DOI Artikel:
Kenyon, Frederic George: Progress of Egyptology: graeco-roman Egypt, 1906-7
DOI Seite / Zitierlink: https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.12424#0076
G2
Peogbess of Egyptology.
Of publications based upon the materials provided by the papyri, the
most important to be noticed this year is the third volume of M. Bouche-
Leclercq's Histoire des Lagides.22 Having completed the narrative of the
dynasty in two volumes, M. Bouche-Leclercq had hoped to deal with the
history of the constitution and administration in the third; but he has
found the material too great for his space, and has been compelled to
leave some of it over for a fourth volume. The third volume deals with
the crown and the dynastic cults, administration and police, the land
cpiestion, the state monopolies, taxation, and financial administration,—all
of them subjects on which nearly the whole of our knowledge comes from
the papyri. M. Bouche-Leclercq has been able to use the three volumes
of the Petrie Papyri, the Bevenue Papyrus, and vol. I. of the Tebtunis
Papyri; and these naturally furnish the main part of his materials. The
Hibeh Papyri appeared too late to be taken into account. Detailed
criticism would be out of place here, but it may be said that the
materials available are carefully used, and full references given. The
discussions of the various doubtful points are not always exhaustive
{indeed they could not be so without a loss of the sense of proportion),
and it is inevitable that in many cases they should soon be antiquated
by the appearance of fresh evidence; but it is very useful to have from
time to time summaries of the information then extant, and this service is
very well performed by M. Bouche-Leclercq's volume. It is, in fact, what he
calls it in his preface, une synthese provisoire. The fourth volume will con-
clude the discussion of the Ptolemaic institutions, and will contain addenda
and a general index. As evidence of the growth of knowledge of late
years, it is instructive to compare the scale of the Ptolemaic histories of
Sharpe (1838), Mahaffy (1895), and Bouche-Leclercq. It is to be wished
that someone would undertake a synthese yrovisoire of the institutions of
Boman Egypt on a somewhat larger scale than that of Milne.
Btolemaic Egypt provides the material for an article by Smyly,23 on
the revenue years of Philadelphus, Euergetes I, and Philopator, in which
he tries to carry further the examination of the subject in the appendix to
the Hibeh Papyri. He brings evidence to show that there was a"revenue
year commencing about the vernal equinox, at or about the beginning of
the month Mecheir. The evidence, however, is not yet so clear and
decisive as one would desire. Dr. Preisigke24 bases upon Hibeh Pap. 110
an elaborate and ingenious study of the Ptolemaic postal system, and
argues that the service there described was a special organisation for
rapid delivery (probably introduced by the Persians, since it resembles
the Persian post described by Herodotus and Xenophon), which must
Peogbess of Egyptology.
Of publications based upon the materials provided by the papyri, the
most important to be noticed this year is the third volume of M. Bouche-
Leclercq's Histoire des Lagides.22 Having completed the narrative of the
dynasty in two volumes, M. Bouche-Leclercq had hoped to deal with the
history of the constitution and administration in the third; but he has
found the material too great for his space, and has been compelled to
leave some of it over for a fourth volume. The third volume deals with
the crown and the dynastic cults, administration and police, the land
cpiestion, the state monopolies, taxation, and financial administration,—all
of them subjects on which nearly the whole of our knowledge comes from
the papyri. M. Bouche-Leclercq has been able to use the three volumes
of the Petrie Papyri, the Bevenue Papyrus, and vol. I. of the Tebtunis
Papyri; and these naturally furnish the main part of his materials. The
Hibeh Papyri appeared too late to be taken into account. Detailed
criticism would be out of place here, but it may be said that the
materials available are carefully used, and full references given. The
discussions of the various doubtful points are not always exhaustive
{indeed they could not be so without a loss of the sense of proportion),
and it is inevitable that in many cases they should soon be antiquated
by the appearance of fresh evidence; but it is very useful to have from
time to time summaries of the information then extant, and this service is
very well performed by M. Bouche-Leclercq's volume. It is, in fact, what he
calls it in his preface, une synthese provisoire. The fourth volume will con-
clude the discussion of the Ptolemaic institutions, and will contain addenda
and a general index. As evidence of the growth of knowledge of late
years, it is instructive to compare the scale of the Ptolemaic histories of
Sharpe (1838), Mahaffy (1895), and Bouche-Leclercq. It is to be wished
that someone would undertake a synthese yrovisoire of the institutions of
Boman Egypt on a somewhat larger scale than that of Milne.
Btolemaic Egypt provides the material for an article by Smyly,23 on
the revenue years of Philadelphus, Euergetes I, and Philopator, in which
he tries to carry further the examination of the subject in the appendix to
the Hibeh Papyri. He brings evidence to show that there was a"revenue
year commencing about the vernal equinox, at or about the beginning of
the month Mecheir. The evidence, however, is not yet so clear and
decisive as one would desire. Dr. Preisigke24 bases upon Hibeh Pap. 110
an elaborate and ingenious study of the Ptolemaic postal system, and
argues that the service there described was a special organisation for
rapid delivery (probably introduced by the Persians, since it resembles
the Persian post described by Herodotus and Xenophon), which must