and down the river. The dam is 2,185 yards long
and over ninety feet thick at the base; in places it rises
one hundred feet above the bed of the river. It is built
of the local red granite, and at each end the granite
dam is built into the granite hillside. Seven hundred
and eight thousand cubic yards of masonry were used.
The sluices are 180 in number, and are arranged at four
different levels. The sight of the great volume of water
pouring through them is a very fine one. The Nile
begins to rise in July, and at the end of November it
is necessary to begin closing the sluice-gates to hold up
the water. By the end of February the reservoir is
usually filled and Phile partially submerged, so that

448 THE LAST DAYS OF ANCIENT EGYPT

boats can sail in and out of the colonnades and Pha-
raoh’s Bed. By the beginning of July the water has
been distributed, and it then falls to its normal level.

‘* It is of course regrettable that the engineers were
unable to find another site for the dam, as it seemed in-
evitable that some damage would result to the temples
of Phile from their partial submergence. Korosko was
proposed as a site, but was rejected for cogent reasons,
and apparently Shellél was the only possible place.
Further, no serious person, who places the greatest
good of the greatest number above considerations of the
picturesque and the ‘ interesting,’ will deny that if it
is necessary to sacrifice Phile to the good of the people
of Egypt, Phile must go. ‘ Let the dead bury their
dead.’ The concern of the rulers of Egypt must be
with the living people of Egypt rather than with the
dead bones of the past; and they would not be doing
their duty did they for a moment allow artistic and
archeological considerations to outweigh in their minds
the practical necessities of the country. This does
not in the least imply that they do not owe a lesser
duty to the monuments of Egypt, which are among the
most precious relics of the past. history of mankind.
They do owe this lesser duty, and with regard to Phile
it has been conscientiously fulfilled. The whole temple,
in order that its stability may be preserved under the
stress of submersion, has been braced up and under-
pinned, under the superintendence of Mr. Ball, of the
Survey Department, who has most efficiently carried
out this important work, at a cost of £22,000. Steel

PRESERVING THE KIOSK 449

girders have been fixed across the island from quay to
quay, and these have been surrounded by cement ma-
sonry, made water-tight by forcing in cement grout.
Pharaoh’s Bed and the colonnade have been firmly
underpinned in cement masonry, and there is little
doubt that the actual stability of Phile is now more

THE KIOSK AT PHILZ IN PROCESS OF UNDERPINNING AND
RESTORATION, JANUARY, 1902.

certain than that of any other temple in Egypt. The
only possible damage that can accrue to it is the partial
discolouration of the lower courses of the stonework of
Pharaoh’s Bed, etc., which already bear a distinct high-
water mark. Some surface disintegration from the for-
mation of salt crystals is perhaps inevitable here, but
the effects of this can always be neutralized by careful

450 THE LAST DAYS OF ANCIENT EGYPT

washing, which it should be an important charge of
the Antiquities Department to regularly carry out.”’
The photographs accompanying the present chapter

THE ANCIENT QUAY OF PHILZ, NOVEMBER, 1904.

This is entirely covered when the reservoir is full, and the palm-trees are farther submerged.

show the dam, the Kiosk in process of conservation
and underpinning (1902), and the shores of the island
as they now appear in the month of November, with

THE LAND OF CANDACE 451

the water nearly up to the level of the quays. A view
is also given of the island of Konosso, with its inscrip-
tions, as it is now. The island is simply a huge granite
boulder of the kind characteristic of the neighbourhood
of Shellal (Phile) and AswAn.

On the island of Elephdntiné, opposite Aswan, an
interesting discovery has lately been made by Mr. How-
ard Carter. This is a remarkable well, which was sup-
posed by the ancients to lie immediately on the tropie.
It formed the basis of Eratosthenes’ calculations of the
measurement of the earth. Important finds of docu-
ments written in Aramaic have also been made here;
they show that there was on the island in Ptolemaic
times a regular colony of Syrian merchants.

South of Aswan and Phile begins Nubia. The Nu-
bian language, which is quite different from Arabic, is
spoken by everybody on the island of Elephantiné, and
its various dialects are used as far south as Dongola,
where Arabic again is generally spoken till we reach
the land of the negroes, south of Khartfim. In Ptole-
maic and Roman days the Nubians were a powerful
people, and the whole of Nubia and the modern North
Sadan formed an independent kingdom, ruled by queens
who bore the title or name of Candace. It was the
eunuch of a Candace who was converted to Christianity
as he was returning from a mission to Jerusalem to
salute Jehovah. ‘‘Go and join thyself unto his chariot”’’
was the command to Philip, and when the Ethiopian had
heard the gospel from his lips he went on his way rejoic-
ing. The capital of this Candace was at Meroé, the

452 THE LAST DAYS OF ANCIENT EGYPT

modern Bagarawiya, near Shendi. Here, and at Naga
not far off, are the remains of the temples of the Can-
daces, great buildings of semi-barbaric Egyptian style.
For the civilization of the Nubians, such as it was, was
of Egyptian origin. Ever since Egyptian rule had been
extended southwards to Jebel Barkal, beyond Dongola,
in the time of Amenhetep LI, Egyptian culture had
influenced the Nubians. Amenhetep III built a temple
to Amen at Napata, the capital of Nubia, which lay

*

THE ROCK OF KONOSSO IN JANUARY, 1902, BEFORE THE BUILDING OF THE DAM AND
FORMATION OF THE RESERVOIR.

under the shadow of Mount Barkal; Akhunaten erected
a sanctuary of the Sun-Disk there; and Ramses II also
built there.

The place in fact was a sort of appanage of the
priests of Amen at Thebes, and when the last priest-
king evacuated Thebes, leaving it to the Bubastites of
the XXIId Dynasty, it was to distant Napata that he
retired. Here .a priestly dynasty continued to reign
until, two centuries later, the troubles and misfortunes
of Egypt seemed to afford an opportunity for the

MONUMENTS OF THE NUBIAN KINGDOM 453

reassertion of the exiled Theban power. Piankhi Mera-
men returned to Egypt in triumph as its rightful sov-
ereign, but his successors, Shabak, Shabatak, and Tirha-
kah, had to contend constantly with the Assyrians.
Finally Urdamaneh, Tirhakah’s successor, returned to
Nubia, leaving Egypt, in the decadence of the Assyrian
might, free to lead a quiet existence under Psametik I
and the succeeding monarchs of the XX VIth Dynasty.
When Cambyses conquered Egypt he aspired to con-
quer Nubia also, but his army was routed and destroyed
by the Napatan king, who tells us in an inscription how
he defeated ‘‘ the man Kambasauden,’’ who had at-
tacked him. At Napata the Nubian monarchs, one of
the greatest of whom in Ptolemaic times was Ergam-
enes, a contemporary of Ptolemy Philopator, continued
to reign. But the first Roman governor of Egypt, dilius
Gallus, destroyed Napata, and the Nubians removed
their capital to Meroé, where the Candaces reigned.
The monuments of this Nubian kingdom, the temples
of Jebel Barkal, the pyramids of Nure close by, the
pyramids of Bagarawiya, the temples of Wadi Ben
Naga, Mesawwarat en-Naga, and Mesawwarat es-Sufra
(‘“‘ Mesawwarat ”’ proper), were originally investigated
by Cailliaud and afterwards by Lepsius. During the
last few years they and the pyramids excavated by Dr.
BE. A. Wallis Budge, of the British Museum, for the
Sfidin government, have been again explored. As the
results of his work are not yet fully published, it is
possible at present only to quote the following descrip-
tion from Cook’s Handbook for Egypt and the Sidén

454 THE LAST DAYS OF ANCIENT EGYPT

(by Dr. Budge), p. 6, of work on the pyramids of Jebel
Barkal: ‘‘ The writer excavated the shafts of one of the
pyramids here in 1897, and at the depth of about twenty-
five cubits found a group of three chambers, in one of
which were a number of bones of the sheep which was
sacrificed there about
two thousand years
ago, and also portions
of a broken amphora
which had held Rho-
dian wine. A second
| shaft, which led to
| the mummy-chamber,
was partly emptied,
but<.at. a: - further
ae i depth of twenty cu-
THE ISLE OF oe ae a bed: INSCRIPTIONS, hits water was found,
The high-water mark of the reservoir when full is and, as there were no
| means for pumping it
out, the mummy-chamber could not be entered.’’ With
regard to the Bagarawiya pyramids, Dr. Budge writes,
on p. 700 of the same work, @ propos of the story of the
Italian Ferlini that he found Roman jewelry in one of
these pyramids: ‘‘ In 1903 the writer excavated a num-
ber of the pyramids of Meroé for the Governor-General
of the Stidan, Sir F. R. Wingate, and he is convinced
that the statements made by Ferlini are the result of
misapprehension on his part. The pyramids are solid
throughout, and the bodies are buried under them.
When the details are complete the proofs for this view

RELICS OF A CHRISTIAN KINGDOM 455

will be published.’’ Dr. Budge has also written upon
the subject of the orientation of the Jebel Barkal and
Nure pyramids.

It is very curious to find the pyramids reappearing
in Egyptian tomb-architecture in the very latest period
of Egyptian history. We find them when Egyptian
civilization was just entering upon its vigorous man-
hood, then they gradually disappear, only to revive in
its decadent and exiled old age. The Ethiopian pyra-
mids are all of much more elongated form than the old
Egyptian ones. It is possible that they may be a sur-
vival of the archaistic movement of the XX VIth Dy-
nasty, to which we have already referred.

These are not the latest Egyptian monuments in the
Siidin, nor are the temples of Naga and Mesawwarat
the most ancient, though they belong to the Roman
period and are decidedly barbarian as to their style
and, especially, as to their decoration. The southern-
most as well as latest relic of Egypt in the Sfidan is
the Christian church of Soba, on the Blue Nile, a few
miles above Kharttim. In it was found a stone ram, an
emblem of Amen-Ra, which had formerly stood in the
temple of Naga and had been brought to Soba perhaps
under the impression that it was the Christian Lamb.
It was removed to the garden of the governor-general’s
palace at Kharttim, where it now stands.

The church at Soba is a relic of the Christian king-
dom of Alua, which succeeded the realm of the Can-
daces. One of its chief seats was at Dongola, and all
Nubia is covered with the ruins of its churches. It was,

456 THE LAST DAYS OF ANCIENT EGYPT

of course, an offshoot of the Christianity of Egypt, but
a late one, since Isis was still worshipped at Phile in
the sixth century, long after the Edict of Theodosius ~
had officially abolished paganism throughout the Roman
world, and the Nubians were at first zealous votaries |
of the goddess of Phile. So also when Egypt fell be-
neath the sway of the Moslem in the seventh century,
Nubia remained an independent Christian state, and
continued so down to the twelfth century, when the sol-
diers of Islam conquered the country.

Of late pagan and early Christian Egypt very much
that is new has been discovered during the last few
years. The period of the Lower Empire has yielded much
to the explorers of Oxyrrhynchus, and many papyri of
interest belonging to this period have been published
by Mr. Kenyon in his Catalogue of the Greek Papyri
in the British Musewm, especially the letters of Flavius
Abinneus, a military officer of the fourth century. The
papyri of this period are full of the high-flown titles and
affected phraseology which was so beloved of Byzan-
tine scribes. ‘‘ Glorious Dukes of the Thebaid,”’ ‘‘ most
magnificent counts and lieutenants,”’ ‘“ all-praiseworthy
secretaries,’’ and the like strut across the pages of
the letters and documents which begin ‘‘ In the name
of Our Lord and Master, Jesus Christ, the God and
Saviour of us all, in the year w of the reign of the most
divine and praised, great, and beneficent Lord Flavius
Heraclius (or other) the eternal Augustus and Auto-
krator, month x, year x of the Indiction.’’ It is an
extraordinary period, this of the sixth and seventh

RELIGIOUS STRUGGLES 457

centuries, which we have now entered, with its bizarre
combination of the official titulary of the divine and
eternal Cesars Imperatores Augusti with the initial
invocation of Christ and the Trinity. It is the transi-
tion from the ancient to the modern world, and as such
has an interest all its own.

In Egypt the struggle between the adherents of
Chalcedon, the ‘‘ Melkites’’ or Imperialists of the
orthodox Greek rite, and the Eutychians or Mono-
physites, the followers of the patriarch Dioskoros, who |
rejected Chalcedon, was going on with unabated fury,
and was hardly stopped even by the invasion of the
pagan Persians. The last effort of the party of Con-
stantinople to stamp out the Monophysite heresy was
made when Cyril was patriarch and governor of Egypt.
According to an ingenious theory put forward by Mr.
Butler, in his Arab Conquest of Egypt, it is Cyril the
patriarch who was the mysterious Mukaukas, the
peyavyns, or ‘* Great and Magnificent One,’’ who played
so doubtful a part in the epoch-making events of the
Arab conquest by ’Amr in A.D. 639-41. Usually this
Mukaukas has been regarded as a ‘‘ noble Copt,”’ and
the Copts have generally been credited with having
assisted the Islamites against the power of Constanti-
nople. This was a very natural and probable conclu-
sion, but Mr. Butler will have it that the Copts resisted
the Arabs valiantly, and that the treacherous Mukaukas
was none other than the Constantinopolitan patriarch
himself.

In the papyri it is interesting to note the gradual

458 THE LAST DAYS OF ANCIENT EGYPT

increase of Arab names after the conquest, more espe-
cially in those of the Archduke Rainer’s collection from
the Fayyim, which was so near the new capital city,
Fustat. In Upper Egypt the change was not noticeable
for a long time, and in the great collection of Coptic
ostraka (inscriptions on slips of limestone and sherds
of pottery, used as a substitute for paper or parch-
ment), found in the ruins of the Coptic monastery
established on the temple site of Dér el-Bahari, we
find no Arab names. These documents, part of which
have been published by Mr. W. E. Crum for the Egypt
Exploration Fund, while another part has lately been
issued for the trustees of the British Museum by Mr.
Hall, date to the seventh and eighth centuries. Their
contents resemble those of the earlier papyri from
Oxyrrhynchus, though they are not of so varied a na-
ture and are generally written by persons of less intel-
ligence, 7. e. the monks and peasants of the monasteries
and villages of Tjéme, or Western Thebes. During the
late excavation of the XIth Dynasty temple of Dér
el-Bahari, more of these ostraka were found, which
will be published for the Egypt Exploration Fund by
Messrs. Naville and Hall. Of actual buildings of the
Coptic period the most important excavations have
been those of the French School of Cairo at Bawit,
north of Asyfit. This work, which was carried on by
M. Jean Clédat, has resulted in the discovery of very
important frescoes and funerary inscriptions, belonging
to the monastery of a famous martyr, St. Apollo.
With these new discoveries of Christian Egypt our

A BACKWARD LOOK 459

work reaches its fitting close. The frontier which
divides the ancient from the modern world has almost
been crossed. We look back from the monastery of
Bawit down a long vista of new discoveries until, four
thousand years before, we see again the Great Heads
coming to the Tomb of Den, Narmer inspecting the
bodies of the dead Northerners, and, far away in Baby-
lonia, Naram-Sin crossing the mountains of the East
to conquer Elam, or leading his allies against the prince
of Sinai.

THE END.

ADDENDA

N the preface reference has already been made to the
most important archeological events of the years
1906-7. These are the discovery of the Tomb of Queen
Tii, the mother of the heretic Akhunaten, by Mr. Theo-
dore M. Davis at Thebes, the publication of the results
of Dr. Budge’s explorations in the Sudan, the comple-
tion of the exploration of the Temple of Mentuhetep
IIT at Dér el-Bahari, and the discovery of cuneiform
tablets by Prof. Winckler at Boghaz Koi in Asia Minor.
The former remarkable discoveries of Mr. Theodore
Davis have already been referred to in preceding pages,
and special reference has been made to the profusion of
gold used in the burial of Iuaa and his wife Tuaa. Now
Iuaa and Tuaa were the parents of Tii, and we should
naturally expect to see the same lavish use of gold,
which in the words of the Alashiyan prince was ‘‘ as
water’? in the land of Egypt. Now are we disap-
pointed; but the whole funeral state of Tii was perhaps
more tasteful, more reticent, so to speak, than that of
her parents. We say ‘‘ was,’’ unhappily, because in con-
tradistinction to the other tomb, in which everything was
so magnificently preserved, much of the funerary furni-

ture of Queen Tii has been terribly damaged by water,
| 461

462 ADDENDA

which at some period unknown had infiltrated into the
tomb. Of the mummy of the queen herself, nothing re-
mains but the grinning skull and a few bones; and
these have only been saved by the timely application
of boiling paraffin wax, which soaks into rotten material
and solidifies it. By the same process much of the
woodwork of the burial, which had been reduced to the
condition of touchwood, was also saved.

Originally the burial must have been very beautiful.
The body was covered by a wooden case of open-work,
inlaid with carnelian and with blue and green glass.
This stood within a great wooden shrine or catafalque,
in the conventional form of a naos, which was covered
with thin gesso, overlaid with gold. Delicate reliefs
depicting the queen were moulded in the gesso before
the gold was applied, and the thin metal sheets were
then carefully beaten in, so that we have the appearance
of reliefs in gold. |

Unluckily much of the gold has now fallen away,
and when the explorers entered the tomb they trod on
fragments of gold foil which littered the floor in every
direction. The catafalque, too, was never properly
placed in position in the tomb, and one of its sides was
found lying on the rubbish in the entrance-tunnel. It
would seem, in fact, that this was not the first resting-
place of Tii. She must originally have been buried at
Tell el-Amarna by Akhunaten, who inscribed the cata-
falque for her. Then, apparently in the reign of Tutan-
khamen, when the Aten-worship was abolished, she was
removed to the Valley of the Kings at Thebes, and

ADDENDA 463

somewhat hastily interred in a tomb which is, like that
of Iuaa and Tuaa, very much smaller than the great
royal hypogea close by, and is, indeed, no more im-
portant than any private tomb. At this time the car-

THE TOMB OF QUEEN TII, MOTHER OF THE HERETIC KING
AKHUNATEN.

touches of the heretical king, her son, were obliterated.
from his mother’s funeral state.

Always fortunate, Mr. Davis has discovered some
most beautiful objects in this tomb. Especially admi-
rable are the alabaster lids of the “ Canopic Jars,”’
which are fashioned in the shape of portrait heads of
the queen. The face is one of great beauty. A golden
diadem in the form of a vulture with wings bent round
and back to enclasp the royal head, was also found be-

464 ADDENDA

sides many small vases and figurines of blue glazed
faience. All these objects are now in the Cairo Museum.
In the work of exploration Mr. Davis was assisted by
Mr. Edward R. Ayrton, of London, Eng., who was also
his assistant the year previous, when the tomb of King
Siptah (XIXth Dynasty) was found. In this tomb
nothing of much interest or value was discovered, but
the tomb itself was well painted, and its discovery has
given rise to renewed discussion of the precise course
of the later history of the XIXth Dynasty.

On the other side of the hill which divides the Valley
of the Tombs of the Kings from the main Nile Valley,
the adjacent excavations of the Egypt Exploration
Fund at Dér el-Bahari have pursued their course to
their end, at the base of the frowning cliffs which en-
close the two temples of Mentuhetep III and Hat-
shepsu. Prof. Naville has now completed his work at
Dér el-Bahari. To him and to the Egypt Exploration
Fund is due the renown of having excavated this most
interesting site and having exposed to view two of the
most interesting temples in Egypt.

At the back of the pyramid and the graves of the
priestesses, already described, has been found an open
eolonnaded court, at the western end of which, and at
a slightly higher level, is a small hypostyle hall, con-
taining the cella, or sanctuary, placed in front of a niche
in the cliff-face. The whole of this, the western portion
of the temple, is placed in an artificial cutting in the
rock, the floor of which generally preserves the level
of the pyramid-platform to the east. The cutting is

ADDENDA 465

rectangular, and the cella and niche are placed in the
centre of the western side or end. In the cella, which
is decorated with fine coloured reliefs, stands an altar
of white limestone; this has a sloping top, in the centre
of which is a round depression for the reception of liba-
tions. Niche and altar are on the central axis of the
temple, in line with the centre of the pyramid and ramp.

THE TEMPLE OF Df&R-EL-BAHARI FROM THE SOUTH,
MARCH, 1907.

The whole building is thus seen to be perfectly sym-
metrical.

In the centre of the colonnaded court, and there-
fore also on the central line of the temple, is one of
the most peculiar features of the building. This is
the open descending dromos of what appears to be a
tunnel: a great rock-cut bab, or royal tomb. The tunnel
proceeds at a gentle slope for a distance of about four
hundred feet, at the end of which is reached a tomb-
chamber like those of the Pyramids, faced with great
blocks of granite. In this stands a naos of granite and
alabaster. But no trace of any royal sarcophagus or

466 ADDENDA

coffin has been found. A few bones were found in the
tunnel, it is true, but there is no proof that the remains
of a king were buried here. Prof. Naville is of the opin-
ion, therefore, that this is not a real tomb at all, but a
‘* House of the Ka,’’ an imitation tomb or cenotaph,
so to speak, in which the king who built the temple was
never really buried, but in which was placed a statue of
his Ka, or Double: this, doubtless, stood in the naos.
Similarly, in another great tomb close by, known as the
Bab el-Hosan, which was excavated by Mr. Howard
Carter in 1898, no body was found, only the statue of a
king wrapped up in cerements like a mummy. This,
also, was probably the ‘‘ House ”’ of another royal Ka.

At the side of the colonnaded court Prof. Naville
and his assistants discovered in February, 1906, a shrine
of the goddess Hathor, erected in the reign of Thothmes
IIT, and containing a life-size image of the goddess in
the form of a cow suckling king Amenhetep II, the son
of the builder of the shrine. The name of Amenhetep a
is also inscribed upon the cow, which is represented
coming out of the marshes, and stems of papyrus rise
at her feet. The way in which the papyrus-stems are
used by the sculptor to carry the great weight of the
Hathor-headdress on the head of the cow is very ad-
mirable. Perhaps of all Egyptian representations of
animals this cow is the finest; its head is most beautiful.

From Thebes we turn to the far-away land of Kush.
Here, amid the sands of the Sudan, Dr. E. A. Wallis
Budge has, during the last few years, carried out for
the Sudan Government and the Trustees of the British

ADDENDA 467

Museum a series of investigations and excavations, the
results of which have lately been published in two
volumes, entitled ‘‘ The Egyptian Sudan,’’ by Messrs.
Kegan Paul, Trench, Triibner & Co. Dr. Budge’s chief

HOUSE OF THE EGYPT EXPLORATION FUND AT DER EL-
BAHARI, AND THE BAB EL-HOSAN.

work lay in the pyramid-fields of Gebel Barkal and
Bakarawiya, the ancient Meroé; but he has also ex-
plored the immediate vicinity of the Second Cataract,
and there, in conjunction with Mr. J. W. Crowfoot,
excavated two previously unknown buildings; a shrine
of Tirhakah at Semna and a small temple of the

468 ADDENDA

XVIIIth Dynasty on the island of Ouronarti, ‘‘ King’s
Isle,’’ in Arabic called ‘* Geziret el-Melek.’’ From
Bakarawiya Dr. Budge has brought to London a speci-
men of the Nubian Meroitic art of late Roman times,
which was previously unrepresented in the national col-
lection. This is a wall from the chapel of a royal pyra-
mid, on which one of the Candacés, the queens of Meroé,
is represented with all the apparatus of Egyptian funer-
ary state about her.

Outside the Nile valley the most important discov-
ery of the last year is one which will have far-reaching
results upon current theories with regard to the ethnog-
raphy of Asia Minor, and will furnish abundant ma-
terial for reconstructing the early history of that region
of the ancient world. For some years past it has been
known that cuneiform tablets were to be found on the
ancient site known as Boghaz Koi in Cappadocia, and
the ruins still visible upon the spot have always indi-
cated that a city of considerable importance once stood
there. In the summer of last year Prof. Winckler
undertook excavations on the site, and his labours have
resulted in the recovery of more than two thousand, five
hundred clay tablets, and fragments of tablets, bearing
inscriptions in the cuneiform character. Dr. Winckler
is now engaged upon the task of deciphering these
documents, and he estimates that the work of decipher-
ment will take him some two years to accomplish.
Meanwhile, however, it is possible to give some idea of
the importance of his discovery by briefly describing
the character of the documents recovered.

ADDENDA 469

All the tablets are written in the cuneiform char-
acters of Babylonia, but, while some are composed in
the Babylonian language, by far the greater number
are written in the native language of the country.
Those of the former class represent the diplomatic cor-
respondence of the period, and, like the letters found
at Tell el-Amarna in Egypt, are written in Babylonian
since that was the language of diplomacy throughout
the East. For communications to vassal states, for
matters of internal administration, and for local and
commercial intercourse, it seems that the native lan-
guage was generally employed. It is noted that this
language is very similar to that of Arzawa, in’ which
two of the letters from Tell el-Amarna are composed,
and it is possible that other documents may prove to
be written in other native languages, or dialects. The
first of the documents to be deciphered are naturally
those written in the Babylonian language, and from a
cursory examination of them Dr. Winckler has already
deduced..the fact that Boghaz Koi marks the site of a
city named Khatti, and that this city was the capital of
the Hittite Empire. Of the diplomatic documents
several passed between Ramses II and the contempo-
rary Hittite king Khattu-shili. We learn that Khattu-
shili’s wife was named Pudu-khipa, and that among his
predecessors upon the Hittite throne were Mur-shili
and Shubbiluliuma. The most important of the diplo-
matic communications as yet deciphered is a version in
the Babylonian language of the treaty drawn up be-
tween Khattu-shili and Ramses II, which was already

470 ADDENDA

known to us from the Egyptian copy upon the walls of
the temple at Karnak. It is of interest to note that in
the cuneiform documents the full name of Ramses II is
‘given as ‘‘ Uashmuaria shatepuaria Riamashesha mai-
Amana,’’ which gives the appropriate pronunciation —
no doubt slightly altered in a foreign speech and writing
— of what we conventionally call ‘‘ Usermaa(t)ra sete-
penra Rameses meri-Amen.’’ We may imagine the
ancient Egyptian original of the name to have sounded
something like ‘‘ Uasmaria satpenria Riamases mai-
Amon.’’ We thus see, as also in the case of the Egyp-
tian names in the Tell el-Amarna letters, that neither
Prof. Maspero’s nor the German system of restored
pronunciation is quite right; the truth probably lies
between them.

Another interesting document among those written
in the Babylonian language is a letter addressed by
Shunash-shura, king of Kizzuwadi, to the Hittite king
to whom he owed allegiance. This king was probably
Khattu-shili, though his name is not actually given.
The letter was written by Shunash-shura after he had
conquered the men of Kharru, and in it he gives a de-
tailed statement, in sixty or seventy paragraphs, of
the manner in which he has divided the spoil with his
overlord. Other documents give the names of a large
number of provinces and cities of the Hittites them-
selves and also of the races with whom they were in
contact.

The importance of this find of documents is great,
for it opens out an entirely new chapter in the history

ADDENDA _ ATL

of the nearer East. It has long been known that Assyr-
ian settlements had been formed at a very early period
in Cappadocia, and we now know that the native Hittite
population took over the Babylonian system of writing
and adapted it to their own language. It was probably
through these early Assyrian settlers that Babylonian
culture was first introduced into the country; but the
Hittite invasion of Babylonia in the reign of Samsu-
ditana, and their probable capture of Babylon on that
occasion, indicate that direct contact also took place
before the end of the Hammurabi Dynasty. The new
find at Baghaz Koi, dating from a period rather later
than that of the Tell el-Amarna letters, proves that in
the thirteenth century B.c., an active correspondence
took place not only between Cappadocia and Egypt, but
also between the various provinces of Asia Minor, and
that clay tablets inscribed in Babylonian cuneiform
were employed as the means of communication. The
results to be obtained from a study of such documents
as have already been discovered will undoubtedly fur-
nish much valuable information both regarding the
early history of Asia Minor, and the influence exerted
by the civilizations of Egypt, and, more particularly, of
Babylon, upon the peoples in that quarter of Western
Asia. :

INDEX

A
Aahmes, king XVIIIth Dynasty, 337,
340

Aba, a noble, 483
Abéshu, Babylonian king, 249
Letters of, 295, 310
Abnub, statuette of, 365
Abfi Ghuraib, temple at, 102, 103
Abfi Hatab, excavations at, 165
Abfi-’l-Haggag, Moslem shékh, 373
Abusir, pyramids at, 95, 101, 103
Abydos, 59, 340, 344
Abyssinia, connection with Egypt, 40, 133
Adad-nirari, Assyrian king, 398, 402
Administration in Babylon, 314
Agriculture in Babylon, 286
Agum, Kassite ruler, 253, 254
Aha, king, tomb of, 49, 57, 61, 88
Identified with Sma (?), 73 ; with Mena,
74, 76, 80
Aha-f-ka, priest of Snefru, 120
Ahnas, 131
Ai, king XVIIIth Dynasty, 349
Akaivasha = Achaians, 366
Akh-aset, pyramid temple, 322
Akhet-aten, city, 385
Akhunaten (Amenhetep IV), heretic king,
87, 99, 101, 183, 452
Destroys temples of Amen, 343
Mother of, 353
Doctrine of, 383
Neglects kingdom, 385
Alashiya = Cyprus, 429, 481
Alua, Christian King of Nubia, 455
Alu-usharshid, King of Kish, 224, 228
Amasis, 70, 434
Amelineau, discoveries of, 59, 62, 63, 64,
72, 73, 87
Amen-Ra, or Amen, deity, temple of, 342-
345, 884, 429, 431, 452, 455
Amenemhat II, pyramid of, 118, 122
Amenemhat III, pyramid of, 118, 121,
124
Descent of, 137
= Moeris, 318

Amenhetep I, tomb of, 837
Amenhetep II, tomb of, 351, 452
Amenhetep III, tomb of, 349, 354
= Memnon, 355, 452
Amenhetep IV = Akhunaten
Ammiditana, king First Dynasty, letter
of, 803
An, city, 78
Ana, Sumerian deity, 188, 214
a Dr., discoveries of, 166, 167, 389,
39
Annunaki, spirits, 308
Antef, name of Egyptian kings, 335, 337
Anu, Northerners, 47, 54
Anubis, Egyptian deity, 49, 61, 105, 347
Apis, 81
Apries, conquered by Amasis, 70, 434
Arame, King of Van, 418
Archaism of XXVIth Dynasty, 105
Architecture, IVth Dynasty, 123
XIIth, 123
Arik-dén-ilu, Assyrian ruler, 896, 399, 402
Armenia, 416
Arsaphes (Herakles). See Hershefi
Art, Vth Dynasty, 101
Asaru, Sumerian deity, 209
Ashir = Ashur
Ashur, city, excavations at, 167, 408, 409
Ashur, deity, 398, 394
= Bél, 405
Ashur-bani-pal, library of, 146
Ashur-nasir-pal, King of Assyria, 408,
410, 418
Assyria, gains independence, 400
Buildings of, 396
Culture of, 412
Astrologers in Babylon, 303
Aswan dam, 446
Asyut, chiefs of, 132
Ata, early King of Egypt, 56, 74
Aten, the Sun-god, 383. See Akhunaten
Ateth, early king, 56
= Tja Ati (?), 74
Attitude toward death in Egypt, 69
Auabra Hor, identification of, 119
Ayrton, discoveries of, 8, 89

473

ATA
B

Babylon, excavations at, 166
Administration in, 314
Rise of Second Dynasty, 246
Captured by Tukulti-Ninib, 404
Culture of, 219, 411
Babylonia, influence on Egypt, 35, 184, 316
Influenced by Sumerians, 145
Religion of, 208, 219
Methods of dating, 241
Calendar of, 304
Bau, Sumerian deity, 198, 205, 209, 214
Beadnell, H. J. L., discoveries of, 12
Bél, Babylonian deity, 235, 404, 405. See
Ashur
Benson, Mrs., discoveries of, 374, 3875
Bét Allam, cemetery, 22
Betjumer = Narmer (?), 76
Bét Khallaf, tombs at, 81, 82, 85
Binothris = Neneter, 79
Bitiliashi, 253, 254, 259, 404
Blankenhorn, discoveries of, 8, 11
Boats in Babylonia, 297
Borchardt, discoveries of, 97, 98, 110, 111
Boundary-stones, 255
Boyd, Harriet, discoveries of, 370
Bubastis, town, 137
Budge, Doctor, discoveries of, 87, 453,
454, 455
Building regulations in Babylon, 284
Burial customs, 22, 33, 38, 66
Bur-Sin, King of Ur, 225
Buto, city, 44-46

C

Calah, capital of Assyria, 408, 410
Canals in Babylonia, 309
Candace, Queen of Nubia, 451
Carter, Howard, discoveries of, 322, 343,
348, 872
Castes in Babylon, 375
Chalcolithic period, implements of, 13
Data of, 18
Chaldzan chronology, 185
Cheops = Khufu, 99
Code of Hammurabi, 266
On marriage, 269
Castes, 275
Slaves, 277
Commercial usages, 279
Building, 284
Agriculture, 286
Irrigation, 294
Transportation, 297
Copper, introduction into Egypt, 18
‘Country of the Sea,’’ 251
Sumerian origin of inhabitants, 252
Rebellion against Babylon, 315
Crete, relations with Egypt, 128, 130

INDEX

Crocodile-god, 440

Cros, Gaston, discoveries of, 151-154, 178,
189-192

Currelly, C. T., discoveries of, 46, 388,
339

Cyprus, 429, 431
Cyrus, King of Persia, 423

D

Darius, inscription of, 421

Dashur, necropolis, 95, 98

Dauda, Sumerian king, 164

Davis, Theodore, discoveries of, 348, 352

Den, king, tomb of, 65, 73

Dér el-Bahari, excavations at, 321, 336-
338, 342, 344, 348

Dimgalabzu, Sumerian deity, 213

Double-Axe, place of, 125

Dra’ Abu-’l-Neyga, necropolis, 337, 339

Dumuzi (Tammuz), Sumerian deity, 195

Dungi, King of Ur, 191, 225, 300

Dunshaga, Sumerian deity, 211

E

Ea, Babylonian deity, 235
EKa-gamil, king Second Dynasty, 253
Eannadu, ruler of Shirpurla, 36, 157, 172
E-bab-bara, temple of Sun-god, 272
Edfu, centre of sun-worship, 40, 44, 49,
438
Egypt, early invasions of, 34, 1389
Relations with Babylon, 35, 316
With Bedawin, 135
Conquers Assyria, 140
Division of, 428
Egyptians, origin of, 30
Two races, 33
One race, 48
Language of, 35
Elam, 172, 203
Geography, 221
Relations with Babylon, 222, 223
Rulers, 283, 236
Not ‘‘ Country of the Sea,’’ 251
Elamite, civilization, 162
Origin and culture, 226-233
El-’Amra cemetery, 22, 43
Elephantiné, island, 451
Embalming introduced, 88
Emutbal, district of Elam, 244
Enakilli, patesi of Gishkhu, 172
Enannadu I and II, rulers of Shirpurla,
178, 177
E-ninnfi, temple of Ningirsu, 196-220
Enki, Sumerian deity, 183, 205, 210, 214
Enlil, Babylonian deity, 171, 176, 180,
183, 193, 196, 214
Enlulim, Sumerian deity, 212

INDEX

Ensignun, Sumerian deity, 212

Entemena, ruler Shirpurla, 154, 173-175
Cones of, 176

Enzu, Sumerian deity, 183, 214

Erech, city, 183, 190, 191

Eridu, Babylonian city, 191, 212

Erosion, effects of, 6, 11

E-sagida, temple of Marduk, 273

Ethiopian stone = embalming knife, 14

Evans, Arthur, discoveries of, 359, 361,

862, 370

F

Fara, excavations at, 165
Fayytfim, the, 29, 126
Flint implements, 5, 11, 15

G

Galalim, Sumerian deity, 211
Gamil-Sin, King of Ur, 158, 225
Garstang, discoveries of, 68, 81, 137, 328
Gatumdug, Sumerian deity, 198, 198, 205
Gautier, discoveries of, 123, 124
Gebelén, cemetery, 22
Geese, fresco of, 358
Gemnika = Kagemna
Ghosts, habits of, 68
Gilgamesh, Babylonian hero, 222
Gishbare, Sumerian deity, 213
Gishkhu, Babylonian city, 169-190
Giza, pyramids of, 95
Golénischeff, theory of, 137
_Gourlay, Miss, discoveries of, 374
Greek and Egyptian, common origin of,
129

Communication, 359

Culture, 363
Greek literature discovered, 441
Grébaut, discoveries of, 104, 350
Gudea, Sumerian ruler, 153, 154, 191, 196
Gu-edin, district, 171, 177, 202, 213
Gurob, excavations at, 131

H

Halbherr, discoveries of, 359
Hall, discoveries of, 8, 321
Hammurabi, ruler of Babylon, 139, 163
Defeats Elamites, 243
Letters of, 264, 299, 390
Code of, 266, 304, 390
Harim, slain with king, 71
Harper, R. F., discoveries of, 164, 165
Hathor, nurse of Horus, 40, 44, 328, 342,
347

Hatshepsu, queen XVIIIth Dynasty, 821,
336

Builds temple, 348, 346
Tomb of, 348, 351

ATS

Hatshepsut, 44
Hawara, tombs and temples at, 119, 124
Haynes, discoveries of, 164, 183
Heliopolis, centre of sun-worship, 40, 44
Conquered by Narmer, 47
Hemaka, viceroy, 78
Henensu = Herakleopolis
Hen-neter = God’s servant, 51
Herakleopolis, kings of, 95, 102, 318
Excavations at, 1381, 182
Herhor, first priest-king, 429, 432
Herodotus, 92, 434
Hershefi (Arsaphes), 181
Hesepti, early king, 73, 74, 77
Hierakonpolis (Nekheb-Nekhen), centre of
sun-worship, 40, 41, 44, 46
Hittites, possibly Mycenzans, 137
Hor. See Auabra Hor
Horemheb, King of Egypt, 352
Horus, the Sun-god, 40, 49
Hyksos, shepherd kings, 96
Origin, 186-139
Invasion and conquest of, 317, 337

I

Ibis-mummies, 89
Ili, priest and ruler, 174
Tluma-ilu, king Second Dynasty, 246, 248
= Dingir-a-an, 252
Ine-Sin, King of Ur, 225
Iron, knowledge of in Egypt, 112
Irrigation and civilization, 4
In Babylon, 290
In Egypt, 294
Isin, Babylonian city, 190
Iuaa, father of Queen Tii, 353

J

Jéquier, discoveries of, 119, 123, 124
Jewelry in Egyptian tombs, 120

K

Kadi, Kishite deity, 171

Kagemna (Gemnika), mastaba of, 104

Kahun, flints of, 15

Kal, Sumerian deity, 213

Karibu-sha-Shushinak, ruler of Elam, 233

Karnak, temple of, 375, 378

Kar-Tukulti-Ninib, city, 406

Kashakti-Shugab, inscription of, 256, 258

Kassites, conquer ‘‘ Country of the Sea’?
and Babylon, 251, 253

Keftiu (Cretans), 359, 363

Khafra = Chephren, 1, 84°

Khasekhemui, early King of Egypt, 46,
47, 51, 76, 77

Tomb of, 85, 93

A476

Khent = Tjer

Khentamerti, god of the dead, 61, 93.
See Osiris

Kheta (Hittites), 187

Kheti, king, 152

Khian, king, 138, 365

Khnumhetep, prince, 136

Khufu (Cheops), [Vth Dynasty, 1, 84, 88,
8)

9
Dress of, 101
Khumbaba, Elamite ruler, 222
King, L. W., discoveries of, 167, 389
Kings, lists of, 55, 72
Identification of, 73
Kish, 156, 224
Knossos, labyrinth at, 125
Vessels of, 361
Koldewey, discoveries of, 165, 166, 389
Kom es-Sultan, ‘‘ Mound of the King,”’
88

Koptos, excavations at, 42

Kudur-mabug, Elamite ruler, 242-243

Kudurru, 225

Kutir-Nakhkhunte, liberates Elam, 236

Kuyunjik (Nineveh), excavations at, 167,
389

L

Labyrinth of Amenemhat ITI, 125

Lakhamu, monster, 206

Land tenure in Babylon, 261-263

Larsam, Elamite city, 191, 243

Legrain, Georges, discoveries of, 117-120,
376-382

Lepsius, discoveries of, 110, 111, 348

Lisht, pyramid, 95-98, 123

Loret, discoveries of, 349

Lugalenuruazagakam, Sumerian deity,
213

Lugaligikhusam, Sumerian deity, 212

Lugalkigubnidudu, 189

Lugalkurdub, Sumerian deity, 211

Lugalsisa, Sumerian deity, 212

Lugalzaggisi, ruler of Gishkhu, 182-190

Luxor, temple of, 373

Lythgoe, discoveries of, 28

M

Mace, discoveries of, 28, 59, 97, 339

Maclver, Randall, discoveries of, 21, 28,
32, 339

Magan, 158

Manes, 41

Manetho, dynastic annalist, 55, 59, 68,
73, 79, 81, 83, 92

Manishtusu, obelisk of, 156

Manium, 158

Marduk, Babylonian deity, 191, 256, 422

Statue taken by Assyrians, 405

INDEX

Marduk-aplu-iddina, king Third Dynasty,
258, 259, 262

Marriage in First Dynasty, 269

Among Sumerians, 271

Maspero, G., discoveries of, 95, 97, 107,
124, 150, 190, 266, 348, 353

Mastabat el-Fara’fin, 107

Maya, Egyptian official, 352

Médfim, cemetery, 33, 95

Mekhu, district, 402

Melishikhu, Third Dynasty, 258, 259,
262

Melukhkha, land of, 203

Memnon = Amenhetep III

Memphis, founding of, 54, 56, 91

Burial place, 61
eck (Menes), identification of, 58, 56,
4, 92

Meneptah, successor of Ramses II, 366

Menes. See Mena

Menkaura, [Vth Dynasty, 84

Mentuemhat, statue of, 375

Mentuhetep III, 128, 342

Mera, steward of palace, 320

Merbap (Merpeba Atjab), 73, 74, 91

Mereruka (Mera), tomb of, 104

Merikara, inscriptions of, 132

Merit, jewels of, 120

Merneit, 74, 77

Meroé, capital of Nubia, 451, 458, 454

Mertisen, Egyptian artist, 331

Mesilim, King of Kish, 157, 171

Mesniu, followers of Horus, 41, 48

Mesopotamia, different masters of, 814

Middle Kingdom, intercourse with for-
eigners of, 138

Min, deity, 42, 49

Minos, King of Crete, 125, 870

Moeris = Amenemhat III, 318

Momemphis, battle of, 434

Monarchy, origin of, 32

Mond, R. L., discoveries of, 857

Mongol origin of Hyksos, theory of, 136

Montelius, Prof. O., on antiquity of use
of iron in Egypt, 118

Months, Babylonian, 304

Morgan, M. J. de, discoveries of, 21, 22,
24, 28, 32, 57, 58, 68, 115, 119, 122,
124, 155, 162, 221, 228, 225, 289, 255,
376

Mukayyar = Ur, burials at, 2

Mut, deity, 374

Mycenzans, represented, 187, 361

N

Nabonidus, 185, 423
Nabopolassar, 422

Nabfi, Babylonian deity, 166, 168
Nag’ ed-Dér, excavations at, 27

INDEX

Na’iri, district of Assyria, 403, 418
Nakada, cemetery, 22, 24, 49
Tomb of Aha at, 57, 62
Napata, capital of Nubia, 452
Nardm-Sin, invades Egypt, 133
Inscriptions of, 157
Son of Sargon I, 186, 190, 223, 228,
300
Narmer, early King of Egypt, 46, 47
Founded Memphis, 54
Tomb of, 61
Identification of, 74, 76
Nati, Babylonian deity, 235
Naukratis, 434, 436
Naville, discoveries of, 63, 138, 321, 343,
345, 347, 383
Nazimaruttash, Third Dynasty, 256
Nebhapet-Ra, wives buried, 71, 321, 322
= Mentuhetep ITI, 335
Neb-hetep Mentuhetep, XIth Dynasty,
322, 335
Nebkaura, 132
Nebuchadnezzar II, palace of, 166, 423-
424
Necherophes, 83
Necropoles, prehistoric, 22
Neferarikara, Vth Dynasty, 98
Nefertari, queen, tomb of, 371
Nefret, queen of Usertsen II, 137
Nefret-ari-Aahmes, worshipped,
342
Nefret-iti, queen of Akhunaten, 385
Neit-hetep, princess, 63
Nekhebet, deity, 44
Nekhen, shrine, 47
Nekhtnebf, king, 436
Ne-maat-hap, 81
Neneter, IId Dynasty, 79
Neolithic age, 5
Pottery of, 15
Population of, 32
Ne-user-Ra, Vth Dynasty, temple of, 98,
102
Dress of, 101
Newberry, ae E., discoveries of, 63, 137,
319/f.

Nidaba, deity of Gishkhu, 182, 183

Nina, deity of Shirpurla, 172- 174, 181,
194, 198, 210, 391

Ninaza, "Babylonian deity, 193, 194

Nindub, Sumerian deity, 199, 210

Nineveh, excavations at, 167, 389

Ningirsu, god of Shirpurla, 171, 174, 180,
181, 193, 196

Sine, Sumerian deity, 193, 194,
1

341-

Ninib, Babylonian god, 166, 422

Ninkharsag, Sumerian deity, 183, 193,
214, 235

Ninmakh, Sumerian deity, 166, 214

ATT

Ninni (Ishtar), 181, 183, 193, 203, 235,
391

Nin-tu-kalama, Sumerian deity, 303
Nippur, excavations at, 183, 186
Nomes, 45

Standard of, 49
Nubhetep, princess, 122
Nubia, 451, 455

O

Osiris, Egyptian deity, 61
Tomb of, 62, 65
Presided over ghosts, 69
Worship of, 78
Sculptures, 86, 88, 105

E

Paleolithic age, habitations in, 5
Climate, 6
Flints of, 11
Palestine, relations with Egypt, 141,
428

Pepi I, 47
Perabsen = Sekhem-ab, 80
Petesuchos (Sebek), crocodile-goa, 440
Petrie, Prof. Flinders, discoveries of,
Lif, JOU., 33577.
Phil, temple at, 446, 456
Philistines, 369, 370
Phtah, god of Memphis, 93, 94
Phtahhetep, author, 104
Piankhi Meramen, 453
Piehl, discoveries of, 15
Pitt-Rivers, discoveries of, 10, 11
Portch, discoveries of, 8
Pottery, Neolithic, 15
“Sequence dating” from,
Cretan, 87, 130
Psametik I, 453
Ptolemies, the, 140, 437, 453
Ptolemy Philadelphus, 93
Puenet = Punt
Punt = Abyssinia, 40, 133
saree Old and Middle Kingdom,
08
The Step, 82
Of Médfiim, 83
Method of building, 110, 117

19, 20

Q

Qebh, early king, 73, 74
Quibell, J., discoveries of, 24, 28, 29,
51, 52, 58

478

R

Ra, the Sun-god, temple at er-Righa, 102
Ra Harmachis, the rising sun, 87, 108,
347
Tum-Ra, the setting sun, 37, 103
Ra-Harmachis. See Ra
Ramesseum, 319, 871
Ramses I, 75
Ramses II, 133
Dress of, 101
Body of, 348
Colossus of, 372
Ramses III, tombs of, 840, 365
Attacked from North, 368
Reisner, discoveries of, 27, 28, 29, 97
Rekhmara, tomb of, 359
Rim-Sin, Elamite ruler, 243, 249
Rusas I, I, II, Kings of Van, 420

s

Saghel el Baglieh, cemetery, 22
Sahura, Vth Dynasty, 98
Sakkéra, necropolis, 1, 94, 103, 105
Samsu-abu, First Dynasty, 314
Samsu-ditana, First Dynasty, 250
Samsu-iluna, ruler Babylon, 240, 245,
249, 300
Sanehat, 135
Sa-nekht, IIId Dynasty, 81, 83
Sargon I, King of Agade, 35, 185-190
Conquers Elam, 223, 228, 800
Sarzec, M. de, discoveries of, 148, 150-
154, 190 n, 198, 195, 800
Sayce, Prof., 146
‘¢ Sayings of Jesus,’’ 442
Schafer, discoveries of, 98
Schiaparella, discoveries of, 371
Schweinfurth, Prof., 8
Sebek (Seknebtunis), crocodile-god, 440
Sebekhetep, official, 357
Sebekneferura, daughter of Amenemhat
III, 119
Seker, god of the dead, 61, 94
Sekhaen-R& Mentuhetep,
nasty, 334
Sekhem-ab (Perabsen), 81
Sekhemet (Pakhet), 374
Sekri = Seker
Semerkha, Ist Dynasty, 84
Semitic element in Egyptian language
and culture, 39, 108
Invasion of Egypt, 48
Descent of Northerners, 48
Conquest of Babylon and Elam, 228,
240
Semti-Den = Onsaphais, 73
Senmut, tomb of, 359
Sennacherib, 423

XIth Dy-

INDEX

‘** Sequence dating,’’ 42
Serapeum, 106
Sergi, discoveries of, 32
Sesokhris (Sa-nekht ?), 82
Set, deity, 81
Seti I, 75
Built temple at Abydos, 92
Body of, 348
Seton-Karr, excavations of, 8, 15
Shadduf, for raising water, 295
Shakanshabar, Sumerian deity, 212
Shalmaneser I, 394, 396
Shalmaneser IT, 410, 418
Shamash, Babylonian deity, 222, 235
Shamshi-Adad, Assyrian ruler, 392, 395
Sheb-Sin, a tax collector, 306, 307
Sh ar el-Kfirna, excavations at, 319,
iI
Shemsu, early king, 73, 74
Shemsu-Heru, 41
Sherghat, excavations at, 410
Shirpurla (Telloh), excavations at, 148,
152, 178
History of, 169, 190, 196
Shubari, people, 403
Shfinet ez Zebib, city, 88
Shushinak, deity of Elam, 234
Shutruk-Nakhkhunte, Elamite king, 159
Sin, deity, 235
Sit-hathor, jewels of, 120
Sin-idinnam, governor of Larsam, 300, 304
Sin-muballit, Babylonian king, 243
Slaves, buried with masters, 68
In Babylon, 277
Bag: IlId Dynasty, tombs of, 56, 83,
Invades Sinai, 133, 340
“Sons of the Sun,’’ 102
Sphinx, emblem of Ra-Harmachis, 103
Steindorff, discoveries of, 97, 835, 336, 360
Stela = gravestone, 105
Stele of Palermo, 46, 79
Of Victory, 157
Of Vultures, 36, 38, 154
Step-Pyramid, 84, 86
Stone age, implements of, 3, 8
Settlements in, 4
Sturge, Allen, 8
Sumerian people, 134
Influence, 134, 145, 191
Civilization, 141, 145, 146, 149, 191
Religion, 195-220
Relations with Babylon, 228
Susa, excavations at, 155, 160, 203

aT
Tancheres = Tatkara Assa

Ta-neter = Abyssinia, 40, 44
Tanis, Sphinxes of, 186

INDEX

Tatkara Assa, 104

Taxes in Babylon, 306

Tell el-Amarna, 365, 385

Telloh (Shirpurla), 148, 150, 178, 191,
195 ‘

Temples, Assyrian and Babylonian
Of Ashur in Ashur, 394
Of Ashur in Kar-Tukulti-Ninib, 406
Of Elamite deities, 301
E-ninnfi of Ningirsu, 194, 196
E-sagila of Marduk at Babylon, 424
Of Marduk sacked, 191
Of Nin-makh, 424
Of Shushinak, 2388
Of various Sumerian deities mentioned,
180, 181, 193
At Toprak Kala, 420
Temples, Egyptian
Akh-aset, 321
Of Amen at Napata, 452
Of Amen-R& and Thothmes I and II,
843, 347
Of the Candaces, 452
At Dendera and Edfu, 438
The Great, 336, 348
Of Hathor, 347
By Queen Hatshepsu, 321, 386, 348
At Hawara, 124
Of Hershefi, 131
. At Karnak, 875
At Luxor, 373
Of Medinet Habfi, 370
Of Mut, 374
Of Neith, 436
Of Nekhen, 47
Of Ne-user-Ra, 98
Of Nubia generally, 453, 455
Of Petesuchos and Pnepheris, 441
At Phile, 446
Of Queens of Thebes, 371
Of Ra near Giza, 102
By Seti I, 92
By Snefru at Médfim, 88
Temti-agun, Elamite ruler, 237
Teta, legendary king, 56, 74
Teta-shera, queen, tomb of, 839
Thebes, the dominant power, 182, 318
This, 59
Thompson, R. C., discoveries of, 167,
889
Thot, 49
Thothmes I, 348, 348
Thothmes II, 348
Thothmes III, 348, 346
Thothmes IV, tomb of, 352
Tiglath-Pileser I, 892
Tiglath-Pileser III, 419, 420
Tii, Queen of Amenhetep III, 358, 384
Tjakaray, 429
Tjer, tomb of, 86, 87

479

Tjeser, invades Sinai, 133, 340
Tjeser, Khetneter, 81, 83
Tombs, Egyptian

Of Aahmes at Abydos, 3388

Of Aba, 483

of Aha, 49, 57, 62, 68, 64

Of Aha-f-ka, 120

Of Amenemhat IT, 118, 351

Of Antef III and IV, 337

Of Auabra Hor, 119, 121

At Dashfir, 108, 118

Of King Den, 65, 85

Of Ist and IId Dynasties, 60

Of Gen-Amen, 358

Of Herakleopolite kings, 95

Of Hyksos kings, 96

Of Imadua, 357

Of Iuaa and Tuaa, 353

Of Kagemna, 104

Of Khasekhemui, 85

Of Khent or Tjer, 86 |

Of Merpeba Atjab, 73, 74, 91

Of Middle Empire, 96, 108

Of Neb-hapet-R& Mentuhetep, 71, 321

Of Neb-hetep Mentuhetep, 322

Of Neferarikara, 98

Of Neithetep, a princess, 63

Of Ne-user-Ra, 98

Of Osiris at Abydos, 69

Of Princesses, 120, 122

Of priestesses of Hathor, 328

Of Rekhmara, 359

Of Sahura, 98 \

Of Sa-nekht, 81, 84

Of Sebekhetep, 357

Of Senmut, 359

In Shékh Abd el-Kfirna, 319

Of Snefru, 88, 95

Of Queen Teta-shera, 339

Of Theban kings, 96

Of Tjeser Khetneter, 81, 84, 85

Of Thothmes I, 348

Of Thothmes IV, 352

Of IIId and IVth Dynasties, 60

Of Uerarina, 104

At Umm el-Ga’ab, 75, 87

Of Usertsen I, 1238

Of Usertsen III, 118, 338
Tombs, secondary, 340
Toprak Kala, citadel of Van, 420
Trade-routes, 283
Tuaa, mother of Queen Tii, 358
Ttikh, cemetery, 22, 24, 58
Tukulti-Ninib, King of Assyria, inscrip-

tions of, 396, 398

Conqueror, 402, 404

Removes statue of Marduk, 405
Tum-Ra or Tum, the Sun-god, 37, 108
Turnure, list of, 92
Tytus, C., 354

480
U

Uenuamen, envoy of Herhor, 429

Uerarina, 104

Ukush, ruler of Gishkhu, 183, 189

Ulam-Buriash, defeats Ea-gamil, 253

Umm el-Ga’ab, cemetery, 64, 74, 75
Pottery at, 87, 88

Unas, King of Egypt, 340

Ur, Elamite city, 190, 225, 243

Urartu = Vannic territory, 418

Ur-Engur, 191

Urizu, Sumerian deity, 212

Urkagina, ruler Shirpurla, 154, 177

Urlumma, ruler Gishkhu, 172

Ur-nina, King of Babylon, 153

Usertsen (Senusret) I, statues of, 123

Usertsen ITI, pyramid of, 15, 62, 124

Usertsen III, portrait and statues of, 100,

326
Pyramid of, 108, 118
Jewels of, 121
Invades Palestine, 136
Possible Hittite descent, 187
Tomb of, 338
Usertsen IV, 382

INDEX

Ush, patesi of Gishkhu, 171
Ushabtiu = ‘* Answerers,’’ 72, 329
Ushpia, Assyrian ruler, 8394-395
Ushumgabkalama, Sumerian deity

Vv

Van, empire of, 415-422
= Armenia, 416
Vaphio, cups of, 361, 365

Ww
Wadi esh-Shékh, 8, 15

Wadi Hammamat, 40, 48, 135
Wadiyén, valley of, 348, 349

Wealth in XUth and XVIIth Dytinstien

353

Weigall, A. E. P., discoveries of, 338,

339
Welsh, discoveries of, 369
Writing, Sumerian, 149
%

Yatnan (Yantinay) = Cyprus, 431

wroutiruprdiarecicdee

MT 4 My

ee

a

meas

é

ANN

3 9088 01708 3361

AER Schwa ciciin lath eledantnlsMebetied Sor onemcat nian atmtm sine mete be te ae abit? 2h
aSix. TATA gates See ~ oo ate aa 5 eas