DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.49270#0358
Ancient Egyptian Fishing
271
as one of indigenous growth. Whether or not this view, and the others I have ventured
to express in this paper, are based on a just appreciation of the material at present avail-
able, the accumulation of further evidence will show.
Addendum
The above paper had gone to press before I had the pleasure of reading an article
on Egyptian metallurgy by Petrie 241—- an article which I would earlier have received had
it not been for the irregularity of the posts. Among the illustrations of the paper in
question are two of harpoons. One 242 is of a form almost identical with that of the New
Kingdom example here given in fig. 72; the other 243, here shown in text
fig. E, is a bilaterally barbed specimen of asymmetrical design, closely re-
sembling the modern Dyur crocodile harpoon of fig. 84. Both specimens
are of copper, and are referred, on grounds not stated in Petrie’s paper, to
the early predynastic period. That they may indeed belong to the latter
part of that age is perfectly possible; but it is difficult to regard them as
possessing such very high antiquity as Petrie attributes to them.244 There-
fore, as I am unacquainted as yet with the arguments by which they have
been dated, I must rest content here to refer the reader to Petrie’s valuable
little paper, and to add to the other drawings accompanying this present
article the text fig. E.
Peabody Museum,
Cambridge.
241 W. M. F. Petrie, ‘The metals in Egypt’ (Anc. Egypt, 1915, pt. 1, p. 12-23).
242 Ibid., p. 13, fig. 2.
243 Ibid., p. 13, fig. 3.
244 Reisner, op. cit., p. 316.
Text fig. E.
271
as one of indigenous growth. Whether or not this view, and the others I have ventured
to express in this paper, are based on a just appreciation of the material at present avail-
able, the accumulation of further evidence will show.
Addendum
The above paper had gone to press before I had the pleasure of reading an article
on Egyptian metallurgy by Petrie 241—- an article which I would earlier have received had
it not been for the irregularity of the posts. Among the illustrations of the paper in
question are two of harpoons. One 242 is of a form almost identical with that of the New
Kingdom example here given in fig. 72; the other 243, here shown in text
fig. E, is a bilaterally barbed specimen of asymmetrical design, closely re-
sembling the modern Dyur crocodile harpoon of fig. 84. Both specimens
are of copper, and are referred, on grounds not stated in Petrie’s paper, to
the early predynastic period. That they may indeed belong to the latter
part of that age is perfectly possible; but it is difficult to regard them as
possessing such very high antiquity as Petrie attributes to them.244 There-
fore, as I am unacquainted as yet with the arguments by which they have
been dated, I must rest content here to refer the reader to Petrie’s valuable
little paper, and to add to the other drawings accompanying this present
article the text fig. E.
Peabody Museum,
Cambridge.
241 W. M. F. Petrie, ‘The metals in Egypt’ (Anc. Egypt, 1915, pt. 1, p. 12-23).
242 Ibid., p. 13, fig. 2.
243 Ibid., p. 13, fig. 3.
244 Reisner, op. cit., p. 316.
Text fig. E.