DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.14391#0036
22
STORE-CITY OF PITHOM AND
THE ROUTE OF THE EXODUS.
" Under our victorious lords, the emperors Maximianus and
Severus, and the most illustrious Caesars Maximums and
Constantine, from Ero to Clusma there are nine miles.—Nine."
As it was usual in the provinces where Greek
was spoken, the distance is given both in Latin
and Greek. The sign which is at the end of the
last line is a 6, which means nine.1 Similar
instances of the number being indicated in
both languages, though the inscription is in
Latin only, have been met with on a Roman road
in Syria, and in several provinces of Asia Minor,
Cappadocia, Bithynia, Mysia, and Galatia.2 Un-
like the other one, this inscription is complete;
there is no gap, no unfinished character, all the
letters have been engraved with the same care.
It would, indeed, be extraordinary that the
engraver should have made a mistake precisely
in the number which gives the distance to the
next station. He would thus have done just
the reverse of what the stone was intended for.
The stone does not seem to have had any other
purpose than to mark a station for soldiers and
travellers, and to indicate the length of the
road to the next city or camp. We may reason-
ably admit that this distance was given cor-
rectly, and that it was not stated at more than
fifty miles shorter than its actual length.
Here we encounter a difficulty which seems
very grave at first sight. In the Itinerary of
Antoninus3 we read that there are eighteen
miles from Ero to Serapiu, and fifty from
Serapiu to Clusma, making a sum of sixty-
eight. I agree that in the first edition of this
Memoir I underrated the value of this official
document, and that I put it aside too hastily.
But my explorations in the Delta, and especially
in the region between Cairo and the isthmus,
have shown" me that we can put only a very
1 T am indebted for this valuable information to a kind
letter from Prof. Th. Mommsen. The eminent Latin scholar
says there can be no doubt as to the correctness of the
inscription.
- vid. Corpus inscr. Latin, III. 1, nos. 205, 309, 312, 313,
314, 315, 347, 464.
2 "Itinerarium Antonini," p. 170, ed. Wesseling.
limited confidence in the distances given by the
Itinerary. Taking the well-known line between
two fixed points, Heliopolis and Heroopolis,
along the old canal, we see that the total
distance is fairly correct; the error is only six
miles, which the Itinerary adds to the real
distance which is sixty-four. Between Ero and
Clusma, supposing it to be the present Suez,
the error is double; it is sixty-eight instead
of fifty-six; but if we wish to determine
the intermediate stations, Scenas Veteranorum,
etc., we may take the distances with a com-
pass and mark them on a map, but we shall
find that none of those stations agree with the
Roman settlements which are on this, line, and
which have been preserved to this day. Some
of these settlements cover a considerable extent
of ground; some have their enclosure; they all
are easily discernible; but none of them fit into
the numbers given by the Itinerary; besides, one
of the most important, the large camp of Tell
Rotab,4 nearly half way between Thou and Ero,
is entirely omitted. The same happens with
several other roads of Egypt, and one is com-
pelled to conclude that when it is checked by
the exploration of the localities themselves, and
studied by the light derived from the Egyptian
inscriptions, the Itinerary, in spite of its being
an official document, loses much of its authority.
In this case the Itinerary is supported by a
great mass of proofs derived both from late
Greek and Arab writers. There has been a
Clusma near Suez, very likely at the present Tell
Kolzum, the name of which is considered as the
Semitic transformation of Clusma. Thus the dis-
agreement between the stone and the Itinerary is
evident, and must be explained. The most
easy way is certainly to suppose, with Professors
Dillmann5 and Mommsen,6 that the stone marked
4 See my memoir on Goshen and the Shrine of Saft et
Henneh, p. 24, and the plan of the fortress, pi. ii.
6 Uber Pithom, Hero, Klusma n£ch Naville, Berliner
Akademie, 30 Juli, 1885, p. 9.
6 Uber einen neuen aufgefandenen Reisebericht nach
dem gelobten Lande. Berl. Akad. 28 April, 1887, p. 7 et 8.
STORE-CITY OF PITHOM AND
THE ROUTE OF THE EXODUS.
" Under our victorious lords, the emperors Maximianus and
Severus, and the most illustrious Caesars Maximums and
Constantine, from Ero to Clusma there are nine miles.—Nine."
As it was usual in the provinces where Greek
was spoken, the distance is given both in Latin
and Greek. The sign which is at the end of the
last line is a 6, which means nine.1 Similar
instances of the number being indicated in
both languages, though the inscription is in
Latin only, have been met with on a Roman road
in Syria, and in several provinces of Asia Minor,
Cappadocia, Bithynia, Mysia, and Galatia.2 Un-
like the other one, this inscription is complete;
there is no gap, no unfinished character, all the
letters have been engraved with the same care.
It would, indeed, be extraordinary that the
engraver should have made a mistake precisely
in the number which gives the distance to the
next station. He would thus have done just
the reverse of what the stone was intended for.
The stone does not seem to have had any other
purpose than to mark a station for soldiers and
travellers, and to indicate the length of the
road to the next city or camp. We may reason-
ably admit that this distance was given cor-
rectly, and that it was not stated at more than
fifty miles shorter than its actual length.
Here we encounter a difficulty which seems
very grave at first sight. In the Itinerary of
Antoninus3 we read that there are eighteen
miles from Ero to Serapiu, and fifty from
Serapiu to Clusma, making a sum of sixty-
eight. I agree that in the first edition of this
Memoir I underrated the value of this official
document, and that I put it aside too hastily.
But my explorations in the Delta, and especially
in the region between Cairo and the isthmus,
have shown" me that we can put only a very
1 T am indebted for this valuable information to a kind
letter from Prof. Th. Mommsen. The eminent Latin scholar
says there can be no doubt as to the correctness of the
inscription.
- vid. Corpus inscr. Latin, III. 1, nos. 205, 309, 312, 313,
314, 315, 347, 464.
2 "Itinerarium Antonini," p. 170, ed. Wesseling.
limited confidence in the distances given by the
Itinerary. Taking the well-known line between
two fixed points, Heliopolis and Heroopolis,
along the old canal, we see that the total
distance is fairly correct; the error is only six
miles, which the Itinerary adds to the real
distance which is sixty-four. Between Ero and
Clusma, supposing it to be the present Suez,
the error is double; it is sixty-eight instead
of fifty-six; but if we wish to determine
the intermediate stations, Scenas Veteranorum,
etc., we may take the distances with a com-
pass and mark them on a map, but we shall
find that none of those stations agree with the
Roman settlements which are on this, line, and
which have been preserved to this day. Some
of these settlements cover a considerable extent
of ground; some have their enclosure; they all
are easily discernible; but none of them fit into
the numbers given by the Itinerary; besides, one
of the most important, the large camp of Tell
Rotab,4 nearly half way between Thou and Ero,
is entirely omitted. The same happens with
several other roads of Egypt, and one is com-
pelled to conclude that when it is checked by
the exploration of the localities themselves, and
studied by the light derived from the Egyptian
inscriptions, the Itinerary, in spite of its being
an official document, loses much of its authority.
In this case the Itinerary is supported by a
great mass of proofs derived both from late
Greek and Arab writers. There has been a
Clusma near Suez, very likely at the present Tell
Kolzum, the name of which is considered as the
Semitic transformation of Clusma. Thus the dis-
agreement between the stone and the Itinerary is
evident, and must be explained. The most
easy way is certainly to suppose, with Professors
Dillmann5 and Mommsen,6 that the stone marked
4 See my memoir on Goshen and the Shrine of Saft et
Henneh, p. 24, and the plan of the fortress, pi. ii.
6 Uber Pithom, Hero, Klusma n£ch Naville, Berliner
Akademie, 30 Juli, 1885, p. 9.
6 Uber einen neuen aufgefandenen Reisebericht nach
dem gelobten Lande. Berl. Akad. 28 April, 1887, p. 7 et 8.