Peogbess of Egyptology.
being written in Egyptian hieroglyphs by an Ethiopian. Schaefer has
succeeded in disentangling many of the difficult expressions, but there are
others that cannot yet be understood. The stela recounts the ceremonies
in connexion with the royal coronation. Meroe was at that time the
residence of the king, the older capital of Napata being secondary. The
king starts from Meroe, goes to the temple of Amen at Napata by the
desert route, then northward to Pnoubs and up the river again to Napata,
whence he journies to Tare (on the eastern bend near the Fourth Cataract)
and back, finally returning from Napata to Meroe. The rest of the
inscription is chiefly occupied with records of military expeditions.
Ebman, A. Z. xxxviii. 127, gives an interpretation of the strangely
written stela of Nectanebo II. from Naucratis, with note added by Wilcken
on the imposts upon Greek merchandise. Compare also Maspeeo's version
in Musee Sgyptien, p. 40.
Wiedemann, 0. L. Z. iii. 286, notes that Alexander appears to have
adopted the 7i;a-name of Nekhtnebef, suggesting that he attempted to make
himself accepted as a new manifestation, or at least as a legitimate
successor, of the last of the Pharaohs. This is a leading idea in the
Romance of Alexander.
Post, 0. L. Z. iv. 58, reviews Keall's Grunclriss d. Altorient. Gesch.,
especially with regard to the chronology of Egypt.
Wiedemann, 0. L. Z. iii. 322, writing on Egyptian chronology, notes
that the approximate date for the Xllth Dynasty in his History agrees
with the higher of the two dates deducible from Borchardt's Sothis date
as found in the Kahun Papyri (c. 3260 b.o. and c. 1800 b.c.). He doubts
the present possibility of interpreting the Kahun record correctly into any
Lefebtjee, Iiev. J^gijpt. ix. 71, on the principal deductions from the
Sothiac dates, with a note by Revillout. This paper, however, was
written in 1896, before the Kahun date was found.
Lieblein, P. S. B. A. xxii. 352, on the heliacal rising of Sothis in the
Xllth Dynasty. He doubts the possibility of the new date, and questions
the cogency of the evidence on which it is founded.
Spiegelbeeg, Bee. xxiii. 101, on the name of the nome of Tentyra.
Piehl, Sphinx, iv. 133, gives translations of the Edfu texts referring
to the nomes (to be continued).