DOI Artikel:
Griffith, Francis Ll.: Progress of Egyptology: archaeology, hieroglyphic studies, etc.
DOI Artikel:Kenyon, Frederic George: Progress of Egyptology: graeco-roman Egypt
DOI Seite / Zitierlink: https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.11503#0069
Geakco-Homan Egypt.
57
altogether wanting, and the sources of various objects can at be^t be ascertained
from memoir (!), sometimes not at all. Yet Mariette, the founder of the Museum,
once stated that, unlike the European collections in which, geneially speaking, the
prorenance of eren the most important objects could not be specified, in the
new Museum this should be known of the most insignificant antiquity. Iu
walking down the long rows in the Museum one is surprised how few exhibits are
provided with explanatory labels. The risitor who is not a specialist gazes on
most of them, unable to find any answer to his questions as to what they represent,
to what period they belong, and whence they came. This defect obviously frustrates
the educational purpose of the Museum, nor is there any useful guide to remedy it.
The masterly and really classical catalogues of Mariette and Maspero are no longer
of practical service since the transfer of the Museum from Bulak to Gizeh, and the
consequent rearrangement of the antiquities. The present guide is so untrustworthy
and scientifically defective as to be no substitute for them. If a satisfactory
handbook is demanded by the multitude of tourists which annually visit the
Museum, no less do Egyptologists demand the systematic publication of the many
treasures stored there, or at least a descriptive catalogue of them, lint without a
complete change in the system of administration these wants will remain unsatisfied,
and the evils described grow into an irremediable injury to science.
"It is absolutely essential that the important post of General Director of the
Antiquities, responsible for the preservation of monuments and the conduct of
excavations, and that of the Chief of the Archaeological Museum should no longer,
as hitherto, be united in one person, but that a separate staff should be appointed
for the administration of the Museum. . . . The work to be done there can be
accomplished only under the guidance of a chief, who shall devote the whole of his
strength and energy to the department over which he presides, and who shall be
solely responsible for it. If such an appointment is delayed, the responsibility
devolves upon those iu power, and science will nut be slow to hold them responsible
for their grave offence, and for the irreparable losses thereby inflicted upon her—and
openly to impeach them. Videant Gonsules ! "
F. Ll. Griffith.
B.—GRAECO-ROMAN EGYPT.
The year 1896-7 has been a fat year, a year of discoveries recalling the
sensations of 1891. Of the most extensive of these discoveries, those
made by the Egypt Exploration Fund itself, it is not necessary to speak
in detail, as they are described in another part of this Report. It
is sufficient here to record that they rival in bulk the great finds of
Arsinoe' and Socnopaei Nesus, and are distinguished from both of these
by the quantity of literary material contained in them. It is true that,
so far as at present known, the literary documents are very fragmen-
tary ; but even fragments, when they include such things as Sayings of
our Lord, third-century Gospels, and stanzas of Sappho, may be matters
of the greatest interest. It may conlidently be expected that the new
f
57
altogether wanting, and the sources of various objects can at be^t be ascertained
from memoir (!), sometimes not at all. Yet Mariette, the founder of the Museum,
once stated that, unlike the European collections in which, geneially speaking, the
prorenance of eren the most important objects could not be specified, in the
new Museum this should be known of the most insignificant antiquity. Iu
walking down the long rows in the Museum one is surprised how few exhibits are
provided with explanatory labels. The risitor who is not a specialist gazes on
most of them, unable to find any answer to his questions as to what they represent,
to what period they belong, and whence they came. This defect obviously frustrates
the educational purpose of the Museum, nor is there any useful guide to remedy it.
The masterly and really classical catalogues of Mariette and Maspero are no longer
of practical service since the transfer of the Museum from Bulak to Gizeh, and the
consequent rearrangement of the antiquities. The present guide is so untrustworthy
and scientifically defective as to be no substitute for them. If a satisfactory
handbook is demanded by the multitude of tourists which annually visit the
Museum, no less do Egyptologists demand the systematic publication of the many
treasures stored there, or at least a descriptive catalogue of them, lint without a
complete change in the system of administration these wants will remain unsatisfied,
and the evils described grow into an irremediable injury to science.
"It is absolutely essential that the important post of General Director of the
Antiquities, responsible for the preservation of monuments and the conduct of
excavations, and that of the Chief of the Archaeological Museum should no longer,
as hitherto, be united in one person, but that a separate staff should be appointed
for the administration of the Museum. . . . The work to be done there can be
accomplished only under the guidance of a chief, who shall devote the whole of his
strength and energy to the department over which he presides, and who shall be
solely responsible for it. If such an appointment is delayed, the responsibility
devolves upon those iu power, and science will nut be slow to hold them responsible
for their grave offence, and for the irreparable losses thereby inflicted upon her—and
openly to impeach them. Videant Gonsules ! "
F. Ll. Griffith.
B.—GRAECO-ROMAN EGYPT.
The year 1896-7 has been a fat year, a year of discoveries recalling the
sensations of 1891. Of the most extensive of these discoveries, those
made by the Egypt Exploration Fund itself, it is not necessary to speak
in detail, as they are described in another part of this Report. It
is sufficient here to record that they rival in bulk the great finds of
Arsinoe' and Socnopaei Nesus, and are distinguished from both of these
by the quantity of literary material contained in them. It is true that,
so far as at present known, the literary documents are very fragmen-
tary ; but even fragments, when they include such things as Sayings of
our Lord, third-century Gospels, and stanzas of Sappho, may be matters
of the greatest interest. It may conlidently be expected that the new
f