DOI Artikel:
Griffith, Francis Ll.: Progress of Egyptology, [11]: Archeology, Hieroglyphic Studies, etc.
DOI Seite / Zitierlink: https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.10056#0041
Archaeology, Hieroglyphic Studies, Etc.
29
upon which the genealogy must be largely based, is the work of
Rameses YL, not of Rameses III.
Petbte, Proc. Soc. Bib. Arch, xviii. p. 56, examines the succession of
the kings of the XXIst Dynasty, establishing the identity of Sa-Amen
of Tanis with Sa-Amen of the royal mummies from Deir el Bahri who
was really distinct from Her-Hor of Thebes. Daressy, Bev. Arch, xxviii.
p. 72, brings a quantity of new evidence to bear upon the same subject
from the great find of priestly mummies at Thebes in 1891. By this
much light is thrown upon the succession and genealogy of the kings
and high priests belonging to the parallel dynasties at Tanis and Thebes.
Cecil Tokr adds a note in the same journal (xxviii. p. 296) suggesting
that Pisebkhanu must be the nomen of the priest-king Menkheperra.
In Rec. de Trav. xviii. 46, Daressy has also some remarks on the
genealogy of the XXIInd Dynasty.
Reinach questions the identity of Herodotus' battle of Magdolon with
the Biblical battle of Megiddo, 608 b.c. {Bev. Arch, xxvii. p. 366), and
Oppert identifies Cadytis, mentioned in the account of the former, with
Carcbemish, instead of Gaza or Jerusalem.
Mallet, Bcc. de Trav. xviii. p. 4, describes an interesting stela of the
Vlllth year of a King Tefnekht. A place-name mentioned upon the
stela is Sauti, which usually means Asyut, but in this case it seems to be
a mistake for Sa=Sais, the capital of King Tefnekht, since the goddess
Neith is named as its patroness.
We may here note The Eyypt of the Hebrews and of Herodotus, an
interesting volume by Professor Sayce, in which the circumstances of the
Biblical references to Egypt are illustrated from the monuments. The
chapter on the Ptolemaic age especially describes the state of the
Jews in Egypt at that time, and some mention of the rise of Christianity
is also included in the sketch. The last three chapters are devoted to
Herodotus, his travels in and account of Egypt. Lists of kings, of
geographical divisions, and of classical writers on Egypt, are given in an
appendix.
The chronology of the Egyptian dynasties has been the subject of
several essays. Eisenlohr, Proc. Soc. Bib. Arch. xvii. p. 280, prints
some warnings with regard, to the evidence supplied by Egyptologists
for the guidance of astronomers in calculating Egyptian dates. One
piece of evidence, however, which the Professor calls in question, namely
the cartouche of the Ebers papyrus, is to most students, including the
present writer, absolutely safe and ascertained. Fotuekingham, Proc.
Soc. Bib. Arch, xviii. 99, criticizes some chronological statements
29
upon which the genealogy must be largely based, is the work of
Rameses YL, not of Rameses III.
Petbte, Proc. Soc. Bib. Arch, xviii. p. 56, examines the succession of
the kings of the XXIst Dynasty, establishing the identity of Sa-Amen
of Tanis with Sa-Amen of the royal mummies from Deir el Bahri who
was really distinct from Her-Hor of Thebes. Daressy, Bev. Arch, xxviii.
p. 72, brings a quantity of new evidence to bear upon the same subject
from the great find of priestly mummies at Thebes in 1891. By this
much light is thrown upon the succession and genealogy of the kings
and high priests belonging to the parallel dynasties at Tanis and Thebes.
Cecil Tokr adds a note in the same journal (xxviii. p. 296) suggesting
that Pisebkhanu must be the nomen of the priest-king Menkheperra.
In Rec. de Trav. xviii. 46, Daressy has also some remarks on the
genealogy of the XXIInd Dynasty.
Reinach questions the identity of Herodotus' battle of Magdolon with
the Biblical battle of Megiddo, 608 b.c. {Bev. Arch, xxvii. p. 366), and
Oppert identifies Cadytis, mentioned in the account of the former, with
Carcbemish, instead of Gaza or Jerusalem.
Mallet, Bcc. de Trav. xviii. p. 4, describes an interesting stela of the
Vlllth year of a King Tefnekht. A place-name mentioned upon the
stela is Sauti, which usually means Asyut, but in this case it seems to be
a mistake for Sa=Sais, the capital of King Tefnekht, since the goddess
Neith is named as its patroness.
We may here note The Eyypt of the Hebrews and of Herodotus, an
interesting volume by Professor Sayce, in which the circumstances of the
Biblical references to Egypt are illustrated from the monuments. The
chapter on the Ptolemaic age especially describes the state of the
Jews in Egypt at that time, and some mention of the rise of Christianity
is also included in the sketch. The last three chapters are devoted to
Herodotus, his travels in and account of Egypt. Lists of kings, of
geographical divisions, and of classical writers on Egypt, are given in an
appendix.
The chronology of the Egyptian dynasties has been the subject of
several essays. Eisenlohr, Proc. Soc. Bib. Arch. xvii. p. 280, prints
some warnings with regard, to the evidence supplied by Egyptologists
for the guidance of astronomers in calculating Egyptian dates. One
piece of evidence, however, which the Professor calls in question, namely
the cartouche of the Ebers papyrus, is to most students, including the
present writer, absolutely safe and ascertained. Fotuekingham, Proc.
Soc. Bib. Arch, xviii. 99, criticizes some chronological statements