PALAEOGRAPHY_Encyclopaedia Britannica, 11th Edition, "Edwardes, Sir Herbert Benjamin" to "Ehrenbreitstein" Volume 9, Slice 1

_Hieroglyphic._--The main division is into monumental or epigraphic

hieroglyphs and written hieroglyphs. The former may be rendered by the

sculptor or the painter in stone, on wood, &c., with great delicacy of

detail, or may be simply sunk or painted in outline. When finely

rendered they are of great value to the student investigating the

origins of their values. No other system of writing bears upon its

face so clearly the history of its development as the Egyptian; yet

even in this a vast amount of work is still required to detect and

disentangle the details. Monumental hieroglyphic did not cease till

the 3rd century A.D. (Temple of Esna). The written hieroglyphs, formed

by the scribe with the reed pen on papyrus, leather, wooden tablets,

&c., have their outlines more or less abbreviated, producing

eventually the cursive scripts hieratic and demotic. The written

hieroglyphs were employed at all periods, especially for religious

texts.

_Hieratic._--A kind of cursive hieroglyphic or hieratic writing is

found even in the Ist Dynasty. In the Middle Kingdom it is well

characterized, and in its most cursive form seems hardly to retain

any definable trace of the original hieroglyphic pictures. The style

varies much at different periods.

+------------+-------------+-----------------+-----------+----------+-----------------+

+------------+-------------+-----------------+-----------+----------+-----------------+

| | | | | | |

| | | | | | |

| [HRG: ir] | eye | ir.t (yori.t) | ir | ir | see, &c. |

| | | | | | |

| [HRG: r] | mouth | r (ro) | r | r | |

| | | | | | |

| [HRG: a] | forearm | '('ei) | ' | ' | [action of hand |

| | | | | | |

| | | | | | |

| | | | | | |

| [HRG: zmA] | lungs and | sm; | sm; | | |

| | | | | | |

| | | | | | |

| [HRG: nfr] | heart and | ? | nfr | | |

| | | | | | |

| | | | | | |

| [HRG: zA] | widgeon | s;.t | s; | s; | |

| | | | | | |

| [HRG: in] | bolti-fish | in.t | in | in | |

| | | | | | |

| | | (2) hw "taste" | hw | | |

| | | | | | |

| [HRG: xt] | cut branch | ht | ht | [ht] | wood, tree |

| | | | | | |

| [HRG: zp] | threshing- | sp.t | sp | | |

| | | | | | |

| [HRG: hrw] | sun | (1) r' "sun" | | | (1) sun |

| | | | | | |

| [HRG: pr] | chamber, | pr | pr | | |

| | | | | | |

| [HRG: N17] | flat land | t' | t' | t' | boundless hori- |

| | | | | | |

| [HRG: Hz] | libation | hs.t | hs | hs | |

| | | | | | |

| [HRG: wD] | cord on | wz | wz | wz | |

| | | | | | |

| [HRG: nb] | basket | nb.t | nb | | |

| | | | | | |

| [HRG: k] | looped | ? | k | k | |

| | | | | | |

| [HRG: mA] | sickle | ? | m' | m' | |

| | | | | | |

| [HRG: U7] | composite | [mr?] | mr | mr | tillage |

| | hoe | | | | |

| | | | | | |

| [HRG: U29] | fire-drill | z'.t(?) | z' | z' | |

| | | | | | |

| | | | | | |

+------------+-------------+-----------------+-----------+----------+-----------------+

_Demotic._--Widely varying degrees of cursiveness are at all periods

observable in hieratic; but, about the XXVIth Dynasty, which

inaugurated a great commercial era, there was something like a

definite parting between the uncial hieratic and the most cursive form

afterwards known as demotic. The employment of hieratic was

thenceforth almost confined to the copying of religious and other

traditional texts on papyrus, while demotic was used not only for all

business but also for writing literary and even religious texts in the

popular language. By the time of the XXVth Dynasty the cursive of the

conservative Thebais had become very obscure. A better form from Lower

Egypt drove this out completely in the time of Amasis II. and is the

true demotic. Before the Macedonian conquest the cursive ligatures of

the old demotic gave birth to new symbols which were carefully and

distinctly formed, and a little later an epigraphic variety was

engraved on stone, as in the case of the Rosetta stone itself. One of

the most characteristic distinctions of later demotic is the

minuteness of the writing.

Hieroglyphic is normally written from right to left, the signs facing

to the commencement of the line; hieratic and demotic follow the same

direction. But monumental hieroglyphic may also be written from left

to right, and is constantly so arranged for purposes of symmetry, e.g.

the inscriptions on the two jambs of a door are frequently turned in

opposite directions; the same is frequently done with the short

inscriptions scattered over a scene amongst the figures, in order to

distinguish one label from another.

In modern founts of type, the hieroglyphic signs are made to run from

left to right, in order to facilitate the setting where European text

is mixed with the Egyptian. The table on next page shows them in their

more correct position, in order to display more clearly their relation

to the hieratic and demotic equivalents.

Clement of Alexandria states that in the Egyptian schools the pupils

were first taught the "epistolographic" style of writing (i.e.

demotic), secondly the "hieratic" employed by the sacred scribes, and

finally the "hieroglyphic" (_Strom._ v. 657). It is doubtful whether

they classified the signs of the huge hieroglyphic syllabary with any

strictness. The only native work on the writing that has come to light

as yet is a fragmentary papyrus of Roman date which has a table in

parallel columns of hieroglyphic signs, with their hieratic

equivalents and words written in hieratic describing them or giving

their values or meanings. The list appears to have comprised about 460

signs, including most of those that occur commonly in hieratic. They

are to some extent classified. The bee [HRGs: bit] heads the list as a

royal sign, and is followed by figures of nobles and other human

figures in various attitudes, more or less grouped among themselves,

animals, reptiles and fishes, scorpion, animals again, twenty-four

alphabetic characters, parts of the human body carefully arranged from

[HRGs: tp] to [HRGs: D54], thirty-two in number, parts of animals,

celestial signs, terrestrial signs, vases. The arrangement down to

this point is far from strict, and beyond it is almost impossible to

describe concisely, though there is still a rough grouping of

characters according to resemblance of form, nature or meaning. It is

a curious fact that not a single bird is visible on the fragments, and

the trees and plants, which might easily have been collected in a

compact and well-defined section, are widely scattered. Why the

alphabetic characters are introduced where they are is a puzzle; the

order of these is:--[HRG Z91] [HRGs: r-H-kA-W] (?) [HRGs: wA] (?)

[HRGs: s] (?) [HRGs: z-Db] (?) [HRGs: Z91-b-Z91-S-SA] (?) [HRGs: k]

(?) [HRGs: xA-X-U29-p-a-g-x-t] (?) [HRGs: i-q].

Three others, [HRGs: XA-D] and [HRGs: f], had already occurred amongst

the fish and reptiles. There seems to be no logical aim in this

arrangement of the alphabetic characters and the series is incomplete.

Very probably the Egyptians never constructed a really systematic list

of hieroglyphs. In modern lists the signs are classified according to

the nature of the objects they depict, as human figures, plants,

vessels, instruments, &c. Horapollon's _Hieroglyphica_ may be cited as

a native work, but its author, if really an Egyptian, had no knowledge

of good writing. His production consists of two elaborate

complementary lists: the one describing sign-pictures and giving their

meanings, the other cataloguing ideas in order to show how they could

be expressed in hieroglyphic. Each seems to us to be made up of

curious but perverted reminiscences eked out by invention; but they

might some day prove to represent more truly the usages of mystics and

magicians in designing amulets, &c., at a time approaching the middle

ages.

[Illustration: PLATE I. EARLIEST EGYPTIAN ART

1. TATOOED FEMALE, LIMESTONE SLAG.

2. 3. HEADS ON IVORY TUSKS.

4. 5. ANIMALS ON BONE COMBS.

6. IVORY HAWK.

7. LIMESTONE LION.

8. IVORY DOG AND GAZELLE.

9. IVORY HANDLE OF KNIFE.

10. 11. WHITE ON RED VASES; MEN AND ANIMALS.

12. SHIP ON A VASE.

13. SHIP ON A WALL PAINTING.

14. IVORY KING.

15. 16. ARCHAIC KING'S HEAD, STUDY IN LIMESTONE.

17. HEAD OF KHASEKHEM.]

[Illustration: PLATE II. EARLY EGYPTIAN ART.

18. LIMESTONE RELIEF.

19. ANIMALS ON SLATE PALETTE._Photo, Mansell._

20. CONQUEROR AS A BULL.

21. GAZELLES AND PALM, SLATE.

22. ANIMALS, SLATE.

23. KING NARMER, SLATE PALETTE.

24. IVORY TUSK, WITH ANIMALS.

25. IVORY WAND, WITH ANIMALS.

26. WOODEN PANELS OF HESI.

27. RAHOTP AND NEFERT.

28. WOODEN FIGURE.]

+---------------------+----------+-----------+---------------+---------------------+

+---------------------+----------+-----------+---------------+---------------------+

| _ent_, "who" | [SGN] | [SGN] | [HRG] | _nty_ |

| | | | | |

| _Perso_ ("Pharaoh") | [SGN] | [SGN] | [HRG] | _Per<o <nh wz, snb_ |

| | | | | |

| _yot_, "father" | [SGN] | [SGN] | [HRG] | _itf_ |

| | | | | |

| _'onkh_, "live" | [SGN] | [SGN] | [HRG] | _<nh_ |

| | | | | |

| _ekh_, "know" | [SGN] | [SGN] | [HRG] | _rh_ |

| | | | | |

| _ahe_, "stand" | [SGN] | [SGN] | [HRG] | _<h<_ |

| | | | | |

| _eine_, "carry" | [SGN] | [SGN] | [HRG] | _in_ |

| | | | | |

| _ms_ (phon.) | [SGN] | [SGN] | [HRG] | _ms_ |

| | | | | |

| _s_ (alph.) | [SGN] | [SGN] | [HRG] | _s_ |

| | | | | |

| _s_ (alph.) | [SGN] | [SGN] | [HRG] | _[/s]_ |

| | | | | |

| _m_ (alph.) | [SGN] | [SGN] | [HRG] | _m_ |

| | | | | |

| _n_ (alph.) | [SGN] | [SGN] | [HRG] | _n_ |

+---------------------+----------+-----------+---------------+---------------------+

The early scribe's outfit, often carried slung over his shoulder, is

seen in the hieroglyph [HRG]. It consisted of frayed reed pens or

brushes, a small pot of water, and a palette with two circular

cavities in which black and red ink were placed, made of finely

powdered colour solidified with gum. In business and literary

documents red ink was used for contrast, especially in headings; in

demotic, however, it is very rarely seen. The pen became finer in

course of time, enabling the scribe to write very small. The split

reed of the Greek penman was occasionally adopted by the late demotic

scribes.

Egypt had long been bilingual when, in papyri of the 2nd century A.D.,

we begin to find transcripts of the Egyptian language into Greek

letters, the latter reinforced by a few signs borrowed from the

demotic alphabet: so written we have a magical text and a horoscope,

probably made by foreigners or for their use. The infinite superiority

of the Greek alphabet with its full notation of vowels was readily

seen, but piety and custom as yet barred the way to its full adoption.

The triumph of Christianity banished the old system once and for all;

even at the beginning of the 4th century the native Egyptian script

scarcely survived north of the Nubian frontier at Philae; a little

later it finally expired. The following eight signs, however, had been

taken over from demotic by the Copts:

[Coptic: shai] = _s_, from [HRG] _si_, dem. [sign], [SGN].

[Coptic: horee] = _h_, probably from [HRG] _hw_ (or [HRG] _hi_),

dem. [sign].

[Coptic: khai] (Boh.) = _h_, from [HRG] _hi_, dem. [SGN].

[Coptic: eksee] (Akhm.) = _h_, from [HRG], [HRG] _hy_, _ht_, dem.

[sign].

[Coptic: fai] = _f_, from [HRG] _f_, dem. [SGN].

[Coptic: cheema] = _c_ from [HRG] _k_ (or [HRG] _h_), dem.

[sign], [sign].

[Coptic: janja] = _g_, from [HRG] _di_ (or [HRG] _ti_), dem.

[sign], [sign].

[Coptic: tee] = _ti_, from [HRG] _dy.t_, dem. [SGN].

For origins of hieroglyphs, see Petrie's _Medum_ (1892); F. Ll.

Griffith, _A Collection of Hieroglyphs_ (1898); N. de G. Davies, _The

Mastaba of Ptahhetep and Akhethetep_, pt. i. (1900); M. A. Murray,

_Saqqara Mastabas_ (London, 1905); also Petrie and Griffith, _Two

Hieroglyphic Papyri from Tanis_ (London, 1889) (native sign-list); G.

Moller, _Hieratische Palaographie_ (Leipzig, 1909); Griffith,

_Catalogue of Demotic Papyri in the J. Rylands Collection_

(Manchester, 1909). (F. Ll. G.)

E. _Art and Archaeology._--In the following sections a general history

of the characteristics of Ancient Egyptian art is first given, showing

the variation of periods and essentials of style; and this is followed

by an account of the use made of material products, of the tools and

instruments employed, and of the monuments. For further details see also

the separate topographical headings (for excavations, &c.), and the

general articles on the various arts and art-materials (for references

to Egypt); also PYRAMIDS; MUMMY, &c.

_General Characteristics._

The wide and complex subject of Egyptian art will be treated here in six

periods: Prehistoric, Early Kings, Pyramid Kings, XIIth Dynasty,

XVIIIth-XXth Dynasties, XXVIth Dynasty and later. In each age will be

considered the (A) statuary, (B) reliefs, (C) painting.

_Prehistoric._--The earliest civilized population of Egypt was highly

skilled in mechanical accuracy and regularity, but had little sense of

organic forms. They kept the unfinished treatment of the limbs and

extremities which is so characteristic of most barbaric art; and the

action was more considered than the form.

(A) In the round there are in the earlier graves female figures of two

races, the Bushman type and European, both probably representing

servants or slaves. These have the legs always united, sloping to a

point without feet (Plate I. fig. 1); the arms are only stumps. The face

has a beaky nose and some indication of eyes. Upon the surface is

colouring; red for the Bushman, with black whisker though female; white

for the European type, with black tattoo patterns. Other female figures

are modelled in a paste, upon a stick, and the black hair is sometimes

made separately to fit on as a wig over the red head, showing that wigs

were then used. Male figures are generally only heads in the earlier

times. Tusks with carved heads (Plate I. figs. 2, 3) are the earliest,

beginning at S.D. (sequence date) 33;[16] heads on the top of combs are

found, from S.D. 42 to the close of such combs in the fifties. All of

these heads show a high forehead and a pointed beard; and such

expression as may be discovered is grave but not savage. In later times

whole figures of ivory, stone and clay are found, with the legs united,

and the arms usually joined to the body. A favourite way of indicating

the eyes was by drilling two holes and inserting a white shell bead in

each. The figures of animals (Plate I. figs. 4, 5) are quite as rude as

the human figures: they only summarily indicate the mature, and often

hardly express the genus. They are most usual on combs and pins; but

sacred animals are also found. The lion is the most usual (Plate I. fig.

7), but the legs are roughly marked, if at all: the leonine air is

given, but the attitude is more distinct than the form. The hawk (Plate

I. fig. 6) is modelled in block without any legs. The slate palettes in

the form of animals are even more summary, and continually degraded

until they lost all trace of their origin. There are also curious

figures of animals chipped in flint, which show some character, but no

detail.

(B) Reliefs with animal figures belong to the later part of the

prehistoric age. The relief is low, and the form hatched across with

lines (Plate I. fig. 8), a style copied from drawing. There is more

animation than in the round figures. At the close of this age the

fashion of long processions of animals appears (Plate I. fig. 9); some

character is shown in these, but no sense of action.

on red vases. Figures of men are very rare (Plate I. fig. 10); they have

the body triangular, the waist being very narrow; the legs are two lines

linked by a zigzag, as if to express that they move to and fro. The

usual figures are goats and hippopotami; always having the body covered

with cross lines to express the connexion of the outlines (Plate I. fig.

11). This technique is in every way closely akin to that of the modern

Kabyle. An entirely different mode is common at a later time when

designs were painted in thin red colour on a light brown ware. The

subjects of the earlier of these examples are imitations of cordage, of

marbling, and of basket-work; later there are rows of men and animals,

and ships (Plate I. figs. 12, 13), with various minor signs. The figures

are never cross-hatched as in earlier drawing, but always filled in

altogether. The fact that the ships have oars and not sails makes it

probable that they were rather for the sea than for Nile traffic, and a

starfish among the motives on such pottery also points to the sea

connexion. The ulterior meaning of the decoration is probably religious

and funereal, but the objects which are figured must have been familiar.

For this whole period see Jean Capart, _Debuts de l'art en Egypte_

(1904; trans. _Primitive Art in Ancient Egypt_).

_The Early Kings._--The dynastic race wrought an entire transformation

in the art of Egypt; in place of the clumsy and undetailed

representations, there suddenly appears highly artistic work, full of

character, action and anatomical detail.

(A) The earliest statues of this age are the colossi of the god Min from

Coptos; that they belong to the artistic race is evident from the

spirited reliefs upon them (see below, B), but the figures were very

rude, the legs and arms being joined all in the mass. The main example

of this early art is a limestone head of a king (Plate I. figs. 15, 16),

which is a direct study from life, to serve as a model. For the accuracy

of the facial curves, and the grasp of character and type, it is equal

to any later work; and in its entire absence of conventions and its pure

naturalism there is no later sculpture so good: as Prof. A. Michaelis

says, "it renders the race type with astounding keenness, and shows an

excellent power of observation in the exact representation of the eyes."

By the portrait, it is probably of King Narmer or some king related to

him, that is, about the beginning of the Ist Dynasty. The ivory

statuette of an aged king (Plate I. fig. 14) is probably slightly later.

It shows the same subtle sense of character, and is unsurpassed in its

reality. Many ivory figures of men, women and animals are known from

Nekhen (Hieraconpolis) and Abydos; and they all show the same school of

work, simple, dignified, observant, and with an air which places them on

a higher plane of truthfulness and precision than later art. There is

none of the mannerism of a long tradition, but a nobility pervades them

which has no self-consciousness. The lower class of work of this age is

shown by great numbers of glazed pottery figures both human and animal.

Later in the IInd Dynasty, the head of Khasekhem (Plate I. fig. 17)

shows the beginning of convention, but yet has a delicacy about the

mouth which surpasses later works.

(B) Reliefs abound at this age, and include the most important evidences

of the development of the art. The earliest examples are those of

animals (Plate II. fig. 18) and shells on the colossi of Coptos. They

show a keen sense of form, and the stag's head, which is probably the

earliest, already bears an artistic feeling wholly different to that of

any of the prehistoric works (P.K. iii. iv.). The carvings on slate

palettes appear to begin with work crudely accurate and forceful, the

heavy limbs being ridged with tendons and muscles (Plate II. fig. 19),

but there is more proportion, with the same massive strength (Plate II.

fig. 20). Soon after, with a leap, the artist produced the first pure

work of art that is known (Plate II. fig. 21), a design for its own sake

without the tie of symbolism or history. The group of two long-necked

gazelles facing a palm tree is of extraordinary refinement, and shows

the artistic consciousness in every part; the symmetric rendering of the

palm tree, reduced to fit the scale of the animals, the dainty grace of

the smooth gazelles contrasted with the rugged stem, the delicacy of the

long flowing curves and the fine indications of the joints, all show a

sense of design which has rarely been equalled in the ceaseless

repetitions of the tree and supporters motive during every age since.

Passing the various palettes with hunting scenes and animals (Plate II.

fig. 22), we come to the great historical carving of King Narmer (Plate

II. fig. 23). Here the anatomy has reached its limits for such work; the

precision of the muscles on the inner and outer sides of the leg, of the

uniform grip in the left arm, and the tense muscle upholding the right

arm, prove that the artist knew that part of his work perfectly. The

large ceremonial mace-heads recording the _Sed_ festivals of the king

Narmer and another, belong also to this school; but owing to their

smaller size they have not such artistic detail. With them were found

many reliefs in ivory, on tusks, wands and cylinders. The main motive in

these is a long procession of animals (Plate II. figs. 24, 25) often

grotesquely crowded; but there is much observation shown and the figures

are expressive. No drawing of this age has survived.

_The Pyramid Kings._--A different ideal appears in the pyramid times; in

place of the naturalism of the earlier work there is more regularity,

some convention, and the sense of a school in the style. The prevailing

feeling is a noble spaciousness both in scale and in form, an equanimity

based upon knowledge and character, a grandeur of conception expressed

by severely simple execution. There is nothing superfluous, nothing

common, nothing trivial. The smallest as well as the largest work seems

complete, inevitable, immutable, without limitations of time, or labour

or thought.

(A) The statuette of Khufu or Cheops (Plate III. fig. 29) though only a

minute figure in ivory, shows the character of immense energy and will;

the face is an astonishing portrait to be expressed in a quarter of an

inch. The life-size statue of Khafre or Chephren (Plate III. fig. 30) is

a majestic work, serene and powerful; carved in hard diorite, yet

unhesitating in execution. The muscular detail is full, but yet kept in

harmony with the massive style of the figure. The private persons have

entirely different treatment according to the character of their

position. In place of the awful dignity of the kings there is the placid

high-bred Princess Nofri (Plate II. fig. 27, Plate III. fig. 31), the

calm conscientious dignitary Hemset (Plate III. fig. 32), the bustling,

active, middle-class official, Ka-aper (Plate II. fig. 28, Plate III.

fig. 33), and the kneeling figure of a servitor. The differences of

character are very skilfully rendered in all the sculpture of this age.

The whole figures are stiff in the earlier time, as the figure of Nes;

then square and massive, but true in form, as Rahotp and Nofri (Plate

II. fig. 27); and afterwards easier and less monumental, as Ka-aper

(Plate II. fig. 28). The skill in beaten copper work is shown by the

portrait of the Prince Mer-en-ra (Plate III. fig. 35).

(B) The reliefs are quite equal to the statuary. The wooden panels of

Hesi (Plate II. fig. 26) show the archaic style of great detail, with a

bold, stark vigour of attitude. Later work is abundant in the

tomb-sculptures of this age, with a fulness of variety and detail which

makes them the most interesting of all branches of the art. The general

effect cannot be judged without a large scene, but the figures of two

men and an ox (Plate III. fig. 37) show the freshness and vigour of the

style, which is even higher than this in some examples. The clear, noble

spacing of the surface work is well shown by a group of offerings and

inscribed titles (Plate III. fig. 36).

[Illustration: PLATE III. PYRAMID PERIOD.

29. IVORY OF CHEOPS.

30. DIORITE OF CHEPHREN.

31. LIMESTONE OF NEFERT.

32. HEMSET: LIMESTONE.

33. WOOD (see Fig. 28).

34. SCRIBE: LIMESTONE.

35. MER-EN-RA: COPPER.

36. LIMESTONE SLAB OF KHENT-ER-KA.

37. THE OXHERDS: LIMESTONE. Photo, Bonfils

38. GRANITE SPHINX.

39. AMENEMHE III.

40. 41. SENWOSRI I.: LIMESTONE RELIEFS: HOTEPA.]

[Illustration: PLATE IV. 1400 B. C. TO ROMAN.

42. AMENOPHIS III.: GRANITE. Photo, Manseil.

43. QUEEN TAIA: LIMESTONE.

44. RAMESES II.: GRANITE. Photo, Anderson.

45. NEGRESS: EBONY.

46. QUEEN HATSHEPSUT.

47. KHA-EM-HAT.

48. SETI I.

49. PRINCESSES: FRESCO.

50. FOUR RACES OF MAN.

51. TUMBLER.

52. SCENE IN XXVI. DYNASTY.

53. PTOLEMAIC RELIEF.

54. MODELLED HEAD AND SKULL.]

geese from Medum, show that such work kept pace with the reliefs; but

most of the fresco-work has perished, and there are few instances of

line drawing.

_The XIIth Dynasty._--This age overlaps the previous in its style. The

end of the last age was in the very degraded tomb work of the early XIth

Dynasty.

(A) The new style begins with the royal statues, which it seems we must

attribute to the foreign kings from whom the XIIth Dynasty was

descended. These statues were later appropriated by the Hyksos, and so

came to be called by their name, which is a misnomer. The type of face

(Plate III. fig. 38) is thick-featured, full of force, with powerful

masses of facial muscle covering the skull. The style is very vigorous

and impassioned, without any trace of relenting towards conventional

work. The surfaces are not in the least subdued by a general breadth of

style, as in the last period; but, on the contrary, revel in the full

detail of variety. There is perhaps no age where nature is so little

controlled by convention in either the living character or its

sculptured expression. One of these kings might well be the founder of

the IXth Dynasty, "Achthoes (Kheti), who did much injury to all the

inhabitants," "Khuther Taurus the tyrant"; the expression is that of a

Chlodwig or an Alboin. From this type evidently descended the milder and

more civilized kings of the XIIth Dynasty, the resemblance being so

strong that the fierce figures have even been identified with that

dynasty by some. A good example is that of the statue of Amenemhat

(Amenemhe) III. (Plate III. fig. 39). The style of the XIIth Dynasty may

be summed up as clean, highly-finished work, strong in facial detail;

but with neither the grandeur of the IVth nor the vivacity of the

XVIIIth Dynasty. This passed in the XIIIth Dynasty into a graceful but

weak manner, as in the statues of Sebkhotp (Sebek-hotep) III. and

Neferhotp.

(B) The relief work shows most clearly the rise of the new style. In the

middle of the XIth Dynasty an entirely fresh treatment appears; the Old

Kingdom work had died out in very bad sunk-reliefs, the fresh style

(Plate III. fig. 41) was a low relief with sharp edges above the field.

It was full of delicate variety in the surfaces, and of elaborated

close-packed lines of hair and ornaments. By the time of the early XIIth

Dynasty, this reached a perfection of refinement in the detail of facial

curves, with an ostentatiously low relief (P.K. ix. i.), rather on the

lines of modern French work; but the whole with clean, firm outlines,

severely restrained in the expression, and without any trace of emotion.

It is the work of a school, in which high training took the place of the

reliance on nature. Sunk relief was also well used, as by Senusert

(Senwosri) I. (Plate III. fig. 40). There was a steady decline during

the XIIth Dynasty and onward, but the same tone was followed.

character of the relief treatment, being more rigid, detailed, and

scholastic than the older style.

_The XVIIIth-XXth Dynasties._--The obvious, not to say superficial,

character of this age has rendered it one of the most popular in

Egyptian art. The older breadth, fulness, and vigour have vanished,

those great qualities which stamp the immortal works of early times. The

difference is much like that between the Parthenon and the Niobids, or

between Jacopo Avanzi and Caracci. In this change is the whole

difference between the art of character and the art of emotion; and

though the emotional side is the more popular, as needing less thought

to understand it, yet the unfailing canon is that in every age and land

the true quality of art is proportionate to the expression of character

as apart from transient emotion. This may perhaps apply to other arts as

well as to sculpture and painting. If we accept frankly the emotional

nature of this age, we may admire its graceful outlines, its vivacious

manner, its romantic style, with an occasional sauciness which is

amusing and attractive. It revelled in rich detail, and close masses of

lines, as in wigs and ribbed dresses. It sported with a seductive Syrian

type of face, especially under Amenophis (Amenhotep) III.; but we find

the anatomy giving way to mere smoothness of surface, for the sake of

contrast with the masses of detail. The romantic element increased,

solemn funereal statues show husband and wife hand in hand; and it

culminated under Akhenaton, who is seen kissing his wife in the chariot,

or dancing her on his knee. An overwhelming naturalism swamped the older

reserves of Egyptian art, and the expression of the postures, actions

and familiarities of daily life, or the instantaneous attitudes of

animals, became the _dernier cri_ of fashion. It was all charming and

wonderful, but it was the end,--nothing could come after it. The XIXth

Dynasty, at its best under Seti I., could only excel in high finish of

smoothness and graceful curves; life, character, meaning, had vanished.

And soon after, under Rameses II., mere mechanical copying, hard

lifeless routine of stone-cutting, regardless of truth and of nature,

dominated the whole.

(A) In sculpture there is a certain baldness of style at first, as in

the Amenophis I. at Turin or Mutnefert at Cairo. More fulness and

richness of character succeeded, as in Tahutmes (Tethmosis) III. and

Amenophis III. (Plate IV. fig. 42, British Museum). And the feeling of

the age finds greater scope in private statues, many of which have a

personal fascination about them, as in the seated figures at Cairo and

Florence, and the freer work in wood, of which the ebony negress (Plate

IV. fig. 45) is the best example. The burst of naturalism under

Akhenaton resulted in some marvellous portraiture, of which the fragment

of a queen's head (Plate IV. fig. 43) is perhaps the most brilliant

instance; the fidelity in the delicate curves of the nose and around the

mouth is enhanced by the touch of artistic convention in the facing of

the lips. The only work of ability in the XIXth Dynasty is the black

granite figure (Plate IV. fig. 44) of Rameses II. at Turin. The ordinary

statuary of his reign is painfully stiff and poor, and there is no later

work in the period worth notice.

(B) The reliefs of the early XVIIIth Dynasty are closely like the scenes

of the tombs in the pyramid age, but soon carving was superseded by the

cheaper painting, and but few tombs in relief are known. The temples

were the principal places for reliefs; and they steadily deteriorate

from the first great example, Deir el Bahri (see ARCHITECTURE:

_Egyptian_), down to the late Ramessides. The portraiture is strong and

clear-cut (Plate IV. fig. 46), but somewhat mechanical and without

muscular detail: the sameness is rather more than is probable. There is

a good deal of repetition for mere effect, even in the fine work of

Kha-em-hat (Plate IV. fig. 47), under Amenophis III. That the artists

were conscious of their poverty of thought is shown by some precise

imitations of the style of early monuments. On reaching the age of

Akhenaton, the peculiar style of that school is obvious in every relief;

the older conventions were deserted, and, for good or for bad, a new

start from nature was attempted. After that the smooth finish of the

Seti reliefs at Abydos (Plate IV. fig. 48) shows no life or observation;

and only occasionally the artist triumphed over the stone-worker, as in

the portrait of Bantanta at Memphis, which is precisely like another

head of her found in Sinai. The innumerable reliefs of the XIXth-XXth

Dynasty temples are only of historic interest, and are all despicable in

comparison with earlier works.

touch, abundance of incident, and even comedy, of the scenes are

familiar in the frescoes in the British Museum. And under Akhenaton this

was pervaded by an entire naturalism of posture, as seen in the two

little princesses (Plate IV. fig. 49). Drawing continued to be the

strong point of the art after the more laborious sculpture had lost all

vitality. The tomb of Seti shows exquisitely firm line drawing; and the

heads of four races (Plate IV. fig. 50), Western, Syrian, and two Negro,

here show the unfailing line-work which has never been matched in later

times. The artist habitually drew the long lines of whole limbs without

a single hesitation or revoke; and the drawing of a tumbling girl (Plate

IV. fig. 51) shows how credibly such contortions could be represented.

The comic papyri of the XXth Dynasty have also a very strong sense of

character, even through coarse drawing and some childish combinations.

The subsequent centuries show continuous decline, and in whatever branch

we compare the work, we see that each dynasty was poorer than that which

preceded it. The XXVIth Dynasty is often looked on as a renaissance; but

when we compare similar work we see that it was poorer than the XXIInd,

as that was poorer than the XIXth. The alabaster statue of Amenardus of

the XXVth is faulty in pose, and perfunctory in modelling; the

resemblance between this and the head of her nephew Tirhaka is perhaps

the best evidence of truthful work. After this there was a strong

archaistic fashion, much like that under Hadrian; in both cases it may

have arrested decay, but it did not lift the art up again. The work of

this age can always be detected by the faulty jointing (Plate IV. fig.

52) and muscular treatment. The elements are right enough, but there was

not the vital sense to combine them properly. Hence the monstrous

protuberances (Plate IV. fig. 53) on relief figures of this age; a fault

which the Greek fell into in his decline, as shown in the Farnese

Hercules.

Portraiture, with its limited demand on imagination and lack of ideals,

was the form of art which flourished latest. The Saitic heads in basalt

show a school of close observation, with fair power of rendering the

personal character; and even in Roman times there still were provincial

artists who could model a face very truthfully, as is shown in one case

in which the stucco head (Plate IV. fig. 54) from a coffin is here

superposed on the view of the actual skull to show the accuracy of the

work. The school of portrait-painting belongs entirely to Greek art, and

is therefore not touched upon here. (See Edgar, _Catalogue of

Graeco-Egyptian Coffins_, 48 plates, for this subject.)

Lastly we must recognize the different schools of Egyptian sculpture

which are as distinct as those of recent painting. The black-granite

school in every age is the finest; its seat we do not know, but its

vitality and finish always exceed those of contemporary works. The

limestone school was probably the next best, to judge from the reliefs,

but hardly any statues of this school have survived; it probably was

seated at Memphis. The quartzite work from Jebel Ahmar near Cairo stands

next, as often very fine design is found in this hard material. The red

granite school of Assuan comes lower, the work being usually clumsy and

with unfinished corners and details. And the lowest of all was the

sandstone school of Silsila, which is always the worst. Broadly

speaking, the Lower Egyptian was much better than the Upper Egyptian; a

conclusion also evident in the art of the tombs done on the spot. But

the secret of the black granite school, and its excellence, is the main

problem unsolved in the history of the art. (W. M. F. P.)

_Tools and Material Products._

_Tools_ (see Illustrations 1 to 111).--The history of tools is a very

large subject which needs to be studied for all countries; the various

details of form are too numerous to specify here, but the general

outline of tools used in Egypt may be briefly stated under _general_ and

_special_ types. The _general_ include tools for striking, slicing and

scraping; the _special_ tools are for fighting, hunting, agriculture,

building and thread-work.

_Striking Tools._--The wooden mallet of club form (1) was used in the

VIth and XIIth Dynasties; of the modern mason's form (2) in the XIIth

and XVIIIth. The stone mace head was a sharp-edged disk (3), in the

prehistoric from 31-40 sequence date; of the pear shape (4) from S.D.

42, which was actually in use till the IVth Dynasty, and represented

down to Roman time. The metal or stone hammer with a long handle was

unknown till Greek or Roman times; but, for beating out metal,

hemispherical stones (5) were held in the hand, and swung at arm's

length overhead. Spherical hard stone hammers (6) were held in the hand

for dressing down granite. The axe was at the close of the prehistoric

age a square slab of copper (7) with one sharp edge; small projecting

tails then appeared at each end of the back (8), and increased until the

long tail for lashing on to the handle is more than half the length of

the axe in an iron one of Roman (?) age (13). Flint axes were made in

imitation of metal in the XIIth Dynasty (9). Battle-axes with rounded

outline started as merely a sharp edge of metal (10) inserted along a

stick (10, 11); they become semicircular (12) by the VIth Dynasty,

lengthen to double their width in the XIIth, and then thin out to a

waist in the middle by the XVIIIth Dynasty. Flint hoes (14) are common

down to the XIIth Dynasty. Small copper hoes (15) with a hollow socket

are probably of about the XXIInd Dynasty. Long iron picks (16), like

those of modern navvies, were made by Greeks in the XXVIth Dynasty.

_Slicing Tools._--The knife was originally a flint saw (17), having

minute teeth; it must have been used for cutting up animals, fresh or

dried, as the teeth break away on soft wood. The double-edged straight

flint knife dates from S.D. 32-45. The single-edged knife (18) is from

33-65. The flint knives of the time of Menes are finely curved (19),

with a handle-notch; by the end of the IInd Dynasty they were much

coarser (20) and almost straight in the back. In the XIth-XIIth Dynasty

they were quite straight in the back (21), and without any handle-notch.

The copper knives are all one-edged with straight back (22) down to the

XVIIIth Dynasty, when two-edged symmetrical knives (23) become usual.

Long thin one-edged knives of iron begin about 800 B.C. Various forms of

one-edged iron knives, straight (24) and curved (25), belong to Roman

times. A cutting-out knife, for slicing through textiles, began

double-edged (26) in the Ist Dynasty, and went through many single-edged

forms (27-29) until it died out in the XXth Dynasty (_Man_, 1901, 123).

A small knife hinged on a pointed backing of copper (31) seems to have

been made for hair curling and toilet purposes. Razors (30) are known of

the XIIth Dynasty, and became common in the XVIIIth. A curious blade of

copper (32), straight sided, and sharpened at both ends, belongs to the

close of the prehistoric age. Shears are only known of Roman age and

appear to have been an Italian invention: there is a type in Egypt with

one blade detachable, so that each can be sharpened apart. Chisels of

bronze began of very small size (33) at S.D. 38, and reached a full size

at the close of the prehistoric age. In historic times the chisels are

about 1 x 1/2, x 6 to 8 in. long (34). Small chisels set in wooden handles

are found (35) of the XIIth and XVIIIth Dynasties. Ferrules first appear

in the Assyrian iron of the 7th century B.C. The rise of stone work led

to great importance of heavy chisels (36) for trimming limestone and

Nubian sandstone; such chisels are usually round rods about 3/4 in. thick

and 6 in. long. The cutting edge was about 1/2 in. wide for flaking tools

(36), which were not kept sharp, and 1 in. wide for facing tools (37)

which had a good edge. In Greek times the iron chisels are shorter and

merge into wedges (39). The socketed or mortising chisel (38) is unknown

till the Italian bronze of the 8th century B.C., and the Naucratis iron

of the 6th century. Adzes begin in S.D. 56, as plain slips of copper

(40) 4 to 6 in. long, about 1 wide and 1/8th thick. The square end was

rounded in the early dynastic times, and went through a series of

changes down to the XIXth Dynasty. Adzes of iron are probably of Greek

times. A fine instance of a handle about 4 ft. long is represented in

the IIIrd Dynasty (P.M. XI.). The adze (41) was used not only for

wood-work but also for dressing limestone.

_Scraping Tools._--Flint scrapers are found from S.D. 40 and onward. The

rectangular scraper (42) began in S.D. 63, and continued into the IInd

Dynasty: the flake with rounded ends (43) was used from the Ist to the

IVth Dynasty (P. Ab. i. xiv., xv.). Round scrapers were also made (44).

Flint scrapers were used in dressing down limestone sculpture in the

IIIrd Dynasty. Rasps of conical form (45), made of a sheet of bronze

punched and coiled round, were common in the XVIIIth Dynasty, apparently

as personal objects, possibly used for rasping dried bread. In the

Assyrian iron tools of the 7th century B.C. the long straight rasp (46)

is exactly of the modern type. The saw is first found as a notched

bronze knife of the IIIrd Dynasty. Larger toothed saws (47) are often

represented in the IVth-VIth Dynasty, as used by carpenters. There are

no dated specimens till the Assyrian iron saws (48) of the 7th century

B.C. Drills were of flint (49) for hard material and bead-making, of

bronze for woodwork. In the Assyrian tools iron drills are of slightly

twisted scoop form (50), and of centre-bit type with two scraping edges

(51). In Roman times the modern V drill (52) is usual. The drill was

worked by a stock with a loose cap (53), rotated by a drill bow, in the

XIIth to Roman dynasties. The pump drill with cords twisted round it was

in Roman use. The bow drill (56) was used as a fire drill to rotate wood

(55) on wood (57); and the cap (54) for such use was of hard stone with

a highly polished hollow. The drill brace appears to have been used by

Assyrians in the 7th century B.C. Piercers of bronze tapering (58), to

enlarge holes in leather, &c., were common in all ages.

_Fighting Weapons._--The battle-axe has been described above with axes.

The flint dagger (59) is found from S.D. 40-56. A very finely made

copper dagger (60) with deep midrib is dated to between 55 and 60 S.D.

Copper daggers with parallel ribbing (61) down the middle are common in

the XIth-XIVth Dynasties; and in the XVIIIth-XXth Dynasties they are

often shown in scenes and on figures. The falchion with a curved blade

(62) belongs to the XVIIIth-XXth Dynasty. The rapier (63) or lengthened

dagger is rarely found, and is probably of prehistoric Greek origin. The

sword is of Greek and Roman age, always double-edged and of iron. The

spear is not commonly found in Egypt, until the Greek age, but it is

represented from the XIth Dynasty onward; it belonged to the Semitic

people (L.D. ii. 133). The bow was always of wood, in one piece in the

prehistoric and early times, also of two horns in the Ist Dynasty; but

the compound bow of horn is rarely found, only as an importation, in the

XVIIIth Dynasty. The arrow-heads of flint (64-66) and of bone (68-69)

were pointed, and also square-ended (67) for hunting (P.R.T. ii. vi.;

vii. A., 7; xxxiv.). The copper arrow-heads appear in the XIXth Dynasty,

of blade form with tang (70); the triangular form (72), and leaf form

with socket (71), are of the XXVIth Dynasty. Triangular iron arrows with

tang are of the same age. Tangs show that the shaft was a reed, sockets

show that it was of wood. Many early arrows (XIIth) have only hard wood

points of conical form. The sling is rarely shown in the XIXth-XXth

Dynasties; and the only known example is probably of the XXVIth.

_Hunting Weapons._--The forked lance of flint was at first wide with

slight hollow (73) from S.D. 32-43; then the hollow became a V notch

(74) in 38 S.D. and onward. The lance was fixed in a wooden shaft for

throwing, and held in by a check-cord from flying too far if it missed

the animal (P.N. LXXIII.). The harpoon for fishing was at first of bone

(75), and was imitated in copper (76, 77) from S.D. 36 onwards. The

boomerang or throw-stick (78) was used from the Ist to the XXIInd

Dynasty, and probably later. Fish-hooks of copper (79-82) are found from

the Ist Dynasty to Roman times. A trap for animals' legs, formed by

splints of palm stick radiating round a central hole, is figured in S.D.

60, and one was found of probably the XXth Dynasty. Fishing nets were

common in all historic times, and the lead sinkers (83) and stone

sinkers (84) are often found under the XVIIIth-XXth Dynasties.

_Agricultural Tools._--The hoe of wood (85) is the main tool from the

late prehistoric time, and many have been found of the XVIIIth Dynasty.

With the handle lengthened (86) and turned forward, this became the

plough (87 is the hieroglyph, 88 the drawing, of a plough); this was

always sloping, and never the upright post of the Italic type. The rake

of wood (89) is usual in the XIIth and XVIIIth Dynasties. The fork (90),

used for tossing straw, was common in the Old Kingdom, but none has been

found. The sickle was of wood (92), with flints (91) inserted,

apparently a copy of the ox-jaw and teeth. The notched flints for it are

common from the Ist to the XVIIIth Dynasty. In Roman times the same

principle was followed, by making an iron sickle with a deep groove, in

which was inserted the cutting blade of steel (P.E. XXIX.).

Shovel-boards, to hold in right (93) or left hand for scraping up the

grain in winnowing, are usual in the XVIIIth Dynasty, and are figured in

use in the Old Kingdom Pruning knives with curved blades (94) are

Italic, and were made of iron by the Romans. Corn grinders were flat

oval stones, with a smaller one lying cross-ways (95), and slid from end

to end. Such were used from the Old Kingdom down to late times. In the

Roman period a larger stone was used, with a rectangular slab (96)

sliding on it, in which a long trough held the grain and let it slip out

below for grinding. The quern with rotary motion is late Roman, and

still used by Arabs. The large circular millstones of Roman age worked

by horse-power are usually made from slices of granite columns.

_Building Tools._--The adze described above was used for dressing blocks

of limestone. The brick-mould was an open frame, with one side prolonged

into a handle (97), exactly as the modern mould. The plasterers' floats

(98) were entirely cut out of wood. The mud rake for mixing mortar is

rather narrower than the modern form. The square (99) and plummet (100,

101) have remained unchanged since the XIXth Dynasty. For dressing flat

surfaces three wooden pegs (102) of equal length were used; a string was

stretched between the tops of two, and the third peg was set on the

point to be tested and tried against the string.

_Thread-Work._--Stone spindle whorls (103) are common in the prehistoric

age; wooden ones were usual, of a cylindrical form (104) in the XIIth,

and conical (105) in the XVIIIth Dynasty. The thread was secured by a

spiral notch in the stick. In Roman times an iron hook on the top held

the thread (106) as in modern spindles. Needles of copper were made in

the prehistoric, as early as S.D. 48, and very delicate ones by S.D. 71.

Gold needles are found of the Ist Dynasty. Fine ones of bronze are

common in the XVIIIth Dynasty, and some with two eyes at right angles,

one above the other, to carry two different threads. The copper bodkin

is found in S.D. 70. Netters are common, of rib bones, pointed (107);

the thread was wound round them. Long netting needles were probably

brought in by the dynastic people as they figure in the hieroglyphs.

Finely-made ones are found in the XVIIIth Dynasty and later. Reels were

also commonly used for net making, of pottery (108) or even pebbles

(109) with a groove chipped around. The flint vase-grinders were used in

the early dynasties (110), and also sandstone grinders for hollowing

larger vases (111).

_Stone-Work._--In the prehistoric ages stone building was unknown, but

many varieties of stones were used for carving into vases, amulets and

ornaments. The stone vases were at first of cylindrical forms, with a

foot, and ears for hanging. These are worked in brown basalt, syenite,

porphyry, alabaster and limestone. In the second prehistoric

civilization barrel-shaped vases became usual; and to the former

materials were added slate, grey limestone and breccia. Serpentine

appears later, and diorite towards the close of the prehistoric ages.

Flat dishes were used in earlier times; gradually deeper forms appear,

and lastly the deep bowl with turned-in edge belongs to the close of the

prehistoric time and continued common in the earlier dynasties (P.D.P.

19). This stone-work was usually formed on the outside with rotary

motion, but sometimes the vase was rotated upon the grinder (Q. H. 17).

The interior was ground out by cutters (figs. 110, 111) fixed in the end

of a stick and revolved with a weight on the top, as shown in scenes on

the tombs of the Vth Dynasty. The cutters were sometimes flints of a

crescent shape (P. Ab. ii. liii. 24), but more usually grinders blocks

of quartzite sandstone (26-34), and occasionally of diorite (Q. H.

xxxii. lxii.). These blocks were fed with sand and water to give the

bite on the stone (P. Ab. i. 26). The outsides of the vases were

entirely wrought by handwork, with the polishing lines crossing

diagonally. Probably the first forming was done by chipping and

hammer-dressing, as in later times; the final facing of the hard stones

was doubtless by means of emery in block or powder, as emery grinding

blocks are found.

In the early dynasties the hard stones were still worked, and the Ist

dynasty was the most splendid age for vases, bowls, and dishes of the

finest stones. The royal tombs have preserved an enormous quantity of

fragments, from which five hundred varied forms have been drawn (P.R.T.

ii. xlvi.-liii. 6). The materials are quartz crystal, basalt, porphyry,

syenite, granite, volcanic ash, various metamorphics, serpentine, slate,

dolomite marble, alabaster, many coloured marbles, saccharine marble,

grey and white limestones. The most splendid vase is one from Nekhen

(Hieraconpolis), of syenite, 2 ft. across and 16 in. high, hollowed so

as to be marvellously light and highly polished (Q.H. xxxvii). Another

branch of stone-work, surface carving, was early developed by the

artistic dynastic race. The great palettes of slate covered with

elaborate reliefs are probably all of the pre-Menite kings; the most

advanced of them having the figure of Narmer, who preceded Menes. Other

carving full of detail is on the great mace-heads of Narmer and the

Scorpion king, where scenes of ceremonials are minutely engraved in

relief. In the Ist Dynasty the large tombstones of the kings are of bold

work, but the smaller stones of private graves vary much in the style,

many being very coarse. All of this work was by hammer-dressing and

scraping. The scrapers seem to have always been of copper.

The earliest use of stone in buildings is in the tomb of King Den (Ist

Dynasty), where some large flat blocks of red granite seem to have been

part of the construction. The oldest stone chamber known is that of

Khasekhemui (end of the IInd Dynasty). This is of blocks of limestone

whose faces follow the natural cleavages, and only dressed where

needful; part is hammer-dressed, but most of the surfaces are

adze-dressed. The adze was of stone, probably flint, and had a short

handle (P.R.T. ii. 13). The same king also wrought granite with

inscriptions in relief. In the close of the IIIrd Dynasty a great

impetus was given to stone-work, and the grandest period of refined

masonry is at the beginning of the IVth Dynasty under Cheops. The tombs

of Medum under Snefru are built with immense blocks of limestone of 20

and 33 tons weight. The dressing of the face between the hieroglyphs was

done partly with copper and partly with flint scrapers (P.M. 27). The

most splendid masonry is that of the Great Pyramid of Cheops. The blocks

of granite for the roofing are 56 in number, of an average weight of 54

tons each. These were cut from the water-worn rocks at the Cataract--the

soundest source for large masses, as any incipient flaws are well

exposed by wear. The blocks were quarried by cleavage; a groove was run

along the line intended, and about 2 ft. apart holes about 4 in. wide

were jumped downward from it in the intended plane; this prevented a

skew fracture (P.T. 93). In shallower masses a groove was run, and then

holes, apparently for wedges, were sunk deeper in the course of it;

whether wetted wood was used for the expansive force is not known, but

it is probable, as no signs are visible of crushing the granite by hard

wedges. The facing of the cloven surfaces was done by hammer-dressing,

using rounded masses of quartzose hornstone, held in the hand without

any handle. In order to get a hold for moving the blocks without

bruising the edges, projecting lumps or bosses were left on the faces,

about 6 or 8 in. across and 1 or 2 in. thick. After the block was in

place the boss was struck off and the surface dressed and polished (P.T.

78, 82). In the pyramid of Cheops the blocks were all faced before

building; but the later granite temple of Chephren and the pyramid of

Mycerinus (Menkaura, Menkeure) show a system of building with an excess

of a few inches left rough on the outer surface, which was dressed away

when in position (P.T. 110, 132).

The flatness of faces of stone or rock (both granite and limestone) was

tested by placing a true-plane trial plate, smeared with red ochre,

against the dressed surface, as in modern engineering. The contact being

thus reddened showed where the face had to be further dressed away; and

this process was continued until the ochre touched points not more than

an inch apart all over the joint faces, many square feet in area. On

stones too large for facing-plates a diagonal draft was run, so as to

avoid any wind in the plane (P.T. 83).

The cutting of granite was not only by cleavage and hammer dressing, but

also by cutting with harder materials than quartz such as emery. Long

saws of copper were fed with emery powder, and used to saw out blocks

as much as 7-1/2 ft. long (P.T. Plate XIV.). In other cases the very deep

scores in the sides of the saw-cut suggest that fixed cutting points

were inserted in the copper saws; and this would be parallel to the

saw-cuts in the very hard limestone of the Palace of Tiryns, in which a

piece of a copper saw has been broken, and where may be yet found large

chips of emery, too long and coarse to serve as a powder, but suited for

fixed teeth. A similar method was common for circular holes, which were

cut by a tube, either with powder or fixed teeth. These tubular drills

were used from the IVth Dynasty down to late times, in all materials

from alabaster up to carnelian. The resulting cores are more regular

than those of modern rock-drilling.

Limestone in the Great Pyramid, as elsewhere, was dressed by chopping it

with an adze, a tool used from prehistoric to Roman times for all soft

stones and wood. This method was carried on up to the point of getting

contact with the facing-plate at every inch of the surface; the cuts

cross in various directions. For removing rock in reducing a surface to

a level, or in quarrying, cuts were made with a pick, forming straight

trenches, and the blocks were then broken out between these. In

quarrying the cuts are generally 4 or 5 in. wide, just enough for the

workman's arm to reach in; for cutting away rock the grooves are 20 in.

wide, enough to stand in, and the squares of rock about 9 ft. wide

between the grooves (P.T. 100). The accuracy of the workmanship in the

IVth Dynasty is astonishing. The base of the pyramid of Snefru had an

average variation of 6 in. on 5765 and 10' of squareness. But,

immediately after, Cheops improved on this with a variation of less than

6 in. on 9069 in. and 12" of direction. Chephren fell off, having 1.5

error on 8475, and 33" of variation; and Mycerinus (Menkeure) had 3 in.

error on 4154 and 1' 50" variation of direction (P.M. 6; P.T. 39, 97,

111). Of perhaps later date the two south pyramids of Dahshur show

errors of 3.7 on 7459 and 1.1 on 2065 in., and variation of direction of

4' and 10' (P.S. 28, 30). The above smallest error of only 1 in 16,000

in lineal measure, and 1 in 17,000 of angular measure, is that of the

rock-cutting for the foundation of Khufu, and the masonry itself (now

destroyed) was doubtless more accurate. The error of flatness of the

joints from a straight line and a true square is but 1/100th in. on 75

in. length; and the error of level is only 1/50th in. along a course, or

about 10" on a long length (P.T. 44). We have entered thus fully on the

details of this period, as it is the finest age for workmanship in every

respect. But in the XIIth Dynasty the granite sarcophagus of Senwosri

II. is perhaps the finest single piece of cutting yet known; the

surfaces of the granite are all dull-ground, the errors from straight

lines and parallelism are only about 1/200th inch (P. 1, 3).

In later work we may note that copper scrapers were used for facing the

limestone work in the VIth, the XIIth and the XVIIIth Dynasties. In the

latter age granite surfaces were ground, hieroglyphs were chipped out

and polished by copper tools fed with emery; outlines were graved by a

thick sheet of copper held in the hand, and sawed to and fro with emery.

Corners of signs and intersections of lines were first fixed by minute

tube-drill holes, into which the hand tool butted, so that it should not

slip over the outer surface.

The marking out of work was done by fine black lines; and supplemental

lines at a fixed distance from the true one were put in to guard against

obliteration in course of working (P.T. 92); similarly in building a

brick pyramid the axis was marked, and there were supplemental marks two

cubits to one side (P.K. 14). When cutting a passage in the rock a rough

drift-way was first made, the roof was smoothed, a red axis line was

drawn along it, and then the sides were cut parallel to the axis. For

setting out a mastaba with sloping sides, on an irregular foundation at

different levels, hollow corner walls were built outside the place of

each corner; the distances of the faces at the above-ground level were

marked on the inner faces of the walls; the above-ground level was also

marked; then sloping lines at the intended angle of the face were drawn

downward from the ground-level measures, and each face was set out so as

to lie in the plane thus defined by two traces at the ends (P.M.

VIII.).

[Illustration: Ancient Egyptian Tools.

_Note._ _The objects are drawn to a scale of 1/6 unless otherwise

described._

MALLETS 1 2

MACES 3 4

HAMMERS 5 6

AXES 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

HOES 14 15

PICK 16

FLINT KNIVES 17 18 19 20 21

METAL KNIVES 22 23 24 25

CUTTING-OUT KNIVES 26 27 28 29

RAZORS 30 31 32

CHISELS 33 34 35 36 37 38 39

ADZES 40 41

SCRAPERS 42 44 45 46

SAWS 47 (1/30) 48

BORERS 49 50 51 52 53 (1/10) 54 55 (1/10) 56 57 58]

[Illustration: Ancient Egyptian Tools.

_Note._ _The objects are drawn to a scale of 1/6 unless otherwise

described._

FIGHTING 59 60 61 62 (1/12) 63 (1/12) 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72

HUNTING 73 74 75 76 77 78 (1/10) 79 80 81 82 83 84

AGRICULTURE all 1/20 85 86 87 88 89 90 (1/20) 91 92 (1/10) 93 94

95 (1/12) 96 (1/12)

BUILDING 97 98 99 100 101

THREAD WORK 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109

VASE GRINDING 110 111]

_Metal-Work._--Copper was wrought into pins, a couple of inches long,

with loop heads, as early as the oldest prehistoric graves, before the

use of weaving, and while pottery was scarcely developed. The use of

harpoons and small chisels of copper next arose, then broad flaying

knives, needles and adzes, lastly the axe when the metal was commoner.

On these prehistoric tools, when in fine condition, the original

highly-polished surface remains. It shows no trace of grinding lines or

attrition, nor yet of the blows of a hammer. Probably it was thus highly

finished by beating between polished stone hammers which were almost

flat on the face. Most likely the forms of the tools were cast to begin

with, and then finished and polished by fine hammering. A series of

moulds for casting in the XIIth Dynasty show that the forms were carved

out in thick pieces of pottery, and then lined with fine ashy clay. The

mould was single, so that one side of the tool was the open face of

metal. As early as the pyramid times solid casting by _cire perdue_ was

already used for figures: but the copper statues of Pepi and his son

seem, by their thinness and the piecing together of the parts, to have

been entirely hammered out. The portraiture in such hammer work is

amazingly life-like. By the time of the XIIth Dynasty, and perhaps

earlier, _cire perdue_ casting over an ash core became usual. This was

carried out most skilfully, the metal being often not 1/50th in. thick,

and the core truly centred in the mould. Casting bronze over iron rods

was also done, to gain more stiffness for thin parts.

In gold work the earliest jewelry, that of King Zer of the Ist Dynasty,

shows a perfect mastery of working hollow balls with minute threading

holes, and of soldering with no trace of excess nor difference of

colour. Thin wire was hammered out, but there is no ancient instance of

drawn wire. Castings were not trimmed by filing or grinding, but by

small chisels and hammering (P.R.T. ii. 17). In the XIIth Dynasty the

soldering of the thin cells for the _cloisonnee_ inlaid pectorals, on to

the base plate, is a marvellous piece of delicacy; every cell has to be

perfectly true in form, and yet all soldered, apparently simultaneously,

as the heat could not be applied to successive portions (M.D. i.). Such

work was kept up in the XVIIIth and XXVIth Dynasties. There is nothing

distinctive in later jewelry different from Greek and Roman work

elsewhere.

_Glaze and Glass._--From almost the beginning of the prehistoric age

there are glazed pottery beads found in the graves: and glazing on

amulets of quartz or other stones begins in the middle of the

prehistoric. Apparently then glazing went together with the working of

the copper ores, and probably accidental slags in the smelting gave the

first idea of using glaze intentionally. The development of glazing at

the beginning of the dynasties was sudden and effective. Large tiles, a

foot in length, were glazed completely all over, and used to line the

walls of rooms; they were retained in place by deep dovetails and ties

of copper wire. Figures of glazed ware became abundant; a kind of

visiting card was made with the figure of a man and his titles to

present in temples which he visited; and glazed ornaments and toggles

for fastening dresses were common (P. Ab. ii.). Further, besides thus

using glaze on a large scale, differently coloured glazes were used, and

even fused together. A piece of a large tile, and part of a glazed vase,

have the royal titles and name of Menes, originally in violet inlay in

green glaze. There was no further advance in the art until the great

variety of colours came into use about 4000 years later. In the XIIth

Dynasty a very thin smooth glaze was used, which became rather thicker

in the XVIIIth. The most brilliant age of glazes was under Amenophis

III. and his son Akhenaton. Various colours were used; beside the old

green and blue, there were purple, violet, red, yellow and white. And a

profusion of forms is shown by the moulds and actual examples, for

necklaces, decorations, inlay in stone and applied reliefs on vases.

Under Seti II. cartouches of the king in violet and white glaze are

common; and under Rameses III. there were vases with relief figures,

with painted figures, and tiles with coloured reliefs of captives of

many races. The latter development of glazing was in thin delicate

apple-green ware with low relief designs, which seem to have originated

under Greek influence at Naucratis. The Roman glaze is thick and coarse,

but usually of a brilliant Prussian blue, with dark purple and

apple-green; and high reliefs of wreaths, and sometimes figures, are

common.

Though glaze begins so early, the use of the glassy matter by itself

does not occur till the XVIIIth Dynasty; the earlier reputed examples

are of stone or frit. The first glass is black and white under Tethmosis

(Tahutmes) III. It was not fused at a high point, but kept in a pasty

state when working. The main use of it was for small vases; these were

formed upon a core of sandy paste, which was modelled on a copper rod,

the rod being the core for the neck. Round this core threads of glass

were wound of various colours; the whole could be reset in the furnace

to soften it for moulding the foot or neck, or attaching handles, or

dragging the surface into various patterns. The colours under later

kings were as varied as those of the glazes. Glass was also wheel-cut in

patterns and shapes under Akhenaton. In later times the main work was in

mosaics of extreme delicacy. Glass rods were piled together to form a

pattern in cross-section. The whole was then heated until it perfectly

adhered, and the mass was drawn out lengthways so as to render the

design far more minute, and to increase the total length for cutting up.

The rod was then sliced across, and the pieces used for inlaying.

Another use of coloured glass was for cutting in the shapes of

hieroglyphs for inlaying in wooden coffins to form inscriptions. Glass

amulets were also commonly placed upon Ptolemaic mummies. Blown glass

vessels are not known until late Greek and Roman times, when they were

of much the same manufacture as glass elsewhere. The supposed figures of

glass-blowers in early scenes are really those of smiths, blowing their

fires by means of reeds tipped with clay. The variegated glass beads

belonging to Italy were greatly used in Egypt in Roman times, and are

like those found elsewhere. A distinctively late Egyptian use of glass

was for weights and vase-stamps, to receive an impress stating the

amount of the weight or measure. The vase-stamps often state the name of

the contents (always seeds or fruits), probably not to show what was in

them, but to show for what kind of seed the vessel was a true measure.

These measure stamps bear names dating them from A.D. 680 to about 950.

The large weights of ounces and pounds are disks or cuboid blocks; they

are dated from 720 to 785 for the lesser, and to A.D. 915 for larger,

weights. The greater number are, however, small weights for testing gold

and silver coins of later caliphs from A.D. 952 to 1171. The system was

not, however, Arab, as there are a few Roman vase-stamps and weights. Of

other medieval glass may be noted the splendid glass vases for lamps,

with Arab inscriptions fused in colours on the outsides. No enamelling

was ever done by Egyptians, and the few rare examples are all of Roman

age due to foreign work.

The manufacture of glass is shown by examples in the XVIIIth Dynasty.

The blue or green colour was made by fritting together silica, lime,

alkaline carbonate and copper carbonate; the latter varied from 3% in

delicate blues to 20% in deep purple blues. The silica was needed quite

pure from iron, in order to get the rich blues, and was obtained from

calcined quartz pebbles; ordinary sand will only make a green frit.

These materials were heated in pans in the furnace so as to combine in a

pasty, half-fused condition. The coloured frit thus formed was used as

paint in a wet state, and also used to dissolve in glass or to fuse over

a surface in glazing. The brown tints often seen in glazed objects are

almost always the result of the decomposition of green glazes containing

iron. The blue glazes, on the other hand, fade into white. The essential

colouring materials are, for blue, copper; green, copper and iron;

purple, cobalt; red, haematite; white, tin. An entirely clear colourless

glass was made in the XVIIIth Dynasty, but coloured glass was mainly

used. After fusing a panful of coloured glass, it was sampled by taking

pinches out with tongs; when perfectly combined it was left to cool in

the pan, as with modern optical glass. When cold the pan was chipped

away, and the cake of glass broken up into convenient pieces, free of

sediment and of scum. A broken lump would then be heated to softness in

the furnace; rolled out under a bar of metal, held diagonally across the

roll; and when reduced to a rod of a quarter of an inch thick, it was

heated and pulled out into even rods about an eighth of an inch thick.

These were used to wind round glass vases, to form lips, handles, &c.;

and to twist together for spiral patterns. Glass tube was similarly

drawn out. Beads were made by winding thin threads of glass on copper

wires, and the greater contraction of the copper freed the bead when

cold. The coiling of beads can always be detected by (1) the little

tails left at the ends, (2) the streaks, (3) the bubbles, seen with a

magnifier. Roman glass beads are always drawn out, and nicked off hot,

with striation lengthways; except the large opaque variegated beads

which are coiled. Modern Venetian beads are similarly coiled. In the

XXIIIrd Dynasty beads of a rich transparent Prussian blue glass were

made, until the XXVIth. About the same time the eyed beads, with white

and brown eyes in a blue mass, also came in (P.A. 25-27, Plate XIII.).

_Pottery_ (see fig. 112).--The earliest style of pottery is entirely

hand made, without any rotary motion; the form being built up with a

flat stick inside and the hand outside, and finally scraped and

burnished in a vertical direction. The necks of vases were the first

part finished with rotation, at the middle and close of the prehistoric

age. Fully turned forms occur in the Ist Dynasty; but as late as the

XIIth Dynasty the lower part of small vases is usually trimmed with a

knife. In the earlier part of the prehistoric age there was a soft brown

ware with haematite facing, highly burnished. This was burnt mouth-down

in the oven, and the ashes on the ground reduced the red haematite to

black magnetic oxide of iron; some traces of carbonyl in the ash helped

to rearrange the magnetite as a brilliant mirror-like surface of intense

black. The lower range of jars in the oven had then black tops, while

the upper ranges were entirely red. A favourite decoration was by lines

of white clay slip, in crossing patterns, figures of animals, and,

rarely, men. This is exactly of the modern Kabyle style in Algeria, and

entirely disappeared from Egypt very early in the prehistoric age. Being

entirely hand made, various oval, doubled and even square forms were

readily shaped.

The later prehistoric age is marked by entirely different pottery, of a

hard pink-brown ware, often with white specks in it, without any applied

facing beyond an occasional pink wash, and no polishing. It is decorated

with designs in red line, imitating cordage and marbling, and drawings

of plants, ostriches and ships. The older red polished ware still

survived in a coarse and degraded character, and both kinds together

were carried on into the next age (P.D.P.).

The early dynastic pottery not only shows the decadent end of the

earlier forms, but also new styles, such as grand jars of 2 or 3 ft.

high which were slung in cordage, and which have imitation lines of

cordage marked on them. Large ring-stands also were brought in, to

support jars, so that the damp surfaces should not touch the dusty

ground. The pyramid times show the great jars reduced to short rough

pots, while a variety of forms of bowls are the most usual types

(P.R.T.; P.D.; P. Desh.)

In the XIIth Dynasty a hard thin drab ware was common, like the modern

_qulleh_ water flasks. Drop-shaped jars with spherical bases are

typical, and scrabbled patterns of incised lines. Large jars of light

brown pottery were made for storing liquids and grain, with narrow necks

which just admit the hand (P.K.).

The XVIIIth Dynasty used a rather softer ware, decorated at first with a

red edge or band around the top, and under Tethmosis (Tahutmes) III.

black and red lines were usual. Under Amenophis III. blue frit paint was

freely used, in lines and bands around vases; it spread to large

surfaces under Amenophis IV., and continued in a poor style into the

Ramesside age. In the latter part of the XVIIIth and the XIXth Dynasties

a thick hard light pottery, with white specks and a polished drab-white

facing, was generally used for all fine purposes. The XIXth and XXth

Dynasties only show a degradation of the types of the XVIIIth; and even

through to the XXVth Dynasty there is no new movement (P.K.; P.I.; P.A.;

P.S.T.).

The XXVIth Dynasty was largely influenced by Greek amphorae imported

with wine and oil. The native pottery is of a very fine paste, smooth

and thin, but poor in forms. Cylindrical cups, and jars with cylindrical

necks and no brim, are typical. The small necks and trivial handles

begin now, and are very common in Ptolemaic times (P.T. ii.).

The great period of Roman pottery is marked by the ribbing on the

outsides. The amphorae began to be ribbed about A.D. 150, and then

ribbing extended to all the forms. The ware is generally rather rough,

thick and brown for the amphorae, thin and red for smaller vessels. At

the Constantine age a new style begins, of hard pink ware, neatly made,

and often with "start-patterns" made by a vibrating tool while the

vessel rotated: this was mainly used for bowls and cups (P.E.). Of the

later pottery of Arab times we have no precise knowledge.

The abbreviations used above refer to the following sources of

information:--

M.D. Morgan, _Dahshur_;

P.A. Petrie, _Tell el Amarna_;

P. Ab. " _Abydos_;

P.D. " _Dendereh_;

P. Desh. " _Deshasheh_;

P.D.P. " _Diospolis Parva_;

P.E. " _Ehnasya_;

P.I. " _Illahun_;

P.K. " _Kahun_;

P.M. " _Medum_;

P.N. " _Naqada_;

P.R.T. " _Royal Tombs_;

P.S. " _Season in Egypt_;

P.S.T. " _Six Temples_;

P.T. " _Pyramids and Temples of Gizeh_;

P.T. ii. " _Tanis, ii._;

Q.H. Quibell, _Hieraconpolis_. (W. M. F. P.)

_Monuments._--The principal monuments that are yet remaining to

illustrate the art and history of Egypt may be best taken in historical

order. Of the prehistoric age there are many rock carvings, associated

with others of later periods: they principally remain on the sandstone

rocks about Silsila, and their age is shown by the figures of ostriches

which were extinct in later times. One painted tomb was found at Nekhen

(Hieraconpolis), now in the Cairo Museum; the brick walls were

colour-washed and covered with irregular groups of men, animals and

ships, painted with red, black and green. The cemeteries otherwise only

contain graves, cut in gravel or brick lined, and formerly roofed with

poles and brushwood. The Ist to IIIrd Dynasties have left at Abydos

large forts of brickwork, remains of two successive temples, and the

royal tombs (see ABYDOS). Elsewhere are but few other monuments; at Wadi

Maghara in Sinai is a rock sculpture of Semerkhet of the Ist Dynasty in

perfect state, at Giza is a group of tombs of a prince and retinue of

the Ist Dynasty, and at Giza and Bet Khallaf are two large brick

mastabas with extensive passages closed by trap-doors, of kings of the

IIIrd Dynasty. The main structure of this age is the step-pyramid of

Sakkara, which is a mastaba tomb with eleven successive coats of

masonry, enlarging it to about 350 by 390 ft. and 200 ft. high. In the

interior is sunk in the rock a chamber 24 x 23 ft. and 77 ft. high, with

a granite sepulchre built in the floor of it, and various passages and

chambers branching from it. The doorway of one room (now in Berlin

Museum) was decorated with polychrome glazed tiles with the name of King

Neterkhet. The complex original work and various alterations of it need

thorough study, but it is now closed and research is forbidden.

[Illustration: FIG. 112.--Principal Types of Pottery of Ancient Egypt.

(Scale 1:20.)

EARLY PREHISTORIC 7000-6000 B.C.

LATER PREHISTORIC 6000-5000 B.C.

I^ST DYNASTY 4800-4500 B.C.

IV^TH-VI^TH DYNASTY 4000-3300 B.C.

XII^TH DYNASTY 2800-2500 B.C.

XVIII^TH DYNASTY 1500-1350 B.C.

XIX^TH DYNASTY 1300-1100 B.C.

XXVI^TH DYNASTY 700-500 B.C.]

The IVth to VIth Dynasties are best known by the series of pyramids (see

PYRAMID) in the region of Memphis. Beyond these tombs, and the temples

attached to them, there are very few fixed monuments; of Cheops and Pepi

I. there are temple foundations at Abydos (q.v.), and a few blocks on

other sites; of Neuserre (Raenuser) there is a sun temple at Abusir; and

of several kings there were tablets in Sinai, now in the Cairo Museum. A

few tablets of the IXth Dynasty have been found at Sakkara, and a tomb

of a prince at Assiut. Of the XIth Dynasty is the terrace-temple of

Menthotp III. recently excavated at Thebes: also foundations of this

king and of Sankhkere at Abydos. In the XIIth Dynasty there is the

celebrated red granite obelisk of Heliopolis, one of a pair erected by

Senwosri (Senusert) I. in front of his temple which has now vanished.

Another large obelisk of red granite, 41 ft. high, remains in the Fayum.

The most important pictorial tombs of Beni Hasan belong to this age; the

great princes appear to have largely quarried stone for their palaces,

and to have cut the quarry in the form of a regular chamber, which

served for the tomb chapel. These great rock chambers were covered with

paintings, which show a large range of the daily life and civilization.

The pyramids and temples of Senwosri II. and III. and Amenemhe III.

remain at Illahun, Dahshur and Hawara. The latter was the celebrated

Labyrinth, which has been entirely quarried away, so that only banks of

chips and a few blocks remain. At the first of these sites is the most

perfect early town, of which hundreds of houses still remain. Of

Senwosri III. there are the forts and temples above the second cataract

at Semna and Kumma. Of the Hyksos age there are the scanty remains of a

great fortified camp at Tell el-Yehudia.

In the XVIIIth to XXth Dynasties we reach the great period of monuments.

Of Amasis (Aahmes) and Amenophis I. there are but fragments left in

later buildings; and of the latter a great quantity of sculpture has

been recovered at Karnak. The great temple of Karnak had existed since

the XIth Dynasty or earlier, but the existing structure was begun under

Tethmosis (Tahutmes) I., and two of the great pylons and one obelisk of

his remain in place. He also built the simple and dignified temple of

Medinet Habu at Thebes, which was afterward overshadowed by the

grandiose work of Rameses III. The next generation--Tethmosis II. and

Hatshepsut--added to their father's work; they also built another pylon

and some of the existing chambers at Karnak, set up the great obelisks

there and carved some colossi. The obelisks are exquisitely cut in red

granite, each sign being sawn in shape by copper tools fed with emery,

and the whole finished with a perfection of proportion and delicacy not

seen on other granite work. One obelisk being overthrown and broken we

can examine the minute treatment of the upper part, which was nearly a

hundred feet from the ground. The principal monument of this period is

the temple of Deir el Bahri, the funeral temple of Hatshepsut, on which

she recorded the principal event of her reign, the expedition to Punt.

The erasures of her name by Tethmosis III., and reinsertions of names

under later kings, the military scenes, and the religious groups showing

the sacred kine of Hathor, all add to the interest of the remarkable

temple. It stands on three successive terraces, rising to the base of

the high limestone cliffs behind it. The rock-cut shrine at Speos

Artemidos, and the temple of Serabit in Sinai are the only other large

monuments of this queen yet remaining. Tethmosis III. was one of the

great builders of Egypt, and much remains of his work, at about forty

different sites. The great temple of Karnak was largely built by him;

most of the remaining chambers are his, including the beautiful

botanical walls showing foreign plants. Of his work at Heliopolis there

remain the obelisks of London and New York; and from Elephantine is the

obelisk at Sion House. On the Nubian sites his work may still be seen at

Amada, Ellesia, Ibrim, Semna and in Sinai at Serabit el Khadem. Of

Amenophis II. and Tethmosis IV. there are no large monuments, they being

mainly known by additions at Karnak. The well known stele of the sphinx

was cut by the latter king, to commemorate his dream there and his

clearing of the sphinx from sand. Amenophis III. has left several large

buildings of his magnificent reign. At Karnak the temple had a new front

added as a great pylon, which was later used as the back of the hall of

columns by Seti I. But three new temples at Karnak, that of Month

(Mentu), of Mut and a smaller one, all are due to this reign, as well as

the long avenue of sphinxes before the temple of Khons; these indicate

that the present Ramesside temple of Khons has superseded an earlier one

of this king. The great temple of Luxor was built to record the divine

origin of the king as son of Ammon; and on the western side of Thebes

the funerary temple of Amenophis was an immense pile, of which the two

colossi of the Theban plain still stand before the front of the site,

where yet lies a vast tablet of sandstone 30 ft. high. The other

principal buildings are the temples of Sedenga and of Solib in Nubia.

Akhenaton has been so consistently eclipsed by the later kings who

destroyed his work, that the painted pavement and the rock tablets of

Tell el Amarna are the only monuments of his still in position, beside a

few small inscriptions. Harmahib (Horemheb) resumed the work at Karnak,

erecting two great pylons and a long avenue of sphinxes. The rock temple

at Silsila and a shrine at Jebel Adda are also his.

In the XIXth Dynasty the great age of building continued, and the

remains are less destroyed than the earlier temples, because there were

subsequently fewer unscrupulous rulers to quarry them away. Seti I.

greatly extended the national temple of Karnak by his immense hall of

columns added in front of the pylon of Amenophis III. His funerary

temple at Kurna is also in a fairly complete condition. The temple of

Abydos is celebrated owing to its completeness, and the perfect

condition of its sculptures, which render it one of the most interesting

buildings as an artistic monument; and the variety of religious subjects

adds to its importance. The very long reign and vanity of Rameses II.

have combined to leave his name at over sixty sites, more widely spread

than that of any other king. Yet very few great monuments were

originated by him; even the Ramesseum, his funerary temple, was begun by

his father. Additions, appropriations of earlier works and scattered

inscriptions are what mark this reign. The principal remaining buildings

are part of a court at Memphis, the second temple at Abydos, and the six

Nubian temples of Bet el-Wali, Jerf Husein, Wadi es-Sebua, Derr, and the

grandest of all--the rock-cut temple of Abu Simbel, with its

neighbouring temple of Hathor. Mineptah has left few original works; the

Osireum at Abydos is the only one of which much remains, his funerary

temple having been destroyed as completely as he destroyed that of

Amenophis III. The celebrated Israel stele from this temple is his

principal inscription. The rock shrines at Silsila are of small

importance. There is no noticeable monument of the dozen troubled years

of the end of the dynasty.

The XXth Dynasty opened with the great builder Rameses III. Probably he

did not really exceed other kings in his activity; but as being the last

of the building kings at the western side of Thebes, his temple has

never been devastated for stone by the claims of later work. The whole

building of Medinet Habu is about 500 ft. long and 160 wide, entirely

the work of one reign. The sculptures of it are mainly occupied with the

campaigns of the king against the Libyans, the Syrians and the negroes,

and are of the greatest importance for the history of Egypt and of the

Mediterranean lands. Another large work was the clearance and rebuilding

of much of the city of Tell el Yehudia, the palace hall of which

contained the celebrated coloured tiles with figures of captives. At

Karnak three temples, to Ammon, Khonsu and Mut, all belong to this

reign. The blighted reigns of the later Ramessides and the priest-kings

did not leave a single great monument, and they are only known by

usurpations of the work of others. The Tanite kings of the XXIst Dynasty

rebuilt the temple of their capital, but did little else. The XXIInd

Dynasty returned to monumental work. Sheshonk I. added a large wall at

Karnak, covered with the record of his Judaean war. Osorkon (Uasarkon)

I. built largely at Bubastis, and Osorkon II. added the great granite

pylon there, covered with scenes of his festival; but at Thebes these

kings only inscribed previous monuments. The Ethiopian (XXVth) dynasty

built mainly in their capital under Mount Barkal, and Shabako and

Tirhaka (Tahrak) also left chapels and a pylon at Thebes; and the latter

added a great colonnade leading up to the temple of Karnak, of which one

column is still standing.

Of the Saite kings there are very few large monuments. Their work was

mainly of limestone and built in the Delta, and hence it has been

entirely swept away. The square fort of brickwork at Daphnae (q.v.) was

built by Psammetichus I. Of Apries (Haa-ab-ra, Hophra) an obelisk and

two monolith shrines are the principal remains. Of Amasis (Aahmes) II.

five great shrines are known; but the other kings of this age have only

left minor works. The Persians kept up Egyptian monuments. Darius I.

quarried largely, and left a series of great granite decrees along his

Suez canal; he also built the great temple in the oasis of Kharga.

The XXXth Dynasty renewed the period of great temples. Nekhtharheb built

the temple of Behbet, now a ruinous heap of immense blocks of granite.

Beside other temples, now destroyed, he set up the great west pylon of

Karnak, and the pylon at Kharga. Nekhtnebf built the Hathor temple and

great pylon at Philae, and the east pylon of Karnak, beside temples

elsewhere, now vanished. Religious building was continued under the

Ptolemies and Romans; and though the royal impulse may not have been

strong, yet the wealth of the land under good government supplied means

for many places to rebuild their old shrines magnificently. In the Fayum

the capital was dedicated to Queen Arsinoe, and doubtless Ptolemy

rebuilt the temple, now destroyed. At Sharona are remains of a temple of

Ptolemy I. Dendera is one of the most complete temples, giving a noble

idea of the appearance of such work anciently. The body of the temple is

of Ptolemy XIII., and was carved as late as the XVIth (Caesarion), and

the great portico was in building from Augustus to Nero. At Coptos was a

screen of the temple of Ptolemy I. (now at Oxford), and a chapel still

remains of Ptolemy XIII. Karnak was largely decorated; a granite cella

was built under Philip Arrhidaeus, covered with elaborate carving; a

great pylon was added to the temple of Khonsu by Ptolemy III.; the inner

pylon of the Ammon-temple was carved by Ptolemy VI. and IX.; and granite

doorways were added to the temples of Month and Mut by Ptolemy II. At

Luxor the entire cella was rebuilt by Alexander. At Medinet Habu the

temple of Tethmosis III. had a doorway built by Ptolemy X., and a

forecourt by Antoninus. The smaller temple was built under Ptolemy X.

and the emperors. South of Medinet Habu a small temple was built by

Hadrian and Antoninus. At Esna the great temple was rebuilt and

inscribed during a couple of centuries from Titus to Decius. At El Kab

the temple dates from Ptolemy IX. and X. The great temple of Edfu, which

has its enclosure walls and pylon complete, and is the most perfect

example remaining, was gradually built during a century and a half from

Ptolemy III. to XI. The monuments of Philae begin with the wall of

Nekhtnebf. Ptolemy II. began the great temple, and the temple of

Arhesnofer (Arsenuphis) is due to Ptolemy IV., that of Asclepius to

Ptolemy V., that of Hathor to Ptolemy VI., and the great colonnades

belong to Ptolemy XIII. and Augustus. The beautiful little riverside

temple, called the "kiosk," was built by Augustus and inscribed by

Trajan; and the latest building was the arch of Diocletian.

Farther south, in Nubia, the temples of Dabod and Dakka were built by

the Ethiopian Ergamenes, contemporary of Ptolemy IV.; and the temple of

Dendur is of Augustus. The latest building of the temple style is the

White Monastery near Suhag. The external form is that of a great temple,

with windows added along the top; while internally it was a Christian

church. The modern dwellings in it have now been cleared out, and the

interior admirably preserved and cleaned by a native Syrian architect.

Beside the great monuments, which we have now noticed, the historical

material is found on several other classes of remains. These are: (1)

The royal tombs, which in the Vth, VIth, XVIIIth, XIXth and XXth

Dynasties are fully inscribed; but as the texts are always religious and

not historical, they are less important than many other remains. (2) The

royal coffins and wrappings, which give information by the added

graffiti recording their removals; (3) Royal tablets, which are of the

highest value for history, as they often describe or imply historical

events; (4) Private tombs and tablets, which are in many cases

biographical. (5) Papyri concerning daily affairs which throw light on

history; or which give historic detail, as the great papyrus of Rameses

III., and the trials under Rameses X. (6) The added inscriptions on

buildings by later restorers, and alterations of names for

misappropriation. (7) The statues which give the royal portraits, and

sometimes historical facts. (8) The _ostraca_, or rough notes of work

accounts, and plans drawn on pieces of limestone or pottery. (9) The

scarabs bearing kings' names, which under the Hyksos and in some other

dark periods, are our main source of information. (10) The miscellaneous

small remains of toilet objects, ornaments, weapons, &c., many of which

bear royal names.

Every object and monument with a royal name will be found catalogued

under each reign in Petrie's _History of Egypt_, 3 vols., the last

editions of each being the fullest. (W. M. F. P.)

F. _Chronology._--1. _Technical._--The standard year of the Ancient

Egyptians consisted of twelve months of thirty days[17] each, with five

epagomenal days, in all 365 days. It was thus an effective compromise

between the solar year and the lunar month, and contrasts very

favourably with the intricate and clumsy years of other ancient systems.

The leap-year of the Julian and Gregorian calendars confers the immense

benefit of a fixed correspondence to the seasons which the Egyptian year

did not possess, but the uniform length of the Egyptian months is

enviable even now. The months were grouped under three seasons of four

months each, and were known respectively as the first, second, third and

fourth month [HRGs: N12:Z1], [HRGs: N12:two], [HRGs: N12:three], [HRGs:

N12:four] of [HRGs: SA-x:t-hrw] (i'h.t) "inundation" or "verdure,"

[HRGs: pr:r-t:hrw] _pr.t_ (_pro_) "seed-time," "winter," and [HRGs:

S:N35B-hrw] _smw (shom)_ "harvest," "summer," the [HRGs:

Z93-Z92-Hr:r-w-rnp-t:Z1] "five (days) over the year" being outside these

seasons and the year itself, according to the Egyptian expression, and

counted either at the beginning or at the end of the year. Ultimately

the Egyptians gave names to the months taken from festivals celebrated

in them, in order as follows:--Thoth, Paophi, Athyr, Choiak, Tobi,

Mechir, Phamenoth, Pharmuthi, Pachons, Payni, Epiphi, Mesore, the

epagomenal days being then called "the short year." In Egypt the

agricultural seasons depend more immediately on the Nile than on the

solar movements; the first day of the first month of inundation, i.e.

nominally the beginning of the rise of the Nile, was the beginning of

the year, and as the Nile commences to rise very regularly at about the

date of the annual heliacal rising of the conspicuous dog-star Sothis

(Sirius) (which itself follows extremely closely the slow retrogression

of the Julian year), the primitive astronomers found in the heliacal

rising of Sothis as observed at Memphis (on July 19 Julian) a very

correct and useful starting-point for the seasonal year. But the year of

365 days lost one day in four years of the Sothic or Julian year, so

that in 121 Egyptian years New Year's day fell a whole month too early

according to the seasons, and in 1461 years a whole year was lost. This

"Sothic period" or era of 1460 years, during which the Egyptian New

Year's day travelled all round the Sothic year, is recorded by Greek and

Roman writers at least as early as the 1st century B.C. The epagomenal

days appear on a monument of the Vth Dynasty and in the very ancient

Pyramid texts. They were considered unlucky, and perhaps this accounts

for the curious fact that, although they are named in journals and in

festival lists, &c., where precise dating was needed, no known monument

or legal document is dated in them. It is, however, quite possible that

by the side of the year of 365 days a shorter year of 360 was employed

for some purposes. Lunar months were observed in the regulation of

temples, and lunar years, &c., have been suspected. To find uniformity

in any department in Egyptian practice would be exceptional. By the

decree of Canopus, Ptolemy III. Euergetes introduced through the

assembly of priests an extra day every fourth year, but this reform had

no acceptation until it was reimposed by Augustus with the Julian

calendar. Whether any earlier attempt was made to adjust the civil to

the solar or Sothic year in order to restore the festivals to their

proper places in the seasons temporarily or otherwise, is a question of

great importance for chronology, but at present it remains unanswered.

Probably neither the Sothic nor any other era was employed by the

ancient Egyptians, who dated solely by regnal years (see below). An

inscription of Rameses II. at Tanis is dated in the 400th year of the

reign of the god Seth of Ombos, probably with reference to some

religious ordinance during the rule of the Seth-worshipping Hyksos;

Rameses II. may well have celebrated its quater-centenary, but it is

wrong to argue from this piece of evidence alone that an era of Seth was

ever observed.

From the Middle Kingdom onward to the Roman period, the dates upon

Egyptian documents are given in regnal years. On the oldest monuments

the years in a reign were not numbered consecutively but were named

after events; thus in the Ist Dynasty we find "the year of smiting the

Antiu-people," in the beginning of the IIIrd Dynasty "the year of

fighting and smiting the people of Lower Egypt." But under the IInd

Dynasty there was a census of property for taxation every two years, and

the custom, continuing (with some irregularities) for a long time,

offered a uniform mode of marking years, whether current or past. Thus

such dates are met with as "the year of the third time of numbering" of

a particular king, the next being designated as "the year after the

third time of numbering." Under the Vth Dynasty this method was so much

the rule that the words "of numbering" were commonly omitted. It would

seem that in the course of the next dynasty the census became annual

instead of biennial, so that the "times" agreed with the actual years of

reign; thenceforward their consecutive designation as "first time,"

"second time," for "first year," "second year," was as simple as it well

could be, and lasted unchanged to the fall of paganism. The question

arises from what point these regnal dates were calculated. Successive

regnal years might begin (1) on the anniversary of the king's accession,

or (2) on the calendrical beginning in each year (normally on the first

day of the nominal First month of inundation, i.e. 1st Thoth in the

later calendar). In the latter case there would be a further

consideration: was the portion of a calendar year following the

accession of the new king counted to the last year of the outgoing king,

or to the first year of the new king? In Dynasties I., IV.-V., XVIII.

there are instances of the first mode (1), in Dynasties II., VI. (?),

XII., XXVI. and onwards they follow the second (2). It may be that the

practice was not uniform in all documents even of the same age. In

Ptolemaic times not only were Macedonian dates sometimes given in Greek

documents, but there were certainly two native modes of dating current;

down to the reign of Euergetes there was a "fiscal" dating in papyri,

according to which the year began in Paophi, besides a civil dating

probably from Thoth; later, all the dates in papyri start from Thoth.

The Macedonian year is found in early Ptolemaic documents. The fixed

year of the Canopic decree under Euergetes (with 1st Thoth on Oct. 22)

was never adopted. Augustus established an "Alexandrian" era with the

fixed Julian year, retaining the Egyptian months, with a sixth

epagomenal day every fourth year. The capture of Alexandria having taken

place on the 1st of August 30 B.C., the era began nominally in 30 B.C.,

but it was not actually introduced till some years later, from which

time the 1st Thoth corresponded with the 29th of August in the Julian

year. The vague "Egyptian" year, however, continued in use in native

documents for some centuries along with the Alexandrian "Ionian" year.

The era of Diocletian dates from the 29th of August 284, the year of his

reforms; later, however, the Christians called it the era of the Martyrs

(though the persecution was not until 302), and it survived the Arab

conquest. The dating by indictions, i.e. Roman tax-censuses, taking

place every fifteenth year, probably originated in Egypt, in A.D. 312,

the year of the defeat of Maxentius. The indictions began in Payni of

the fixed year, when the harvest had been secured.

See F. K. Ginzel, _Handbuch der mathematischen und technischen

Chronologie_, Bd. i. (Leipzig, 1906), and the bibliography in the

following section.

2. _Historical._[18]--As to absolute chronology, the assigning of a

regnal year to a definite date B.C. is clear enough (except in

occasional detail) from the conquest by Alexander onwards. Before that

time, in spite of successive efforts to establish a chronology, the

problem is very obscure. The materials for reconstructing the absolute

chronology are of several kinds: (1) Regnal dates as given on

contemporary monuments may indicate the _lengths of individual reigns_,

but not with accuracy, as they seldom reach to the end of a reign and do

not allow for co-regencies. Records of the time that has elapsed between

two regnal dates in the reigns of different kings are very helpful; thus

stelae from the Serapeum recording the ages of the Apis bulls with the

dates of their birth and death have fixed the chronology of the XXVIth

Dynasty. Traditional evidence for the lengths of reigns exists in the

Turin Papyrus of kings and in Manetho's history; unfortunately the

papyrus is very fragmentary and preserves few reign-lengths entire, and

Manetho's evidence seems very untrustworthy, being known only from late

excerpts. (2) The duration of a period may be calculated by

_generations_ or the probable average lengths of reigns, but such

calculations are of little value, and the succession of generations even

when the evidence seems to be full is particularly difficult to

ascertain in Egyptian, owing to adoptions and the repetition of the same

name even in one family of brothers and sisters. (3) _Synchronisms_ in

the histories of other countries furnish reliable dates--Greek, Persian,

Babylonian and Biblical dates for the XXVIth Dynasty, Assyrian for the

XXVth; less precise are the Biblical date of Rehoboam, contemporary with

the invasion of Shishak (Sheshonk) in the XXIInd Dynasty, and the date

of the Babylonian and Assyrian kings contemporary with Amenhotp IV. in

the XVIIIth Dynasty. The last, about 1400 B.C., is the earliest point to

which such coincidences reach. (4) _Astronomical data_, especially the

heliacal risings of Sothis recorded by dates of their celebration in the

vague year. These are easily calculated on the assumption first that the

observations were correctly made, secondly that the calendrical dates

are in the year of 365 days beginning on 1st Thoth, and thirdly that

this year subsequently underwent no readjustment or other alteration

before the reign of Euergetes. The assumption may be a reasonable one,

and if the results agree with probabilities as deduced from the rest of

the evidence it is wise to adopt it; if on the other hand the other

evidence seems in any serious degree contrary to those results it may be

surmised that the assumption is faulty in some particular. The harvest

date referred to below helps to show that the first part of the

assumption is justified.

+---------+---------------+--------+----------+------+--------+------+

| |(minimum date).|1894 &c.|1904-1908.|1905. | 1906. |1906. |

+---------+---------------+--------+----------+------+--------+------+

| I. | } | 4777 | 3315 | 3360 | 3400 | 5510 |

| II. | } 3180 | 4514 | | 3110 | | 5247 |

| III. | } | 4212 | 2895 | 2810 | 2980 | 4945 |

| IV. | 2830 | 3998 | 2840 | 2720 | 2900 | 4731 |

| V. | | 3721 | 2680 | 2630 | 2750 | 4454 |

| VI. | 2530 | 3503 | 2540 | 2480 | 2625 | 4206 |

| VII. | | 3322 | | 2300 | 2475 | 4003 |

| VIII. | | 3252 | | | | 3933 |

| IX. | | 3106 | 2360 | | 2445 | 3787 |

| X. | | 3006 | | | | 3687 |

| XI. | | 2821 | 2160 | 2100 | 2160 | 3502 |

| XII. | 2130 | 2778 | 2000 | 2000 | 2000 | 3459 |

| XIII. | 1930 | 2565 | 1791 | | 1788 | 3246 |

| XIV. | | 2112 | | | | 2793 |

| XV. | 1780 | | 1680[*] | | | 2533 |

| XVI. | | 1928 | | | | 2249 |

| XVII. | | 1738 | | | | 1731 |

| XVIII. | 1530 | 1587 | 1580 | | 1580 | 1580 |

| XIX. | 1320 | 1327 | 1321 | | 1350 | 1323 |

+---------+---------------+--------+----------+------+--------+------+

[*] Meyer makes XIII. overlap XV. (Hyksos), and XIV. (Xoite),

contemporary with XVI. (Hyksos) and XVII. (Theban).

The duration of the reigns in several dynasties is fairly well known

from the incontrovertible evidence of contemporary monuments. The XXVIth

Dynasty, which lasted 139 years, is particularly clear, and synchronisms

fix its regnal dates to the years B.C. within an error of one or two

years at most. The lengths of several reigns in the XIIth, XVIIIth and

XIXth Dynasties are known, and the sum total for the XIIth Dynasty is

preserved better than any other in the Turin Papyrus, which was written

under the XIXth Dynasty. The succession and number of the kings are also

ascertained for other dynasties, together with many regnal dates, but

very serious gaps exist in the records of the Egyptian monuments, the

worst being between the XIIth and the XVIIIth Dynasties, between the

XIth and the VIth, and at Dynasties I.-III. For the chronology before

the time of the XXVIth Dynasty Herodotus's history is quite worthless.

Manetho alone of all authorities offers a complete chronology from the

1st Dynasty to the XXXth. In the case of the six kings of the XXVIth

Dynasty, Africanus, the best of his excerptors, gives correct figures

for five reigns, but attributes six instead of sixteen years to Necho;

the other excerptors have wrong numbers throughout. For the XIXth

Dynasty Manetho's figures are wrong wherever we can check them; the

names, too, are seriously faulty. In the XVIIIth Dynasty he has too many

names and few are clearly identifiable, while the numbers are

incomprehensible. In the XIIth Dynasty the number of the kings is

correct and many of the names can be justified, but the reign-lengths

are nearly, if not quite, all wrong. The summations of years for the

Dynasties XII. and XVIII. are likewise wrong. It seems, therefore, that

the known texts of Manetho, serviceable as they have been in the

reconstruction of Egyptian history, cannot be employed as a serious

guide to the early chronology, since they are faulty wherever we can

check them, even in the XXVIth Dynasty whose kings were so celebrated

among the Greeks. There remain the astronomical data. Of these, the

Sothic date furnished by a calendar in the Ebers Papyrus of the 9th year

of Amenophis I. (when interpreted on the assumption stated above), and

another at Elephantine of an uncertain year of Tethmosis III., tally

well with each other (1550-1546, 1474-1470 B.C.) and with the Babylonian

synchronism (not yet accurately determined) under Amenhotp IV.

(Akhenaton). Another Sothic date of the 7th year of Senwosri III. on a

Berlin papyrus from Kahun, similarly interpreted (1882-1878 B.C.), gives

for the XIIth Dynasty a range from 2000 to 1788 B.C. This (discovered by

L. Borchardt in 1899) seems to offer a welcome ray, piercing the

obscurity of early Egyptian chronology; guided by it the historian Ed.

Meyer, and K. Sethe have framed systems of chronology in close agreement

with each other, reaching back to the 1st Dynasty at about 3400 B.C. To

Meyer is further due a calculation that the Egyptian calendar was

introduced in 4241-4238 B.C.[19] Their results in general have been

adopted by the "Berlin school," including Erman, Steindorff (in

Baedeker's _Egypt_) and Breasted in America. Nevertheless many

Egyptologists are unwilling to accept the new chronology, the chief

obstacle being that it allows so short an interval for the six dynasties

between the XIIth and the XVIIIth. If the XIIth Dynasty ended about 1790

B.C. and the XVIIIth began about 1570 B.C., taking what seems to be the

utmost interval that it permits, 220 years have to contain a crowd of

kings of whom nearly 100 are already known by name from monuments and

papyri, while fresh names are being added annually to the long list; the

shattered fragments of the last columns in the Turin Papyrus show space

for 150 or perhaps 180 kings of this period, apparently without reaching

the XVIIth Dynasty. An estimate of 160 to 200 kings would therefore not

be excessive. The dates that have come down to us are very few; the only

ones known from the Hyksos period are of a 12th and a 33rd year. In the

Turin Papyrus two reign-lengths of less than a year, seven others of

less than five years each, one of ten years and one of thirteen seem

attributable to the XIIIth and XIVth Dynasties. Probably most of the

reigns were short, as Manetho also decidedly indicates. It is possible

that the compiler of the Turin Papyrus, who excluded contemporary reigns

in the period between the VIth and the XIIth Dynasties, here admitted

such; nor is a correspondingly large number of kings in so short a

period without analogies in history. Professor Petrie, however, thinks

it best, while accepting the evidence of the Sirius date, to suppose

further that a whole Sothic period of 1460 years had passed in the

interval, making a total of 1650 years for the six dynasties in place of

220 years. This, however, seems greatly in excess of probability, and

several Egyptologists familiar with excavation are willing to accept

Meyer's figures on archaeological grounds. To the present writer it

seems that Meyer's chronology provides a convenient working theory, but

involves such an improbability in regard to the interval between the

XIIth and the XVIIIth Dynasties that the interpretation of the Sothic

date on which it is founded must be viewed with suspicion until clear

facts are found to corroborate it. Corroboration has been sought by

Mahler, Sethe and Petrie in the dates of new moons, of warlike and other

expeditions, and of high Nile, but their evidence so far is too vague

and uncertain to affect the question seriously. It is remarkable that no

records of eclipses are known from Egyptian documents. The interesting

date of the harvest at El Bersha, quoted by Meyer in Breasted,

_Records_, i. p. 48, confirms the Sothic date for the XIIth Dynasty in

some measure, but it belongs to the same age, and therefore its evidence

would be equally vitiated with the other by any subsequent alteration in

the Egyptian calendar. Before the discovery of the Kahun Sothic date,

Professor Petrie put the end of the XIIth Dynasty at 2565 B.C.; in 1884

even Meyer had suggested 1930 B.C. as its _minimum_ date, thus allowing

400 years at the least for the period from the XIIIth Dynasty to the

XVIIth.

+----------+-----------+-------+------------+----------+---------+

| | 1884. | 1884. | 1905-1906. | 1906. | 1904. |

+----------+-----------+-------+------------+----------+---------+

| XIX. | 1490 | 1320 |(1328), 1322| 1350 | |

| XX. | 1280 | 1180 | 1202 | 1200 | |

| XXI. | 1100 | 1060 | 1102 | 1090 | |

| XXII. | 975 | 930 | 952 | 945 | |

| XXIII. | 810 | | 755 | 745 | |

| XXIV. | 720 | | 721 | 718 | |

| XXV. | 715 | 728 | 715 | 712 | |

| XXVI. | 664 | 663 | 664 | 663 | |

| XXVII. | 525 | 525 | 525 | 525 | 425 |

| XXVIII. | 415 | | 405 | | c. 405 |

| XXIX. | 408 | | 399 | | 399 |

| XXX. | 387 | | 378 | | 380 |

| Ochus | 350 | | 342 | | 342 |

+----------+-----------+-------+------------+----------+---------+

Beyond the XIIth Dynasty estimates must again be vague. The spacing of

the years on the Palermo stone has given rise to some calculations for

the early dynasties. Others are grounded on the dates of certain

operations which are likely to have taken place at particular seasons

of the year so that they can be roughly calculated on the Sothic basis,

others on Manetho's figures, average lengths of reigns, evidence of the

Turin Papyrus, &c.

Table I. page 79 shows the chronology of the first nineteen dynasties,

according to recent authorities, before and after the discovery of the

Kahun Sothic date.

The dates of the earlier dynasties in this table are always intended to

be only approximate; for instance, Meyer in 1904 allowed an error of 100

years either of excess or deficiency in the dates he assigned to the

dynasties from the Xth upwards.

The other dynasties are dated as in Table II. by different authorities.

See Ed. Meyer, _Geschichte des Altertums_, Bd. i. (Stuttgart, 1884),

_Geschichte des alten Agyptens_ (1887), _Agyptische Chronologie_

(_Abhandl._ of Prussian Academy) (Berlin, 1904, with the supplement

_Nachtrage zur agypt. Chronologie_, ib. 1907); K. Sethe, "Beitrage zur

altesten Geschichte Agyptens" (in his _Untersuchungen_, Bd. iii.)

(Leipzig, 1905); J. H. Breasted, _Ancient Records of Egypt_,

"Historical Documents," vol. i. (Chicago, 1906); W. M. F. Petrie, _A

History of Egypt_, vol. i. (London, 1884), vol. iii. (1905),

_Researches in Sinai_ (London, 1906); G. Maspero, _Histoire ancienne

des peuples de l'orient_ (Paris, 1904); A. Wiedemann, _Agyptische

Geschichte_ (Gotha, 1884); articles by Mahler and others in the

_Zeitschrift fur agyptische Sprache and Orientalistische

Literaturzeitung_ (recent years). (F. Ll. G.)

Encyclopaedia Britannica, 11th Edition, "Edwardes, Sir Herbert Benjamin" to "Ehrenbreitstein" Volume 9, Slice 1 · 第 17 / 28 题