CHAPTER IV._The Fayûm and Lake Mœris

HISTORY OF THE FAYÛM PROVINCE — THE FAYÛM BEFORE LAKE MŒRIS.

The past history of the Fayûm Province was probably the following.

In the beginning, the sea covered the whole of the area which

afterwards became the Nile Valley and its bordering hills. By a slow

process of upheaval the dry land appeared above the level of the

waters, but, in the process, what was formerly the uniform bed of the

sea became an uneven surface with heights and depressions and faults.

The Nile Valley, the Fayûm and Wadi Raiân depressions were the

ultimate result of this action, the formation of the Nile Valley being

completed by the flow of water. At first the upper reaches of the Nile

Valley held its waters at a high level by barriers of rock, but in

process of time these barriers were cut through, the bed scoured out

by the constant flow of water, and the water surface lowered beyond

its present levels, to be again gradually raised to the levels of

to-day. The lower reaches of the Nile Valley were probably at first

occupied by the sea, until the yearly deposit of the floods formed

the Delta, and pushed the land thus formed further and further out,

forcing the sea to retire. As the surface of the Delta became raised

and prolonged by successive annual deposits, the bed and water-surface

of the Nile also would have risen with it, until the levels at which

the Nile flowed in its lower reaches became those of the present day.

At a point in the hills dividing the Nile Valley and the Fayûm, about

10 kilometres south of Lahûn, near Sidment-el-Gebel, Dr. Schweinfurth

found “the indubitable witnesses of a Pliocene sea” preserved in

the form of oysters (_Ostrea cucullata_ and _Pecten_) in the white

sand at about R.L. 60 to 70. (See map and Plate XXI.) The Pliocene

sea, he maintains, intruded up the Nile Valley and extended on both

sides of it as far as the contours of 60 to 70 metres above sea-level

allowed. The place, where the oysters in the white sand were found,

is situated in a flat depression on the plateau of the narrowest part

of the hills separating the Nile Valley and the Fayûm. The Pliocene

sea flowed here from one depression into the other, and would have

succeeded in scouring away the barrier between the two depressions,

if it had not been interrupted by a later upheaval or a withdrawal of

the sea. In a similar manner there seems to have been made from Lahûn

to Hawârah, the present communication between the Nile Valley and the

Fayûm by which the Bahr Yûsuf entered to form Lake Mœris, either

as an old Nile-arm or as an artificial branch of the natural arm.

Besides this passage, the desert tract on the north of it offers,

as breaks in the higher ridge, several depressions, which must have

been accessible to the Pliocene sea. The present railway line to

the Fayûm crosses the hills at one of these depressions.

On account of the regularity of the limestone strata in the Fayûm

and Wadi Raiân, a violent upheaval cannot be supposed to have been

the cause that produced these two depressions, and it is more likely

that they are the results of erosion and scour.

In a passage I have already quoted from Mr. Petrie’s writings, he

states that in prehistoric times the Nile was a vastly greater river

than it is now, due to an enormous rainfall. Let us then assume the

Pliocene sea-level at R.L. 60 to 70, according to Dr. Schweinfurth,

and an enormous volume of water coming down from the Upper Nile Valley

according to Mr. Petrie. The sea which then invaded the Nile Valley

would have been in communication with the Red Sea, and may have had

a tide of 5 metres range, which would have complicated the currents,

and added to the scouring action. Below Wâstah, the channel of the

Nile Valley, contained between the Libyan and Arabian Hills, is much

contracted. Under these conditions the floods from the Upper Nile

would escape sideways through the depressions in the Libyan Hills

into the Fayûm and the Wadi Raiân; into the latter by way of the

Wadi Muellah, and possibly by other connections with the Nile Valley

of a low enough level.

A large volume of water would thus be forced westwards out of the

Nile Valley, and would find its way towards the sea to the west

of Alexandria. In its endeavours to dig out a channel for itself

it would erode laterally, or scour down vertically according as

the softer material was found in one direction or the other. The

different points of delivery and volumes of the water contributing

to the flow, and the nature of the rock met with in its path would

determine the form the channel would take at the various stages of

its development. Tremendous eddies would be produced by projections

of hard rock and contractions of the irregular channels, which would

lift material from the bed and produce deep holes.

Had this action not been arrested by the further upheaval of the

land, perhaps a second Nile Valley would have been formed branching

from the main valley at Behnesa, passing through the Wadi Raiân and

Fayûm depression, and continuing through the Wadis Fadhi and Faragh,

west of Memphis and Cairo, to the Natron Lakes, and thence to the sea

west of Alexandria; or returning to the Nile Valley, or side of what

is now the Delta, but was then sea, at some point south of Alexandria.

If this theory is a sound one, the remarkable depressions of the

Fayûm and Wadi Raiân are paralleled on a small scale by the deep

holes (_bayarât_) scoured out below the bridges or cuts in the

Upper Egypt Basin embankments, or outside a breach in a Nile bank.

The section, given on Plate XVIII., of 50 miles of the Nile Valley

and desert opposite Cairo, is taken from Mr. Cope Whitehouse’s

article, entitled “The Pyramid Hill of Gizeh,” which appeared

in the ‘Quarterly’ some time ago. It shows (assuming it on

Mr. Whitehouse’s authority to be a correct representation of the

ground) the channels, that I have named, in the arrested state of

development which they had reached, when the flow of water, which

was digging them out, was cut off.

[Illustration: PLATE XVIII.

SECTION OF 50 MILES ON LAT. 30°.

Borrowed from Cope Whitehouse.

_Note._—The dotted line represents the level of the Pliocene Sea,

but is not in Cope Whitehouse’s section, which was drawn for

another purpose.]

After the upheaval had raised their borders above sea-level, the sea

would be henceforward excluded from the depressions and be replaced

by the waters of the Nile, which would have entered by the gap in

the Libyan Hills at Lahûn. The upheaval continuing and the Nile

at the same time scouring out its bed, a condition of levels would

have come about, under which there would have been an annual inflow

during the floods and outflow into the Nile on the floods subsiding.

In a long series of years there would result a thick deposit of Nile

mud in the Fayûm, the richest deposit being found near the point

where the waters first spread themselves out after passing through

the comparatively narrow defile in the Libyan Hills. The tendency

of the entrance of the waters, heavily charged with silt, into an

extended basin filled with water would be to form a delta of Nile

deposit similar to that which the Nile itself has formed in entering

the sea, modified by the form of the basin bed, which would not have

been uniform like that of the sea. On account of the momentum of

the body of water leaving the defile and entering the lake, there

would be formed a projecting ridge (contour R.L. 23) of deposit in

the direction of the flow, while the deposit, resulting from the

end and side spills, would form in gentle slopes with approximately

parallel and rounded contours (R.L. 17 to 10) on both sides, and at

the end of the projecting ridge as shown in Plate XIX.

Thus, in consequence of the former action of rain on the surrounding

hills, greater or less at different points along the borders according

as the inclination of the adjacent watersheds was towards or away

from the depression, and in consequence also of the deposition of

Nile mud by the annual entry of the river flood, the bed of the

lake formed in the depression would take the shape shown by the

contours on the diagram of the Fayûm, Plate XIX. The former of

these processes of change of the bed and borders of the depression

may have ceased before the latter commenced to operate, or both

may have acted simultaneously or alternately, which would account

for layers of Nile mud being found near the Hawârah pyramid lying

below the water-borne detritus of the hills.

From a knowledge of the rules which govern the formation of a Delta,

and the consequent raising of the level of the river which forms it,

we might conclude that the Nile floods in past times were not as high

as they are nowadays, though on the other hand we do not know that

the floods were not greater in volume, and the probability is that

they were. But whatever may be the truth about former Nile levels,

the levels, at which Nile deposits are found in the Fayûm, furnish

evidence of the maximum height to which the flood waters rose in

the Lake.

At the commencement of the passage by which the waters entered the

Fayûm, the highest Nile deposit is at R.L. 26·00. At Hawârah it

is at R.L. 24·50, and along the ridge reaching out towards Medineh,

R.L. 23·50. Probably, therefore, the water in the Lake reached

about R.L. 26·50 at the commencement of the gorge, but the level

of the Lake itself rarely, if ever, exceeded R.L. 25·00.

[Illustration: PLATE XIX.

CONTOURED DIAGRAM OF THE FAYÛM DEPRESSION.

_Note._—This being a diagram only, all minor folds and indentations

of contours have been suppressed, so as to show more clearly the

general shape.

The upper contours along the north-west side of the Lake must not

be considered to be accurately represented, as no surveys of this

side have been made.]

It will be as well to determine, before going further, whether the

present volumes of the Nile flood would suffice to fill the Lake

Fayûm to the level of R.L. 25·00, which I have assumed it must

have reached to account for the Nile deposits on its borders at

R.L. 24·50.

At the time we are considering, no artificial works existed for

controlling the inflow and outflow of the Lake.

We have first to determine the lowest level to which the Lake would

have been lowered by the outflow and evaporation at the end of the

summer, and before the next rise of the river commenced. The Nile may

have flowed at a lower level then (that is, in very early prehistoric

times) than now, the summer volume was probably greater then than now,

as the unbreached barriers in the upper reaches would have ponded

up the water into reservoirs, which, slowly emptying themselves,

would have helped to raise the summer level; the flow-out also from

the Fayûm Lake would have raised at its exit the level of the summer

Nile, at least during the winter months, but not necessarily during

the summer months, as it may have expended itself sooner. There are

thus three unknown elements in the problem, and nothing to witness

to the former _minimum_ levels in the same way that the Nile deposit

does to the maximum levels. We are therefore forced to base the

calculations on existing levels, and to suppose that the effect on

the water surface of the former lower level of the Nile bed was

counterbalanced by the increased volume of water flowing in the

river bed. At any rate at some period sooner or later the present

minimum level of the Nile must have been reached.

The probability is that the exit channel of the lake joined the

Nile at or near Wâstah. Up to the end of April the rate of fall

of the river exceeds the rate at which evaporation would lower

a lake surface, but in May the river falls about 15 centimetres,

and not at all on an average in June. Hence, up to the end of April

the fall of the river would determine the rate of fall of the lake,

but in May and June the fall due to evaporation would rule the rate.

R.L.

The level of the Nile at Wâstah at the end of April

may be taken to be 18·75

The distance from Wâstah to Lahûn is 30 kilometres.

„ Lahûn to Hawârah 15 „

Total 45 „

Allowing a water surface slope for the outflow of ¹⁄₂₅₀₀₀,

the difference in water surface level between the lake at

Hawârah and the Nile at Wâstah would be 1·80

-----

Hence the water surface of the lake at the end of April

would be at 20·55

Evaporation would still further lower

the surface in May by ·25

„ „ „ June „ ·30

---

0·55

-----

The water surface in the lake would thus become 20·00

Probably the commencement of the flow into the lake would

not take place till a few days after the middle of July,

which may be taken as the time when the lake reaches its

lowest level for the year. Evaporation for this period of

July must therefore also be allowed for, say 0·20

-----

The lowest level of the lake would therefore be 19·80

The mean surface area of the Lake Fayûm between R.L. 19·80 and

25·00 may be taken as 2000 million square metres.

Evaporation during the ninety days of flood would tend to lower the

level 70 centimetres.

The quantity of water required to raise the lake from R.L. 19·80

to 25·00 would therefore be 2,000,000,000 × (5·20 + 0·70) =

11,800 million cubic metres, or a daily average for ninety days of

131,111,111 cubic metres.

At the commencement of these ninety days the inflow would be small,

increasing rapidly to the maximum; and again, as the lake level rose

and the Nile began to fall in October, the inflow would gradually

decrease to nothing by the end of the ninety days. Hence it would

probably be necessary to suppose a maximum daily discharge into the

lake of about 200 million cubic metres a day for part of the time.

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

| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |

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

| | for | | | |

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

| | | day. | | |

| | | | | |

|Sept. 1| 11 | 67 } | 28·08 | 26·64 |

| | | } Average| | |

| „ 11| 11 | 108 } 112 | 28·11 | 26·67 |

| | | } | | |

| „ 21| 11 | 162 } | 28·14 | 26·70 |

| | | | | |

|Oct. 1| 13 | 157 } | 28·14 | 26·70 |

| | | } Average| | |

| „ 11| 12 | 174 } 192 | 28·15 | 26·71 |

| | | } | | |

| „ 21| 14 | 245 } | 28·12 | 26·68 |

| | | | | |

|Nov. 1| 15 | 372 | 28·05 | 26·61 |

| | | | | |

| „ 11| 11 | 372 | 27·05 | 25·61 |

| | | | | |

| „ 21| 11 | 67 | 26·40 | 24·98 |

| | | | | |

|Dec. 1| 12 | 63 | 25·88 | 24·40 |

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

Colonel Western, in a note on the Wadi Raiân, shows that for a

certain number of years out of sixteen years (1872 to 1887, of which

he had the statistics to work with) there is a surplus discharge in

the Nile which might be abstracted without in any way interfering with

the ordinary irrigation of the Delta. In his calculations he takes 565

million cubic metres in twenty-four hours as the discharge required

by the Delta during September and the first half of October. He is,

of course, referring to the conditions of the Delta at the present

time. He gives the table which appears on the preceding page, to

which I have added the corresponding gauge levels at Beni Suef and

Magnûnah mouth for reference further on.

The month of August has not been given, as the conclusion was come to

that there was no water to spare in August under present conditions.

The calculation, giving these figures, is made assuming that

regulation on the Barrage below Cairo is not called in to assist;

the discharges allowed to Lower Egypt, after abstracting the above

quantities, being sufficient to give a water surface at the level

required for irrigation without any heading-up. Now, the quantity

required to fill the lake to R.L. 25·00, as found before, is 11,800

million cubic metres. This, let us suppose, would be made up thus:—

September 30 days at 112 millions = 3,360 millions.

October 31 „ 192 „ = 5,952 „

Parts of August

and November 29 „ 86 „ = 2,494 „

------

Total 11,806 „

These discharges could be abstracted without affecting Lower Egypt

irrigation, as it exists now, for eleven years out of sixteen. This,

however, is not a quite correct statement as applied to each of

the eleven years, since the discharges given in the table are

the _averages_ of those years in which a surplus discharge is

available. Among these would be some very high years, in which it

would be possible to fill the lake to a higher level than 25·00,

and years when this level would not be reached.

Besides the years, for which the averages of surplus discharges

are taken, there would be five years out of sixteen when the supply

would fall short in September, the month of highest level.

There is no necessity in this stage to seek for a connection between

the lake and the Nile for filling the lake, as the water would find

its way in large volumes across all the low parts of the valley

into the drainage depression along the edge of the Libyan Desert,

now known as the Bahr Yûsuf.

The levels at which the Nile deposits are found in the Fayûm, the

discharges which might be drawn off from the Nile, and the area of

the Fayûm Lake are thus all in agreement with the supposition that

the level of the Fayûm lake was yearly raised from about R.L. 20·00

to 25·00, and that the level attained was never sufficiently high

to cause an overflow into the Wadi Raiân.

THE FAYÛM AS LAKE MŒRIS.

Judging then from the evidence furnished by Nile deposit and

fresh-water shells, there is nothing to support the theory that there

has been any _great_ change in the Nile levels since the waters

first found their way into the Fayûm. But whatever conditions of

levels and volumes of Nile discharges we start with, we must at

some date arrive at the period of present conditions. According to

Mr. Petrie, however, there is good evidence (which I will give later

on) to support the theory that in Herodotus’ time the Nile levels

were 2 metres lower than now, and it is further probable that, at

the time of the transformation of the Lake Fayûm into Lake Mœris,

the Nile volumes were what they are now. I shall, however, discuss

the subject, assuming that present conditions as to Nile levels also

existed at the formation of Lake Mœris, and point out afterwards

how the difference of 2 metres in the level at the time of Herodotus

affects the conclusions.

The formation of Lake Mœris is credited to Amenemhat III. of the

XIIth Dynasty, who gained a reputation for making great improvements

in the Irrigation Department, and carrying out hydraulic works of

immense benefit to the country, about 2500 B.C., or within 5000

years of to-day. Now, 5000 years, geologically estimated, is a

very short time, and we may assume, without much chance of error,

that he had practically the same _general_ conditions to work with

as regards _relative_ levels of land and water and Nile discharges

as we have to-day.

The Fayûm Lake would, in his time, have filled and emptied itself,

and low Niles would now and then have occurred. But even without the

occurrence of a low Nile it would have been observed that during the

summer, when the surface of the lake in the Fayûm had reached its

lowest level, there was a considerable area of land, formed of Nile

deposit, laid bare. A shining light among the king’s subjects may

have conceived a project for reclaiming this land from the annual

inundation, submitted his project to the king and obtained his

approval to its execution.

The problem would be that, while reclaiming the land, the advantages

to be derived from a natural regulator to the Nile should not be

lost. The return flow which took place from the lake would, while

it was uncontrolled by artificial works, be greatest when there was

least benefit to be derived from a raising of the Nile water-surface;

and least in the summer months, when an addition to the Nile discharge

would have been most needed. The effect of the uncontrolled early

return-flow might even have acted disadvantageously in checking

the fall of the Nile level in December and the following winter

months, and thereby delaying the draining of the lands which had

been inundated by the preceding flood.

Now, although the amount of water stored in the lake might, according

to the project we are considering, become less in quantity than it

was before control was introduced, still by husbanding the water

till the season of low Nile, when an addition to the Nile was most

required, the same benefits might be obtained from the reservoir

during the summer months as were felt when the lake acted under

nature’s guidance only; and in addition to this, the flood water

would be more quickly drained off the inundated lands, and crops

be sown earlier, than would have been the case when the return-flow

from the lake commenced with the fall of the Nile.

The project would then consist of works for admitting water into the

lake until it rose to a certain height and then excluding any more,

with the exception of about 10 to 15 million cubic metres a day,

which would be required to make good the loss by evaporation over

an area of about 1500 million square metres. The same work could be

adapted to hold in the water on the fall of the river, and let it

flow back when required; or this duty might be performed by a separate

regulator. Some point between Lahûn and Hawârah would be chosen to

make a bank and regulator to bar the Bahr Yûsuf passage through the

hills. Probably a convenient place was found near Hawârah pyramid,

close to which the Labyrinth was built.

By limiting the level of the lake to R.L. 22·50, all the area above

that level, which is that of the highest plateau in the Fayûm,

would be left uncovered, and fitted for cultivation and habitations.

The regulator established and the level of the water in the lake

being thereby brought under control, it would be safe to commence

the occupation of the reclaimed land.

All this is speculation as to how the natural Fayûm Lake became

transformed into the artificially controlled Lake Mœris of

Herodotus. There is little to base speculation upon, and therefore

the transformation process may be varied within certain limits at

the choice of the speculator.

Mr. Petrie’s views, already given at length, suggest a modification

of the foregoing, which I will give as an alternative idea.

The natural drainage channel for carrying off the overflow of the

Nile, now the Bahr Yûsuf, being situate in the lowest lying lands,

would of necessity be kept clear by the annual discharge of the

waters from the inundated lands. On reaching the south end of the

isolated piece of desert in front of Lahûn, part of its discharge

would go east of this island, part to the west. The western discharge

would, at Lahûn, either enter the Fayûm, or part would do so and

part continue northwards. At the north end of the isolated piece of

desert, the discharge, going northwards, would again divide up, some

of it continuing to flow in the channel under the Libyan Desert,

some finding its way back to the Nile near Wâstah. Under these

circumstances the channel north of Lahûn would not be so likely

to keep itself clear as the channel to the south of Lahûn. Thus

the channel conducting the water to the Fayûm would remain clear,

while that carrying the outflow would be less likely to do so. The

outflow would also be more within soil (i.e. below the land surface)

than the inflow and therefore under worse conditions for keeping its

channel open. The outflow channel might therefore deteriorate, and,

as there would be water flowing in it during the hot season at a low

velocity, reeds might grow and obstruct the water-way. The draining

of the Fayûm Lake would therefore be unsatisfactorily done, and the

water would stand in it at a comparatively high level till the end

of the summer. This would encourage the growth of rushes also in the

Lahûn-Hawârah passage, which would check the inflow, and, while

preventing the rise of the lake, would favour silt deposit. “This

then,” in Mr. Petrie’s words, “was the state in which the great

engineering monarchs found the province:—a basin full of overflow

Nile water, replenished at each inundation through a marshy shallow

inlet and with much of its bottom so raised by deposits as to have

become almost marsh ground, like the present lakes about the coast.”

A channel to drain off the water at low Nile and reclaim the marshes

would have been the first work to suggest itself, and the necessity

for regulators, to prevent any excess of water from entering by the

cleared channel, would then have been felt. The flow of water in the

drain leading back to the Nile may have suggested the grand idea of

utilising the lake as a regulator for the excesses and shortcomings

of the Nile.

Amenemhat I., who was a sportsman, and prided himself on “hunting

the lion and bringing back the crocodile a prisoner,” may have

chosen the point which projected farthest into the Lake (now

Medinet-el-Fayûm and Kom-Faris) for the site of his palace and

garden. Here he would escape from the pestilential odours that he

probably kept about him in his original home, and at the same time

enjoy the desert air, cooled by the immense surface of the lake,

on which he could indulge his taste for crocodile hunting. The

natural attractions which so rare a combination of desert air and

open space of water would afford, would probably, under the royal

favour, have made the new watering place and sanatorium a fashionable

resort for the aristocracy, who would soon have built villas on the

borders of the lake along the esplanade of Crocodilopolis, or Shed,

as its first name appears to have been.

The modern Helouan, a dry treeless spot on the eastern desert a few

miles south of Cairo, found favour in the eyes of the late Khedive,

Tewfik Pasha, and became a sanatorium for the Cairenes, to whom a

good draught of pure desert air must be a real treat after living in

the tainted air of Egypt’s unsavoury capital. Helouan has sulphur

springs to boast of, but Crocodilopolis had a fine expanse of sweet

water to look out upon, instead of a dry, blinding and scorching

desert.

The area above R.L. 22·50, at first reclaimed from the lake between

Lahûn and Medineh, would have been about 10,000 acres; and the king

and his favourites would, according to nature, have taken possession

of it. But there would have been an extensive shore of habitable

ground round the margins of the lake and on each side of the canal

connecting the lake with the Nile, which would be within reach of

a perpetual water supply and with the means of water transport at

the door almost of the habitations.

When the attractions of Crocodilopolis and its suburbs became

more appreciated and the population increased, the want of a

larger area of cultivable land would be felt. There would also be

another inconvenience, besides scarcity of arable land, felt by

the dwellers in Crocodilopolis, arising from the yearly fall of

the water surface. At high water, when the lake was filled up to

R.L. 22·50, embarkation and disembarkation from boats might take

place at Crocodilopolis itself, but, as the waters of the lake

were allowed to flow back to the Nile, and the water level fell to

R.L. 20·00 or 19·50, there would be laid bare a muddy margin of 2

kilometres breadth between the city and the water, which could with

difficulty be crossed, and if crossed, the depth of water along the

edge of the lake would be found too shallow to allow boats to get

close to the land. One or both of these wants probably was the cause

that led to the construction of the bank from the high land, east of

Edwah to Biahmu, and thence, it appears probable, to Medineh. (See

Plate XX.) The bank from Edwah to Biahmu runs generally along

contour R.L. 17·50, and therefore would have been formed in water,

probably with material transported from the high lands on the east

and south-east of Edwah. This may account for the material of which

the bank is formed being different from the land on either side of

it, and for the absence of any trace of a borrow pit from which the

bank was made. Such a bank, connected with the high land east of

Edwah, running along contour R.L. 17·50 and joined from Biahmu to

the high land at Crocodilopolis, would have enclosed an area, from

which the lake water would have been excluded, the other two sides of

the enclosure being formed by the natural ridge at the end of which

Crocodilopolis was built, and by the high land connecting this ridge

near Hawârat-el-Maqta with the commencement of the artificial bank

at Edwah. From the levels of the rock underlying the Nile deposit

at Hawârah it seems probable that the entering waters flowed in

greatest volume past the Hawârah pyramid, separating the reclaimed

tract from the desert on which the pyramid stands. Possibly this was

the only channel by which the waters were admitted to the lake, and

across which the regulator was built in the immediate neighbourhood

of the Labyrinth and pyramid. The present course of the Bahr Yûsuf

beyond Hawârah may have been closed and the Medineh ridge connected

with the high desert on the left of the Bahr Yûsuf, near the modern

head of the Gharaq canal. At present it is so connected, and the

connection is only broken by artificial canals cut through it.

[Illustration: PLATE XX.

DIAGRAM SHOWING THE LIMITS OF LAKE MŒRIS ACCORDING TO THE THEORY

FAVOURED IN THIS PAPER.

_Note._—The contours along the N.W. side of the lake are not

accurately shown as this side has not been surveyed.

Outside the contour of R.L. 25·00 the dotted surface represents

uncultivated desert. Within the contour of R.L. 21·00 the area

crossed by parallel lines represents the water-surface of Lake Mœris.

The unshaded and undotted area represents the cultivable land in

and around Lake Mœris.]

Thus would the second reclamation have been contrived, and it would

have added about 7000 feddans of good land to the 10,000 feddans

included in the first reclamation.

The Edwah bank, however, does not stop at Biahmu, but (a fact Linant

did not remark) continues in its first alignment to Kalabiîn, past

Saliîn and Fidimîn, to a point a little to the north of Sinrû. (See

Plate XXI.) Thence it curves round towards the south, and crosses the

Abûksah Railway at a point half-way between Agamiîn and Abshiwâî

(Abû Ginshû). At this crossing are extensive remains of an old

town on the line of the bank. The remains of several smaller towns

are also to be found between the railway and the point in the bank

north of Sinrû, all on the line of the bank. From this length of

bank other banks at different angles to the main bank seem to have

existed; some appeared to go towards Medineh, others towards Abûksah

in the direction of Lake Qurûn.

Following the main bank on the other side of the railway along

contour R.L. 17·50 or thereabouts, a ravine is crossed, on the far

edge of which, in the line of the bank, is a peculiar black mound,

formed of layers of cinders or some material that has been blackened

by fire. The bank is thence traceable for about a thousand metres

more, continuing in a due southerly direction, and then it is lost

among the thick plantations of date-trees which commence at this

point and extend to Tobhâr.

[Illustration: PLATE XXI.

_Stanford’s Geogl. Estabt. London_

MAP TO SHOW POSITION OF SUPPOSED REGULATORS OF LAKE MŒRIS.]

Does it double back to Medineh through Talat and Sinbat; or continue

along its contour through Tobhâr, Manâshi, Disyâ, Abgig, and to

the desert near Azab? (See Map at end.) There were found no traces

to show. A further examination of the ground on both sides of the

Abûksah Railway has thrown no light on the matter. It would appear

that the traces of the bank end somewhere in the triangle formed by

joining the villages of Abû Ginshû, Agamiîn, and Sinrû.

I thought it might be possible that, either from near Sinrû or west

of Agamiîn, the bank was carried up the slope, at right angles to

the contours, to Medineh to close the side of the new area to be

reclaimed, but I looked for its traces in vain. But, _supposing_

the existence of this side-bank, the new area, enclosed by the bank

joining Medineh, Sinrû (or Agamiîn), and Biahmu, and bounded also by

the former bank from Biahmu to Medineh, would add about 10,000 feddans

to that already reclaimed, bringing up the total to 27,000 feddans.

The want of a larger cultivable area would thus by these reclamations

be partly met.

Now, as the artificial bank was formed along contour R.L. 17·50

(under the conditions assumed), and the water of the lake, as will be

shown afterwards, never fell below R.L. 19·50, there would at lowest

water be 2 metres depth of water up against the bank, and the most

convenient point of embarkation and disembarkation for the inhabitants

of Crocodilopolis on their way to Memphis would be at Biahmu, which

they would reach by the road running along the top of the artificial

bank formed between Crocodilopolis and Biahmu. They would take ship

at Biahmu for the north-east corner of the lake, whence the desert

route runs direct to Memphis. This is the direct road used to-day

by the natives, who journey between Medineh (Crocodilopolis) and

Bedreshên (Memphis), the road passing through Tamîyah, the site

of which was, at the time that we are considering, 30 metres below

water. (See Map at end.) It was therefore strictly correct to say

that Lake Mœris lay between the Memphite and Arsinoïte Nomes.

The ruins at Biahmu, of which Plate XXII. shows the present condition,

are not in the line of the main bank from Edwah to Kalabiîn, but

about 300 metres to the north of it. It is probable, therefore, that

they were placed at the end of a projecting bank, in connection with

the main bank, alongside which boats could lie. The two colossal

figures (Plate XXIV.) mounted on their pedestals would have formed

splendid landmarks for ships crossing from the north shore of

the lake.

[Illustration: PLATE XXII.

BIAHMU RUINS.]

Thus we have a vast lake of about 1600 million square metres of

water surface, and an area of 27,000 feddans (acres) reclaimed from

it, with Crocodilopolis in the reclaimed area, and the Hawârah

pyramid and the Labyrinth on the shores of the lake at the point

where the waters entering the lake were controlled. (Plates XX. and

XXI.) This, I believe, was the Lake Mœris of Herodotus and of those

who confirmed his testimony, and Mr. Petrie, as I have shown before,

holds the same general views.

But his theory, that the two pyramids, which Herodotus stated stood

about the middle of the lake, were identical with the two colossi

of Biahmu, of which the present ruins are all that is left, does not

appear to me a satisfactory explanation of the account of them given

by Herodotus, though to what Herodotus said he was _told_ I think

no importance need be attached, as statements in a foreign language

are apt to be misunderstood or misinterpreted. Arab traditions also

may be curious and interesting, but they are of little value as a

record of the past.

It will be worth while to calculate the inflow and outflow of the lake

in the condition, in which I have supposed it to be, as Lake Mœris,

and to see if the existing features of the Nile Valley throw any light

on the statements of the first historical witnesses to its existence.

In my former calculations of the volumes of water required to fill

the Fayûm depression to higher levels, I have taken the area of the

depression at 2000 million square metres. But our mean water level

is now R.L. 21·00, and the area of the lake will be reduced.

The present taxed area in the Fayûm

is nearly 234,000 feddans.[8]

-------

The actual cultivated area is more

probably about 280,000 „

The area of the Birket-el-Qurûn is

about 70,000 „

-------

Total 350,000 „

350,000 feddans = 1,470,000,000 square metres.

Add the uncultivated area below

R.L. 21·00 = 300,000,000

-------------

Total 1,770,000,000

Deduct areas reclaimed from

Lake Mœris:—

1st reclamation 40,000,000

2nd „ 24,000,000

3rd „ 40,000,000

---------- 104,000,000

-------------

Remaining for area of Lake Mœris 1,666,000,000

or, say, 1600 million square metres.

Now let us suppose that the exit channel joins the Nile at the

point where Kosheshah Escape has been built, a little above Wâstah

(Plate XXI.)

The lowest summer levels at Wâstah were in 1887, 18·82; 1888,

18·12; 1889, 18·26.

Let us then call the mean L.W.L. of Wâstah 18·50.

As the exit channel would be of considerable dimensions, we may suppose

a water-surface slope, at the _final_ date of outflow, of ¹⁄₅₀₀₀₀. The

distance from Wâstah to Lahûn is 25 kilometres, and from Lahûn to

Hawârah 10 kilometres; total 35 kilometres. The fall in this distance

would then be 0·70, which would make the level at Hawârah, or the level

of the lake (18·50 + 0·70 =) 19·20. But the outflow, even at the date of

the lowest level of the Nile, before the rise commenced, may be assumed

to have raised the Nile 30 centimetres, which would make the lowest

level of the lake R.L. 19·50.

The water surface of Lake Mœris would therefore oscillate between the

level of 22·50, beyond which the regulator would be used to prevent

its rising, and R.L. 19·50, below which it could not fall on account

of the level which the Nile maintains at its point of union with it.

On the map of Linant Pasha’s, published in 1854, before the

railway and Ibrahimîyah Canal were made, the channels in the

Nile Valley shown in connection with the Lahûn entrance are the

Bahr Yûsuf, coming from the south, and the Magnûnah Canal going

north. The latter, after going north for 13 kilometres, is joined by

three channels, the first taking off from the Nile at Beni Suef,

and the second and third a little south of Ashment. The third

is the old Magnûnah. These channels unite in the neighbourhood

of Abûsir-el-Malaq, the second passing by the village of Bûsh,

the immense heap, on which the modern village stands, witnessing

to the existence of an ancient town on that spot. Abûsir-el-Malaq

also was evidently in the far past a place of importance. North

of Abûsir-el-Malaq the channel of the Magnûnah is continued as

a single channel along the west desert for 4 or 5 kilometres when

it bifurcates, one branch continuing under the western desert, and

the second going east to join the Nile at the point where Kosheshah

Escape now stands. Some of these channels are shown on Plate XXI.

Having evidence of no other channels, let us suppose that the

Magnûnah Canal with its mouth near Ashment was the feeder, the

branch to Kosheshah Escape the exit channel, and the eastern branch

under the western desert a canal of supply to Memphis. (The Bahr

Yûsuf I do not consider as in those times a channel in _direct_

communication with the Nile.)

With R.L. 22·50 and 19·50 as the maximum and minimum levels of Lake

Mœris, there would, under these circumstances and unless prevented

by the use of a regulator, have been a flow into the lake from about

the 15th July to the 15th January, and a return flow from the 15th

January to the 15th July.

The levels of the Nile and lake would have been approximately as

follows:—

R.L.

{ Lake 19·50

Lowest water levels, {

when lake ceases to { Junction at Abûsir-el-Malaq 19·40

flow out and the {

flow-in is about to { Magnûnah Nile mouth at Ashment 20·00

commence. {

{ Outlet into Nile at Kosheshah Escape 19·00

{ Lake 22·50

Water levels on 15th {

January, when flow-in { Abûsir-el-Malaq 22·00

would cease and lake {

return-flow would { Magnûnah mouth 23·00

commence. {

{ Outlet, Kosheshah 21·00

{ Lake 21·50 to 22·50

{

Ordinary flood maximum { Abûsir-el-Malaq 25·30 to 27·40

levels at end of {

September. { Magnûnah mouth 26·00 to 28·00

{

{ Outlet, Kosheshah 24·80 to 27·00

The year 1888 was one of very low Nile flood, but even in that year,

from about 20th July to 15th November, the Nile level at Magnûnah

mouth was above R.L. 23·00, and reached R.L. 26·00 at the top of

the flood.

The quantity of water required to fill the lake from R.L. 19·50 to

22·50, and to allow for its evaporation for six months, is calculated

as follows:—

Million cubic

metres.

Volume required to raise lake 3 metres = 1600 million

square metres × 3 4800

Volume required to make good 6 months’ evaporation

= 1600 million square metres × 1·30 2080

Volume required for irrigation of 25,000 feddans

reclaimed, for 6 months 100

----

Total volume required 7580

The greater part of this would be poured in during the three months

of flood, say 5000 million cubic metres in 100 days, or an average

of 50 million cubic metres a day.

There now remains to be calculated the discharge that this reservoir

would give back to the Nile during the low water months.

Million cubic

metres.

The content of the stratum of water between R.L. 22·50

and 19·50 is 1600 million square metres × 3 4800

Of this there would be lost by evaporation during the

6 months 1600 million square metres × 1 1600

----

There would thus remain available for purposes of

irrigation 3200

The reclaimed land round Arsinoë (about 25,000 feddans)

would require about 50 million cubic metres for its

irrigation during the 6 months of winter and summer 50

----

The balance available for the Nile Valley would be 3150

If we suppose this water husbanded and made use of only during the

100 days of summer, when its want is most felt, the lake would give

an average daily discharge to the Nile of 31½ million cubic metres,

that is, the low Nile discharges would be doubled and raised from

30 millions to 60 millions. But by a careful distribution of this

stored-up water between the months of April, May, and June, and ten

days of July, it would have been possible to keep up the discharges

constantly to seventy millions, as shown in the table below:—

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

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

|March | 70,000,000 | Nil | 70,000,000 |

| | | | |

|April | 45,000,000 | 25,000,000 | 70,000,000 |

| | | | |

|May | 34,000,000 | 36,000,000 | 70,000,000 |

| | | | |

|June | 34,000,000 | 36,000,000 | 70,000,000 |

| | | | |

|July 1 to 8| 45,000,000 | 25,000,000 | 70,000,000 |

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

The supply from the reservoir will thus be

(36 million × 61 days) + (25 million × 38 days) = 3146 million

cubic metres.

Such an increase of the summer supply would probably have the effect

of doubling the area under summer crops in the Delta, if it could be

obtained now, but it is not clear how it could have been utilised

without a barrage to raise the water-level, and without, as far as

we know, any Sêfi (summer) canals.

It is not, however, imagined that in the days of Lake Mœris there

was any such scientifically economical control of the Nile waters,

as supposed in the foregoing calculations, but they are given to show

what the _possibilities_ of a lake under the conditions assumed would

be. My aim has been to establish its utility, in answer to Linant’s

argument against the developed Lake Qurûn theory, which consisted in

a demonstration that this lake could have served no useful purpose,

such as the historians credited it with.

Possibly the needs of navigation were a more important consideration

in those days than summer irrigation, though not given the first

place now. An increased volume supplied at low water to the shallowing

water-routes would even for this object have been a gain.

The disappearance of all trace of the regulators is felt by some

to be a difficulty in the way of the admission of their former

existence, inasmuch as the ancients built on such a colossal

scale. But the Labyrinth, which was built out of the reach of water,

has disappeared, and its traces were only of late years identified

in a mass of stone chips and trenches filled with sand, which

underlay the foundations. Such being the fate of the Labyrinth,

which must have surpassed the regulators as a structure of colossal

dimensions, it is only natural to suppose that the stones forming

the superstructure of the regulators should also have been removed

for the same objects as the stones of the Labyrinth, and, if the

materials of the floors were spared, it would only be on account of

their situation being unfavourable to their removal. But, if spared,

the action of running water would in time cause their disappearance,

either by undermining them and burying them to depths below their

original position, or by depositing a layer of mud above them. In

the latter case they may still exist in a situation where some future

excavation may chance to bring them to light again.

Hence I hold that, in the face of Strabo’s explicit statement that

there were regulators at each end of the canal for controlling the

inflow and outflow of the lake, the objection of want of evidence of

the former existence of regulators is not sufficiently strong to be

allowed to have much weight against the theory, that the submerged

Fayûm, with the entry and exit of its waters kept under control

by regulators, and its water-levels ranging between R.L. 22·50

and 19·50, was the Lake Mœris of Herodotus; the Arsinoïte Nome,

in connection with it, consisting of the reclaimed high lands within

the limits of the lake and along the borders of the lake itself and

margins of the feeder canal. It is admitted, as a weak point in this

theory, that unless the Arsinoïte Nome can be imagined as extending

into the Nile Valley, the area of cultivable land comprised in the

nome is very limited. Let us see how far such a conception of Lake

Mœris is in accord with the testimony of the ancient records which

relate to it.

Strabo remarks, that “the Lake Mœris, by its magnitude and depth,

is able to receive the superabundance of water which flows into

it at the time of the rise of the river, without overflowing the

inhabited and cultivated parts of the province.” This could not be

made to accord with M. Linant’s theory, and can only be understood

by supposing that the _high_ lands in the Fayûm were reclaimed, and

that the flood waters filled the rest of the Fayûm without rising

so high as to inundate them. At the same time the area of the lake

must have been great to fit it, under this limitation, to receive

a sufficient volume to moderate the Nile floods and to be able to

return to the Nile a sufficiently large supply to supplement the low

Nile discharge in an efficient manner. The figures representing the

possible performances of the lake have been given.

Diodorus also says, “Accordingly the king dug a canal from the

Nile to the basin 10 miles in length and 300 feet in breadth.” This

would seem to show that the canal took off from the Nile immediately

opposite Lahûn, for, if its mouth had been carried further south

up the Nile, its length would have exceeded 10 miles. The breadth

of 300 feet equals 91½ metres. This also agrees with the size of

the inflow and outflow canals which would have been necessary to

discharge the calculated volumes.

A canal with bed width 90 metres, depth 8 metres, and water surface

slope ¹⁄₂₀₀₀₀, will discharge about 69½ million cubic metres per 24

hours, which agrees with the calculation for the inflow.

A canal with bed width of 90 metres, depth 6½ metres, and water surface

slope of ¹⁄₂₅₀₀₀, would discharge 34 million cubic metres per 24

hours, which agrees with the calculations for the outflow.

Diodorus remarks also that “a little south of Memphis a canal was

cut for a lake, brought down in length from the city 40 miles.”

This is somewhat obscure, but may mean that a canal 40 miles in

length was dug to connect Memphis with the lake. Supposing the canal

that fed the lake from the Nile passed Abûsir-el-Malaq as already

described, the canal to connect the lake and Memphis would have

taken off from the feeder canal at or near Abûsir-el-Malaq. The

distance from that point to the modern Bedreshên, the station at

which tourists alight for viewing the ruins of Memphis, is 47 miles,

and it is quite possible that what was known as Memphis extended

several miles to the south, and that the canal was only 40 miles in

length between Abûsir-el-Malaq and Memphis.

Herodotus states that the lake is six months filling and six months

emptying. With the surface level of the lake limited to R.L. 22·50,

and with the mouth of the feeder canal near Ashment and the outflow

at Kosheshah Escape, such would be the case, for though the lake

might be filled during the months of flood to R.L. 22·50, there

would still be a flow into the lake for the remainder of the six

months to meet loss by evaporation.

On the shores of the Lake Mœris would stand the Labyrinth with

its pyramid (Hawârah), and within the lake area Crocodilopolis or

Arsinoë (Medinet-el-Fayûm). The lake would serve as a moderator for

the Nile in flood, and would supplement the short supply of the river

in summer. It would have had a perimeter of 220 kilometres against

Herodotus’ perimeter of 360 kilometres, assuming that Jomard and

others were right in supposing that Herodotus made use of the little

stadius. The greatest depth of the lake, when filled to R.L. 22·50,

would have been at least 70 metres against Herodotus’ depth of

92 metres.

The lake itself was not artificially made, as supposed by Herodotus,

but was brought under control by the works of man.

The water in the lake came from the Nile and not from local sources.

The lake lay between the Arsinoïte and Memphite Nomes.

Herodotus and others after him state that there existed two pyramids,

crowned by colossal statues, centrally situated in the lake, and

Herodotus thus describes them:—“The lake lies oblong north and

south, being, in its deepest part, 50 fathoms deep. It tells its

own story that it is artificially made, for about the middle of the

lake stand two pyramids, each rising above the surface of the water

50 fathoms, and that part of them which is built under water being

as much more. On the top of each (or _against_ each, according to

Cope Whitehouse’s translating) is a colossal figure seated on a

throne. So these pyramids are 100 fathoms high.”

It is supposed by some that the ruins at Biahmu (Plate XXII.) are

the remains of what Herodotus described as pyramids. Possibly they

are, but it seems a somewhat feebly supported supposition. Though a

colossus on the top of a pyramid is not what one would expect to find

there, and the dimensions of the pyramids given by Herodotus are, of

course, obtained second-hand and may be worthy of little reliance,

still the evidence, that the Biahmu ruins are the remains of what

he referred to, does not seem to me convincing.

[Illustration: PLATE XXIII.

RESTORATION OF A COLOSSUS, BIAHMU, FAYÛM.

Reproduced from Petrie’s ‘Hawara, Biahmu, and Arsinoë.’]

Mr. Flinders Petrie considers that these ruins are the remains of

what was once a place of embarkation and disembarkation on the lake,

consisting of a flight of steps, flanked by two colossi raised

on high pedestals. In one of his publications he has pictorially

reproduced these colossi, their pedestals and enclosure walls, in a

most complete manner (Plate XXIII.), his only personal acquaintance

with the figures consisting of a broken nose and fragments of stone

drapery, discovered among the débris of their ruins. To one of the

uninitiated, even after studying the evidence adduced by Mr. Petrie,

there appears to be a great deal of esoteric ingenuity or imagination

in the process of reproduction, but one or the other of these gifts

is a necessity in dealing with anything Egyptological on account of

the incompleteness of the historical records. Plate XXIII. gives a

reproduction of Mr. Petrie’s restoration, and Plate XXII. is from

a photograph of the ruins as they exist now. The reduced levels have

been added by me.

In Mr. Petrie’s restoration he has shown the worshipper down below,

standing on the general country level. My idea is that the interior

of the courtyard was filled up to the level of the surrounding wall

and formed a landing-place, as I have indicated in Plate XXIV. by

the upper figure and the boats. If the water stood up against the

courtyard wall, as I have shown, since there is no mortar in the

joints of the masonry, the man below (as shown in Mr. Petrie’s

unmodified representation) would have been drowned out.

This landing-place was probably connected at the back by a bank with

the main bank running through Biahmu.

It appears that some say that the lake waters flowed into and out of

the lake by one and the same channel, and that others say there were

two canals, one for the inflow and another for the outflow. These two

accounts may be reconciled by supposing that the former referred to

the canal south of Abûsir-el-Malaq, which is a single canal, Plate

XXI., and that the latter referred to the channels, one of which was

for the inflow from the Nile near Ashment, to Abûsir-el-Malaq, and

the other for the outflow from Abûsir-el-Malaq to Memphis or perhaps

to the point on the Nile where Kosheshah Escape stands. Strabo is

obscure on this point. He writes:—“Then follows the Heracleöte

Nome, in a large island, near which is the canal on the right hand,

which leads into Libya, in the direction of the Arsinoïte Nome;

so that the canal has two entrances, a part of the island on one

side being interposed between them.” Possibly this refers to

the isolated bit of desert in front of and to the east of Lahûn,

which is “a part of the island” interposed between the Bahr

Yûsuf coming from the south and passing to Lahûn on the left of

the island, and the Magnûnah canal or special lake-feeder, which

passes on the right of the island, turns south towards Lahûn and

leads into Libya in the direction of the Arsinoïte Nome.

[Illustration: PLATE XXIV.

MODIFIED REPRESENTATION OF THE BIAHMU RUINS RESTORED.]

I have consulted Smith’s ‘Dictionary of Greek and Roman Geography,’ to

find out what the editor considered to be the accepted views about Lake

Mœris in 1868. Under “Mœris Lacus” I find that the views stated agree in

the main with those favoured in this paper. Linant’s theory is not

referred to, and probably had not been heard of by the editor. The

following passage about the connecting canal occurs in the Dictionary,

which can hardly be made to refer to the Bahr Yûsuf as the main

lake-feeder, though assumed to do so in the passage itself:—“There are

grounds for supposing that ancient travellers did not always distinguish

between the connecting canal, the Bahr Yûsuf, and Mœris itself. The

canal was unquestionably constructed by man’s labour, nor would

it present any insuperable difficulties to a people so laborious as

the Egyptians. If, then, we distinguished, as Strabo did, the canal

from the lake, the ancient narratives may be easily reconciled with

one another and with modern surveys. Even the words of Herodotus

may apply to the canal, which was of considerable extent, beginning

at Hermopolis (Ashmunîn) and running four leagues west, and then

turning from north to south for three leagues more, until it reaches

the lake.”

Now the old Magnûnah Canal, with its mouth on the river near Ashment,

goes west for a little over three leagues to Abûsir-el-Malaq, and

then turns _from north to south_ for three leagues till it reaches

Lahûn. (Plate XXI.) As it is a remarkable thing to find a canal in

the Nile Valley which runs from north to south, the near agreement

of these figures and directions is a remarkable coincidence, if it

is nothing more.

There is another coincidence which may well be accidental, but is

worth noticing. Arab tradition is, I believe, the authority for

placing the mouth of the connecting canal at Ashmunîn. “Joseph

collected workmen and dug the canal of Menhi from Ashmunîn to

el-Lahûn.”

Now the mouth of the old Magnûnah Canal, which I have been supposing

may have been the canal of inflow, had one of its mouths near

“Ashment.” Can a misprint have been responsible for “Ashment”

being changed into “Ashmunîn,” or may it not have been changed

during the process of handing down the tradition orally, the name of

the larger town Ashmunîn being substituted when the lesser Ashment

lost its importance and its notoriety after Lake Mœris ceased to be?

But all these speculations must be modified, _but not more than

modified_, if what follows is a more correct view of the conditions

of the Nile at the time of Herodotus.

Hitherto I have assumed that the levels of maximum and minimum Nile

were the same in his time as they are now.

But it is supposed that the Nile levels at that time were about

2 metres lower than they are now, and it is necessary to consider

in what way such a change of conditions would modify the views of

what Lake Mœris was and did, as given in the foregoing arguments

and calculations.

The supposition, or certainty, that the Nile in the time of Herodotus

was about 2 metres lower in level than it is now, is based on the

following observations, which Mr. Petrie has given me. He estimates

that the rate of rise has been about 4 inches a century. This, he

states, is shown by a Roman wall at Tanis and by the town-level of

Naukratis, both old towns in Lower Egypt. The old tombs at Memphis

are now under water. At Edfu the High Nile rises shoulder high on

the walls, which shows a rise of 4 inches or more per century. At

Aswân (Assouan) the records of High Niles on the Roman Nilometer

show that they were lower than now by an amount calculated at a rate

of 4 inches per century.

There is also, Mr. Petrie adds, other evidence of the same sort,

but less definite, giving the same general result.

If now we suppose the Fayûm (Lake Mœris) filled to R.L. 20·50

and emptied to R.L. 17·50, there is nothing to be changed in the

calculations, except the maximum and minimum surface levels of

the lake. Thus there would be a rather, but not much, larger area

reclaimed and the Edwah-Biahmu bank would have been formed along

the edge of the lake at lowest water, instead of in two metres of

water. This modified view of its formation would seem to be more

probable than that which supposed it to have been formed in water.

If, however, we suppose the lake still filled to R.L. 22·50

as a maximum, while its lowest level reached R.L. 17·50, the

discharges found to have been necessary to fill the lake (under the

conditions previously assumed excepting as regards minimum level),

must be increased by 50 per cent., and the figures representing the

return-flow be doubled.

In all probability the maximum level of the lake was somewhere

between R.L. 22·50 and 20·50, and may be taken as varying from

R.L. 22·00 to 21·00.

The lake may have been chiefly filled by the Bahr Yûsuf and the flood

waters inundating the Nile Valley, but, to fulfil the conditions of

a six months’ flow-in and six months flow-out of the lake, under

the new conditions supposed, and retaining a maximum lake-level of

R.L. 22·50, the canal of supply would have to have its off-take

from the Nile moved to a point about half-way between Beni Suef and

Biba. Supposing the Bahr Yûsuf and the flood water of the Nile Valley

filled this lake during the flood months and the Bahr Yûsuf ceased

to flow with the end of the flood, the canal from between Beni Suef

and Biba would have had to supply only about 10 million cubic metres

a day to make good the loss by evaporation, if the lake-level was not

to be allowed to fall below R.L. 22·50 till the return-flow to the

Nile was required. But there is no reason to suppose this to have

been a necessity. With a lowest level of 17·50 instead of 19·50,

the problem of the lake as a relieving and supplementing reservoir

to the Nile, with houses and cultivation above its highest levels,

is much simplified, and a large margin is given between R.L. 20·50

and 22·50 for increasing the volumes given in my former calculations,

to render the lake a more efficient safety-valve for excessive floods,

and for moderating the fall of the Nile to low discharges by giving

back to it a more abundant outflow.

Accepting this view of the range of the lake-levels, we shall have

to look upon the Magnûnah Canal and its branches as channels of

return-flow to the Nile for the commencement of the period of outflow,

which would afterwards cease to carry any discharge in summer, when

the lake-level had fallen below about R.L. 19·00. For the remaining

period of outflow the Kosheshah Escape branch from Abûsir-el-Malaq

to the Nile and the branch to Memphis skirting the Libyan Hills,

would have carried all the discharge returning to the Nile Valley.

The peculiar isolated piece of Nile desert opposite Lahûn and the

cultivated strip of land between it and the main desert, through

which the Bahr Yûsuf flows into the Fayûm, seems to lend itself to

the regulation of the entry and exit of the Nile waters. To control

the entry of the waters a regulator A and cross bank _a b_ from the

island desert across the Bahr Yûsuf to the main desert on the west

could have been made. (See map, Plate XXI.)

The excess water, excluded from the lake by regulation on A, would

have found its way along the east of the patch of desert as it

does to-day.

To retain and to control the exit of the water, a regulator B and

its bank _c d_ might have been added, where shown on the map, or

anywhere between B and the end of the narrow band of cultivation at

C. There is, however, no evidence to show that such works did exist,

but Strabo’s statement, the presence of the Lahûn pyramid and

the situation of the villages Lahûn and Manshîyah make it perhaps

probable that there were some important works connected with the

lake in their neighbourhood.

The reason for the peculiar alignment of the present bank _g_ D B _c_

which closes the gap into the Fayûm, is difficult to imagine, as

the bank is at least three times the length it would have been, if it

had been formed in a direct line across the gap. But it has suggested

itself to me, that the length B _c_ may be part of the original bank

_d_ B _c_, that may have crossed from side to side of the valley of

exit, and on which the villages of Lahûn and Manshîyah were built.

Trying to find some explanation for the alignment of the existing

bank, it had also occurred to me, that the line of the bank may have

followed the ridge of the bar, that would have been formed across

the wider part of the entrance to the Fayûm by the high level water

flowing in. This bar would, if it had existed, have been the first

land to show above water on the subsidence of the floods, and may

have been chosen, on the occasion of one of the repeated breaches at

Hawârat-el-Maqta, as the most convenient line for forming a bank

to shut out the Nile flood. But this would have been at a later

date, after Lake Mœris had ceased to perform its functions of a

Nile regulator.

However, I think the former supposition, that the bank B _c_ was part

of an old bank, formed for quite another than its present purpose,

and that the bank _g_ B was subsequently made between Lahûn and the

desert (perhaps when the existing old Lahûn regulator was made),

a more likely explanation. The length B _d_ would have disappeared

after it ceased to perform any useful function.

There may have been both, or one, or neither of the regulators A and

B, but if there was a regulator at Hawârah at the head of the lake

at F, there would have been little to be gained except additional

security from the regulator A.

If then we suppose that the bank _c_ B _d_ and the regulator B

only existed to collect the flood waters, and turn them into the

lake, and that a regulator at Hawârah at F also existed to keep

excess water out of the lake, such an arrangement would agree with

Strabo’s statement that “when the river falls, the lake again

discharges the water by a canal at both orifices, and it is available

for irrigation. There are regulators at both ends of the canal for

regulating the inflow and outflow.”

The part A _b_ of one of these suggested banks exists to-day, as

a lately abandoned basin bank, with regulators in it, but there

is nothing, that I know of, to show that it existed in the time of

Lake Mœris. At the western desert end, _a_, of the supposed bank,

stands the village Tamma. Dr. Schweinfurth says this is certainly

an ancient Egyptian name, and he describes some remarkable mounds

of pure black Nile earth, containing no trace of bricks, sherds,

stones from buildings, or other things, which lie just to the south

of the modern village in four symmetrically placed hills, containing

about 300,000 cubic metres.

Possibly the ancient Tamma was in some way connected with Lake Mœris,

but the riddle of the mounds has not yet been solved. They appeared

to me to be the remains of the mouth of a canal taking off from a

bend of the Bahr Yûsuf, but the great height and contour of the

mounds and the abruptness with which they commence and terminate

are not to be easily accounted for. The alignment of the canal,

if such it was, points towards the entrance valley to the Fayûm.

On the east of Lahûn village there are also some mounds of moderate

height, but of short length, which are evidently the remains of two

old parallel canals, both pointing in the direction of the Fayûm. The

abruptness with which these banks begin and end is also remarkable.

Supposing then, that the Nile levels in the time of Herodotus were

2 metres lower than those of to-day, the conception of Lake Mœris

must be modified as follows:—

The lowest level to which Lake Mœris fell in summer was R.L. 17·50

above mean sea, and it was filled to levels ranging between

R.L. 20·50 and 22·50, but its level was never allowed to exceed

the latter level. Probably there was a regulator and bank passing

through Lahûn from west to east between the main and detached

desert preventing the flow of the Bahr Yûsuf waters to the north,

and so diverting them into Lake Mœris; and also another regulator

at Hawârah to forbid the admission of an excessive volume into the

lake (Plate XXI.). On each side of this latter regulator may have

been sluices, on the right to feed a canal to irrigate during flood

time the high land, between Hawârah pyramid and the present railway

line, along the course of the old Bahr Wardan; and on the left to

admit water into the reclaimed tract round about Crocodilopolis,

perhaps along the present course of the Bahr Yûsuf, for irrigation

and navigation.

The old Edwah-Biahmu-Sinrû bank, instead of having been formed in

water, would have been thrown up along the edge of the water when at

its lowest level. The Biahmu landing-place would have been projected

into the lake to obtain a quay for embarkation and disembarkation

and possibly a channel would have been dug between the two colossi,

so that boats might come alongside even at low water; a channel

about 2 metres deep being sufficient.

The Edwah-Sinrû bank would have been subjected to most severe wave

action, and could not have stood, unless we suppose it to have

been well revetted with stone on the lake face. Probably it was,

but the stone has entirely disappeared, a thing not incredible, when

one considers how little has been left of the wonderful Labyrinth

described by Herodotus and others after him.

But if the conclusion, that the Nile water-levels have risen at

the rate of 4 inches a century, be a correct one, and if it may be

assumed that the rise has been continuous and uniform in historic

times, the levels at the time of the XIIth dynasty (B.C. 2500), when

Lake Mœris is supposed to have been formed, would have been about

4½ metres lower than at present. Under such conditions R.L. 23·50

would have been the highest level reached by the floods at the

Lahûn entrance; and therefore, at the site of the modern Medineh,

the water-level would have been somewhat lower. Such a state of things

would have permitted the establishment of the town “Shad” without

the necessity of any arrangements for controlling the admission

of the water. To what minimum levels the Nile fell, after it had

first flowed at higher levels, and how far back the change from a

deepening of its bed by scour to a raising of it by deposit took

place is a geological question; but if the Nile flood maximum ever

fell as low as about R.L. 18·00 at the Lahûn entrance, no water

would have entered the Fayûm, since the rock bed at Hawârah is

somewhere about this level. (Linant’s Hawârah sill at R.L. 21·00

is known to be higher than the bed of the natural channel, which runs

between the village of Hawârat-el-Maqta and the Hawârah pyramid.)

Imagination thus may draw another picture of a time when, after the

Fayûm deposit had been laid down by the Nile flowing at high levels,

the gradual scouring of the Nile bed lowered the flood water surface

to such an extent that the supply, which kept the Fayûm Lake full,

was gradually shut off, until, at last, the maximum flood level

falling below that of the lowest rock surface between Lahûn and

Hawârah, no water would have flowed into the Fayûm, and the lake

would have dried up and left the land barren for want of a water

supply.

After the opposite action set in and the Nile levels rose again,

the flow into the Fayûm would recommence and gradually increase

century by century, until at last levels would be reached favourable

to the establishment of the town “Shad” on the site of the

modern Medineh.

The Nile continuing to rise, protecting banks to keep the waters of

the lake, when at flood levels, from the cultivation and habitations

would have been found necessary, and at last the capital itself would

have been threatened by the gradually increasing level reached by

the highest floods. Then, if not before, measures to regulate the

inflow and to facilitate the outflow would be taken to protect the

highest parts of the province from submersion, and means such as

those suggested before would be resorted to to reclaim some of the

invaded lands.

Since the foregoing was written, Brugsch Pasha, a leading

Egyptologist, has delivered a lecture in Cairo to the Khedivial

Geographical Society on the 8th April, 1892, from which I quote the

following passage, showing that the Pasha’s conclusions, drawn

from a study of the monuments, agree with the conclusions I have

arrived at from a study of the levels and features of the ground in

the neighbourhood of Hawârah.

“Nul doute que le vaste gouffre de 20-30 mètres de hauteur qui

s’ouvre entre les bords occidentaux du désert de Hawara et les

terrains cultivés du côté opposé est, qui, maintenant, porte le

nom de “la Mer sans eau” (_Bahr-bela-ma_) formait anciennement

une partie du lac Mœris. C’est ainsi que ce dernier avait acquis

fortuitement une signification funéraire en rapport avec le culte

des morts, qui, d’après la tradition en vogue chez les anciens

Égyptiens, devaient passer en bateau le Nil ou un lac pour aborder au

port de la nécropole et à l’entrée du monde souterrain. Hawara

représentait depuis les temps de la XIIme dynastie le cimetière

de la ville Crocodilopolis-Arsinoë, près de Medinet-el-Fayoum;

les défunts étaient transportés sur les canaux jusqu’au lac,

qu’ils traversaient pour arriver au port de la nécropole. Les

textes que j’ai consultés lors de mon dernier séjour à Hawara,

ne parlent de la terre du lac qu’en la mettant en rapport avec

l’Osiris de la nécropole de Hawara.

“Un canal principal (ou si l’on veut plusieurs peut-être)

conduisait l’eau du lac au pied du plateau de Hawara vers la

métropole qui, à l’époque des Pharaons, s’appelait “Shad”

et dont l’existence remonte au moins jusqu’au règne d’Amenemhê

Ier, le fondateur de la XIIme dynastie. Les dernières fouilles que

j’ai exécutées à Médineh, mettent ce fait hors de doute. Il

paraît même que l’ancienne ville de Shad formait la résidence

des rois de cette dynastie, dont les pyramides s’élèvent sur le

sol de la terre du lac.”

This statement about the principal canal (or several canals), leading

from the lake at the foot of Hawârah towards “Shad,” accords

with my conceptions of the lake, but not with Linant’s; as in _his_

theory all this plateau between Hawârah and the modern Medineh,

or ancient Shad, was lake, and a canal or canals could not have been

made in the lake itself. If then this fact about a canal leading from

the lake at the foot of Hawârah to Shad is proved beyond a doubt,

Linant’s theory is disproved by Brugsch Pasha himself, though he

previously states that no “savant sérieux” is opposed to it.

In this same paper, from which I am quoting, this further passage also

occurs, which agrees with what I have imagined to have been the early

history of the town, on part of the ruins of which Medineh now stands.

“La terre du lac, ainsi que je l’ai déjà fait remarquer, a

dû exister au commencement de la XIIme dynastie, dont le premier

roi, Amenemhè Ier, avait fondé au bord de la ville Médineh un

sanctuaire au Dieu Sobk. Au delà de cette époque je ne trouve

aucune trace de sa mention dans les textes de l’ancien empire:

l’œuvre de l’arrosement du Fayoum par un canal du Nil doit donc

être reportée au moins jusqu’à l’époque du roi que je viens de

citer. Également à cette époque, la fondation d’un sanctuaire et

d’un palais royal fait supposer l’existence d’une résidence,

c’est-à-dire d’une grande ville à laquelle le canal Hounet

fournissait ses eaux.

“Tout porte à croire que le canal fut creusé longtemps avant le

XIIme dynastie, car une résidence ne s’établit pas dans un pays

inhabitable ou qui venait à peine d’être arrosé. L’opinion

que les rois de la XIIme dynastie doivent être regardés comme

les créateurs du canal Hounet n’est plus à soutenir, le Fayoum

‘la terre du lac’ date certainement d’une époque de beaucoup

antérieure à la XIIme dynastie, et les rois de cette maison

royale, pour des raisons que nous ignorons, ont seulement choisi

cette terre pour y transférer leur résidence et les temples de

leurs divinités.”

How this view is made to accord with the Linant Lake conception is

not clear, but it is not opposed to the idea that a natural lake,

connected by a natural channel with the Nile Valley, existed and made

the growth of the town “Shad” a possibility before the canal

was remodelled, and control of the entry and exit of the waters

introduced by the engineering monarchs of the XIIth dynasty.

TRANSFORMATION OF LAKE MŒRIS INTO THE FAYÛM OF TO-DAY.

Assuming that the conception of Lake Mœris, as given in this paper,

is a true one, we have now to consider how the change to present

conditions in the Fayûm came about.

In the passage quoted from ‘Hawara, Biahmu, and Arsinoë,’

Mr. Petrie states that “apparently under the Persians or Ptolemies

the desire to acquire more land in the Fayûm at the expense of

the irrigation of the Nile valley, led to restricting the inflow,

and gradually drying up the lake.”

Mr. Cope Whitehouse, in one of his papers, points out that Mœris,

in its character of regulator and reservoir, existed chiefly for

remote provinces, and therefore required for its maintenance a strong

central government with sufficient administrative skill and energy to

take the necessary steps and to expend the necessary amount of money

to secure the maintenance of the reservoir, canal, and regulators

in working order. Under a careless government, or while anarchy, or

internal or external troubles weakened administration, the private

interests of individuals who were on the spot to assert themselves,

would have prevailed over the public claims of the Northerners,

powerless to keep watch over and to insist upon their rights from

the distant towns of the Delta. A corrupt Public Works Department,

uncontrolled by a chief with broad views of what was desirable in the

general interests of Egypt, may have permitted each chief engineer

of a nome to do what seemed good in his own eyes for the profit

of the particular part of Egypt in which he was the Public Works

officer. If we imagine that he had scruples, there have not been

absent, in the modern history of the Irrigation Department of Egypt,

instances of the application of means for overcoming scruples, and,

as so much else in the customs of the country can be traced back

to that far past time when Lake Mœris must have been languishing

towards extinction, we may also suppose that the Eastern salve for

tender consciences was applied and the scruples overcome.

But whatever the cause (and there is nothing but speculation,

which can help us to imagine it), at some time or other, either by a

gradual or sudden process, Lake Mœris ceased to perform its offices

of regulator and reservoir, which had won for it the admiration of

all who visited it. Having once reached the stage when it ceased to

be useful in supplementing the low Nile, there would be nothing to

prevent measures being taken to exclude all water, but such as was

necessary for the irrigation of the reclaimed areas. Evaporation would

lower the Lake level year by year, and leave more land uncovered. Year

by year the Lake would contract itself, and retire to lower levels,

until it had reached the present dimensions of the modern Lake Qurûn,

whose water surface at the commencement of May 1892 was 43·50 metres

below mean sea-level. The rate of the lake’s retreat was doubtless

not uniform and continuous, but was retarded by accidents and breaches

of the barrier, raised against the Nile floods, causing a return of

the water over reclaimed lands. The deep ravines of the Fayûm are

nature’s bold strokes on the face of the province, which record

some of the victories of the water, in its efforts to fulfil the

law imposed on it to find its own level, over man’s endeavours to

control this law.

Evaporation by itself, had its results not been vitiated by other

causes, would have lowered the lake surface by about 2 metres a year,

but the drainage and waste from the reclaimed area under irrigation

would have retarded the fall, and breaches would probably have

occasionally converted the fall into a rise. It is therefore difficult

to assign dates for different levels of the lake surface, but probably

the old towns at different levels around the borders of the Fayûm,

so far as their dates can be fixed, will, when their levels have

been correctly ascertained, throw some light on this subject.

The former manner of conducting the irrigation of parts of the

province would have caused a much larger proportionate discharge into

the lake, than finds its way to it at present. Considerable areas

were enclosed by banks, and inundated under the Basin system, known

in the Fayûm as “Malaq,” in contradistinction to irrigation by

small field channels, a system called “Misqâwi.” The contents of

these small basins, when emptied, flowed into the lake. On the south

side of the Fayûm there was, until late years, a large basin known

as “Hod-el-Tuyûr” (the Basin of the Birds), which was formed by

building an immense wall across a fold of contour R.L. 15·00. The

top of this wall is about R.L. 16·00. The bed of the basin is at

R.L. 12·00, so we may conclude that, when this wall was built, the

lake levels must have been at any rate below R.L. 12·00. This basin

was abolished in 1886, and ordinary perennial irrigation introduced

over the area formerly included within the basin limits. Since then

the fall of the lake surface has been more rapid, in spite of its

annually diminishing evaporating area.

The existing lake, which is the rudiment of the large lake that once

filled the whole of the Fayûm depression, is called Lake Qurûn,

or el-Qurn, the Lake of the Horns, or the Horn, apparently so named

from a rock that projects into the lake from its west side and

called “el-Qurn.”

It is evident, from the levels of the rock bed underlying the Nile

deposit near Hawârah, that the original course of the waters flowing

into Lake Mœris (after it became Lake Mœris by introducing means of

controlling its waters) must have been along the ravine which runs to

the north of the modern village of Hawârat-el-Maqta. The bed of the

present Bahr Yûsuf, at a point about a kilometre below that village,

is rock at R.L. 21·00, and this rock joins the high desert on the

south of the Bahr Yûsuf. But on the north it dips down, and close

under Hawârat-el-Maqta has been found to have its original surface

at R.L. 19·17, dipping still lower towards the north-east. Plate

XXV. gives cross-sections of the entrance valley of the Fayûm,

and also of the ravine behind Hawârat-el-Maqta.

“Hawârat-el-Maqta” signifies “Hawârah of the Breach,” and

round about this village lay the battlefields where many a struggle

was made by man to get the mastery of the water, until he at last

prevailed. Massive walls and solid banks, retaining the Bahr Yûsuf

in its high level channel, and barring the passage into ravines,

scoured out by previous torrents of water bursting away from control,

mark the sites of many a breach, and suggest sleepless and anxious

nights of hard labour for the wretched irrigation officer in charge

in the days when the water seemed to have asserted its rights to

flow where it pleased.

On the left of the Bahr Yûsuf are the remains of a channel, which

was clearly a temporary one for carrying the water, while a breach

near Hawârat-el-Maqta was being repaired. Linant Pasha tells of the

occurrence of one of these breaches on the west of Hawârat-el-Maqta

as late as the commencement of this century (in 1819 or 1820). He

states that this breach caused much damage. An attempt was made to

close it during the floods, but in spite of all that could be done,

and in spite of the energy of the people employed by Mehemet Ali,

it was not till after six months at the time of low water that the

closure was effected. It appears that the old bridge at Lahûn (the

only one existing at the time) could not be closed, when the breach

occurred, probably for want of suitable closing apparatus. This

breach was down-stream of the rock bed in the Bahr Yûsuf.

When the level of Lake Mœris was kept up to levels above R.L. 17·50,

the regulator at Hawârah near the Labyrinth, which I have supposed

controlled the entry of the water into the lake, would have admitted

the flood waters freely until the lake rose to the maximum allowable,

say R.L. 22·00. If then closed, and supposing the Nile levels to

have been 2 metres lower then than now, the regulator would probably

have been subjected to a head of about 3 metres as a maximum, but

afterwards when Lake Mœris ceased its functions and the lake fell

to low levels, the regulator would have had to hold up a head of

water equal to the depth of water on its floor, in order to exclude

the water from the lake. The right and left side channels would have

taken in water from above the regulator for irrigating the reclaimed

tracts. The drainage of the irrigated areas would have commenced

to form drainage channels, the right drainage following the bed

of the original inflow channel into Lake Mœris. As the lake level

continued to fall, the drains would have scoured themselves out to

lower levels, and cut back. The canals too would then have breached

into the deepening ravines.

[Illustration: PLATE XXV.

CROSS SECTION OF THE ENTRANCE VALLEY TO THE FAYÛM AT THE OLD BAHR

WARDAN MOUTH, 3 KILOMETRES ABOVE HAWÂRAT-EL-MAQTA.]

[Illustration: CROSS SECTION OF RAVINE BEHIND HAWÂRAT-EL-MAQTA.]

On the opposite sides of the ravine and in face of the village of

Hawârat-el-Maqta, during one of my inspections, I came across

the remains of two ancient canals, shown on the sketch map,

Plate XXVI. Starting from the present edge of the ravine are two

old canals, clearly distinguishable as such by the existing banks,

which are of considerable height. In the angle between the two are

the remains of an ancient town, and fragments of granite pillars. One

of these fragments was part of the shaft of a large pillar of the

clustered-stalk design.

Both these canals, after a few hundred yards, lose themselves in

broken ground sloping down and tailing into the main ravine.

Probably the left canal was the first made, and, when it breached

into the ravine on its left, the right canal was made to take its

place, which in its turn also breached and found its way into the

ravine. The take-off was then shifted farther up the Bahr Yûsuf

to the position of the present head of the Bahr Sêlah. The dotted

lines show the supposed continuations of the two old canals. To feed

them, either the ravine must have been dammed below their present

take-off from it, or else they must have been continued across the

head of the ravine to the banks of the Bahr Yûsuf. The fact that the

second diversion diverges from the old canal just where it leaves the

ravine, suggests the former alternative, but more probably this was

made the point of departure from the first channel so as to utilise

the banks, which already existed, for crossing the ravine and avoid

the necessity for making a new crossing.

Joined on to the breached end of the left canal there exist some

curious vestiges of irrigation works, which have failed. It appears

that there was originally an earth dam A B joining the banks of one

or other of these two old canals with a point in the direction of

or across the ravine. In the line of this bank where the height was

greatest, was a thick masonry wall, now known as “Hêt Rozma.”

This wall is made of brick and rubble stone of a very inferior

quality, built in mortar made of lime and mud; it is 90 metres in

length, 5 metres thick, and 6·70 metres high. (The top of this

wall is at R.L. 21·35.) The bare end of the wall is evidently the

original masonry end, as it was built, no part of the wall having

been carried away when the bank, which must have joined its outer

end, disappeared. The bank, of which this wall formed the centre,

evidently breached and scoured out a hole, marked by the pool C

below the breach. This breach was repaired by adding an inclined

wall D E to the Hêt Rozma, continued by an earth bank E F to the

bank of the old left canal. Again another bank G F seems to have

been formed above this, and to have breached. The violent action of

the water is shown by the circular hollow H, which has been scooped

out of the level ground _upstream_ of this breach.

[Illustration: PLATE XXVI.

_Stanford Geog. Estab. London_

SKETCH MAP OF THE GROUND BETWEEN HAWÂRAT-EL-MAQTA AND HAWÂRAH

PYRAMID.

_Note._—The ravines are not correctly mapped, but only sketched

in to show generally how the ground is broken up.]

I give this description to indicate what interesting problems there

are to solve, or lose oneself in conjectures about, in various

parts of the Fayûm Province, and especially in the neighbourhood

of Hawârat-el-Maqta and the wonderful Labyrinth.

Given then the actual conditions of a considerable difference of

level, continually increasing, between the water at its entrance

to the Fayûm, and the lake surface, and, from an irrigation point

of view, a steep surface slope to the country under irrigation,

ravines would commence to form along the lines where drainage and the

water, discharged by canal breaches, would collect to flow towards

the lake. Wherever also an inundated area, surrounded by banks,

effected the discharge of the water contained in the basin, there

would be made the beginning of a ravine, which may afterwards have

been utilised as an irrigation or drainage channel.

The main drainage lines of the north and south were naturally formed

along the lines, where the rounded concentric contours of the central

part of the Fayûm double back to run along the north and south sides

of the depression, as shown in the diagram (Plate XIX.). At many

points the rock being reached, further deepening of the channel was

checked. The rock being close to the surface along the upper part

of the course of the south main drainage line, a deep ravine has

not been formed, until after the village of Miniet-el-Hêt is passed.

But the north drainage line has been scoured out and cut back to the

banks of the Bahr Yûsuf itself, so that deep ravines exist within

a short distance of and parallel to its present watercourse. Into

these ravines a breach would precipitate all the main canal supply,

if such were to occur from negligence or from rashly permitting

irrigation to be conducted from heads roughly constructed by the

fellahîn in the Bahr Yûsuf banks.

Probably some small village channel, allowed to take off directly

from the Bahr Yûsuf without a proper head, and used to irrigate

some low lands along the slopes of the main ravine, caused a minor

ravine to commence and grow, until, cutting back as far as its head,

it eventually gave rise to the breach of 1820, which resulted in

a widening out of the branch ravine until it attained its present

dimensions.

It is, I think, evident that, when Lake Mœris ceased to be,

Hawârat-el-Maqta was the key to the position and the point where the

problem of the Fayûm irrigation had to be solved. It was necessary

for the irrigation of the whole province, that the water-level should

be held up at this point, so as to flow along the ridge between

Hawârat-el-Maqta and Medineh, from which the whole province, with

the exception of the land on the right of the north drainage line,

was commanded. For the irrigation from the Bahr Sêlah or from the

ancient canals, of which the Bahr Sêlah is the modern representative,

it was necessary also that the water should not be allowed to run

to low levels down the ravine at the back of Hawârat-el-Maqta. The

principal operation then to be performed was to bar this ravine to

the passage of the water, and to make the water flow forward along

the ridge to Medineh at a high enough level at least to pass over

the rocky bed, which is now found in the modern Bahr Yûsuf about a

kilometre beyond Hawârah. This end being attained, the water would

flow along the ridge, from the sides and end of which it would be

distributed into the different branch canals covering the face of

the province. Works to control the quantity of water given to each

branch, and weirs to head-up the water at intervals along the canals

of too rapid a slope would have been added as the want of them made

itself felt.

The lake level would become lower year by year, and more land would

be reclaimed and brought under cultivation.

At some period of this process, probably after a breach at

Hawârat-el-Maqta, or on the failure of the regulator supposed to have

formerly existed at Hawârah, the Lahûn bank and its old regulator

would have been formed to exclude the excess of water and to control

the discharge admitted into the Fayûm. (For sections of these banks,

see Plate XXVII.)

I have suggested before that the part of the Lahûn bank which runs

east and west was made in the time of Lake Mœris, and that the

part from Lahûn to the south side of the gap, which crosses the

Bahr Yûsuf at the old Lahûn Bridge, was subsequently made to shut

out the Nile floods, when for some reason the means of regulation

within the Fayûm at Hawârah ceased to be efficient.

The old Lahûn Bridge has three openings of 2·67 width, the floor

level of two of them being at R.L. 21·97 and of the third at

R.L. 20·72, so that this bridge could only have been constructed

_after_ the discharge required by the Fayûm had fallen to the amount

of its present requirements, or to even less, as the waterway is

somewhat under what is desirable for the passage of 7 million cubic

metres a day, the maximum discharge utilised in the Fayûm at the

present day during floods.

[Illustration: PLATE XXVII.

BANK RIGHT OF LAHÛN BRIDGE, OR GISR GADALLAH.]

[Illustration: BANK LEFT OF LAHÛN BRIDGE, OR GISR BAHLAWÂN.

CROSS SECTIONS OF LAHÛN BANKS.]

It is evident, from the remains of canals along the north and south

sides of the Fayûm, that at some time or other these slopes of the

province were irrigated to higher levels than the limit of the present

cultivation. On the right the old Bahr Wardan is traceable from its

old mouth on the Bahr Yûsuf (Kom-el-Iswid) above the present Sêlah

Head as far as the north-west corner of the Fayûm depression. It

would appear that the water surface level of the Bahr Yûsuf at

Hawârah must be lower now than when this canal was under conditions

favourable for irrigation. Perhaps it worked when the regulator was,

as supposed, at Hawârah, and before the Lahûn bank and old bridge

shut out the high-level waters of the Nile flood.

On the south side of the Fayûm there are similarly the remains

of an old canal within the limits of what is now desert. This was

probably fed by an aqueduct formed along the top of the Minia wall,

which held up the waters in Hod-el-Tuyûr. This wall and aqueduct were

breached, and though the wall was restored, the aqueduct was not, and

the supply was cut off from the high-level canal. The land depending

on it consequently returned to desert. Large blocks of old masonry

lying prone on the ground at some distance from the present wall

show with what force the escaping waters must have rushed through

the breaches to have been able to transport such massive blocks to

so great a distance from their original position.