DOI Artikel:
Griffith, Francis Ll.: Progress of Egyptology: archaeology, hieroglyphic studies, etc.
DOI Seite / Zitierlink: https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.12054#0038
24
Pbogeess of Egyptology.
Niebuhe sketches the history of Egypt, from the earliest times to the
present day, in Helrnost's Weltgeschichte. (120 pp.)
Peteie has contributed an article on the discoveries in Egyptian
History since 1872 to the supplementary volume xxvii. of the Encyclo-
paedia Brilannica.
The only considerable criticism of the discoveries in the Royal
Tombs at Abydos we owe to M. Naville, who writes a long and
interesting article on the oldest Egyptian monuments, departing in many
ways from the views of Petrie. The chief points which he endeavours to
prove are: (1) The buildings in the desert are not literally tombs, but
rather temples for the cult of their Ka. (2) There ought not to be kings
anterior to Menes, particularly at Abydos: " Narmer " is really Boethos,
the first king of the Ilnd Dynasty. According to M. Naville, Boethos,
Usaphais, and Miebidos are the only kings as yet identified of the early
time; the identification of Menes had been combated in M. Naville's
previous paper. M. Naville suggests that Ka-Sekhem and Ka-Sekhemui
are two names for one king, before and after his victories over the northern
people ; possibly the king is to be identified with Miebidos. M. Naville
incidentally proposes many new readings for the inscriptions, and promises
a further contribution on the subject, Bee. xxiv. 109.
A very valuable edition of the inscription on the famous stone of
Palermo, prepared with the aid of Dr. Boechaedt and Professor Setiie, is
published by Dr. Schafeb under the title of Bin BruchstUck Altaegyptischer
Ahtialen (Abh. d. Konigl. Ahad. zu Berlin). The inscription was first
noticed about 1865 by De Rouge, and a good copy by Trof. Pellegrini was
published in 1896. M. Naville in particular has made excellent use of
it in his recent discussions of the monuments of the early kings. The
inscription is difficult to copy and the present revision is very welcome.
Dr. Schafer and his collaborators throw much new light on this peculiar
and hitherto very obscure record, making its general scheme quite in-
telligible and giving a reasonable interpretation of most of the details.
It is a fragment, and alas a very small one, of official annals of the kings
of Egypt, probably compiled in the Vth Dynasty. It begins with a mere
list of names of kings of Lower Egypt before the two crowns were united.
Later, presumably in the 1st Dynasty, each year of the king's reign is
marked by one or more entries: by the time of the IVth Dynasty there
are several entries to each year, and for the Vth Dynasty there are
annually long lists of endowments given to temples and of buildings erected,
and the number of months and days of the last year of each king before
his death are duly noted. That such annals as these existed is a very
Pbogeess of Egyptology.
Niebuhe sketches the history of Egypt, from the earliest times to the
present day, in Helrnost's Weltgeschichte. (120 pp.)
Peteie has contributed an article on the discoveries in Egyptian
History since 1872 to the supplementary volume xxvii. of the Encyclo-
paedia Brilannica.
The only considerable criticism of the discoveries in the Royal
Tombs at Abydos we owe to M. Naville, who writes a long and
interesting article on the oldest Egyptian monuments, departing in many
ways from the views of Petrie. The chief points which he endeavours to
prove are: (1) The buildings in the desert are not literally tombs, but
rather temples for the cult of their Ka. (2) There ought not to be kings
anterior to Menes, particularly at Abydos: " Narmer " is really Boethos,
the first king of the Ilnd Dynasty. According to M. Naville, Boethos,
Usaphais, and Miebidos are the only kings as yet identified of the early
time; the identification of Menes had been combated in M. Naville's
previous paper. M. Naville suggests that Ka-Sekhem and Ka-Sekhemui
are two names for one king, before and after his victories over the northern
people ; possibly the king is to be identified with Miebidos. M. Naville
incidentally proposes many new readings for the inscriptions, and promises
a further contribution on the subject, Bee. xxiv. 109.
A very valuable edition of the inscription on the famous stone of
Palermo, prepared with the aid of Dr. Boechaedt and Professor Setiie, is
published by Dr. Schafeb under the title of Bin BruchstUck Altaegyptischer
Ahtialen (Abh. d. Konigl. Ahad. zu Berlin). The inscription was first
noticed about 1865 by De Rouge, and a good copy by Trof. Pellegrini was
published in 1896. M. Naville in particular has made excellent use of
it in his recent discussions of the monuments of the early kings. The
inscription is difficult to copy and the present revision is very welcome.
Dr. Schafer and his collaborators throw much new light on this peculiar
and hitherto very obscure record, making its general scheme quite in-
telligible and giving a reasonable interpretation of most of the details.
It is a fragment, and alas a very small one, of official annals of the kings
of Egypt, probably compiled in the Vth Dynasty. It begins with a mere
list of names of kings of Lower Egypt before the two crowns were united.
Later, presumably in the 1st Dynasty, each year of the king's reign is
marked by one or more entries: by the time of the IVth Dynasty there
are several entries to each year, and for the Vth Dynasty there are
annually long lists of endowments given to temples and of buildings erected,
and the number of months and days of the last year of each king before
his death are duly noted. That such annals as these existed is a very