Naville, Edouard: The store-city of Pithom and the route of the Exodus (London, 1888)

I have alluded before1 to the fact that Hero-
dotus mentions Pithom under the name of
Patumos of Arabia, TlaTovpLos r) 'Apafiirj. The
identity of the two names is so obvious that,
until quite lately, it has never been questioned
by any geographer or historian. As the pas-
sage of Herodotus has been the object of a
good deal of discussion I shall here explain
how, after the discovery of the site of Pithom,
and the vicinity of the sea, we are to read and
interpret the passage which I quote in full:2
Wappvrl^ov Se IVe/cws nous e'yeVero /cat ifiaalkevcre
AlyvnTOV, 09 rfj Sttopu^t ine^elp-qcre TrpSiTos Trj e's
ty)u 'Epv6pr]v Odkaaaav (pepovcrrj, tt/v Aapeios 6
Uipar^s Seurepa StGjpufe .... 'H/crat Se dnb tov
Neikov to vScop is avTr)v, rjKTcu Se KaTvirepBe
okiyov BovfidaTios 7rdX.tos napa. ndrovp-ov rrjv
Apaftirjv nokiv. 'Eo-eyei Se e's Tr)v 'EpvOprjv
Odkaaaav. " Psammitichus left a son called
Nekos, who succeeded him upon the throne.
This prince was the first to attempt the con-
struction of the canal to the Red Sea—a work

completed afterwards by Darius the Persian.....

The water is derived from the Nile, which the
canal leaves a little above the city of Bubastis,
near Patumos the Arabian town; it runs into
the Red Sea."

This is the text which is given in most of
the new editions of Herodotus, and the trans-
lation generally adopted. But since the site of
Pithom has been determined exactly, and it has
been found that the city was at the end of the
canal near the coast of the Arabian Gulf, the
sentence of Herodotus can no more be under-
stood as before; either the text is incorrect, or

1 Pp. 5 and 8.

s Herod, ii. 158, ed. Muller. Paris, Didot.

it must be translated differently. Leaving
aside for the present the argument de facto,
let us consider the sentence merely from a
literary point of view. It is evident that it has
been wrongly divided. What does Herodotus
describe ? the canal which goes to the Red Sea,
rfj ets Tr)v 'Epv9pr)v ddkacrcrav <j>epovo~r) ; it is a
matter of course that it runs into the Red Sea.
The end of the sentence, e'o-e'xei etc., is a quite
unnecessary repetition. Supposing we were to
describe a canal the name of which sufficiently
indicates where it leads to, such as the Rhone-
Rhine canal for instance, after having men-
tioned the place where it leaves the Rhone we
should not add merely that it runs into the
Rhine, unless it were to fix the spot where the
junction takes place. It is exactly the same
with Herodotus; he gives us the two ends of
the canal, the starting point near Bubastis and
the point of junction near Patumos. The text
is corrupt, but it is easily mended; first by
putting the stop after 7rd\tos, and by displacing
the Se', for which we have the authority of two
manuscripts. Thus we read: 'Hktcu Se kojtv-
nepOe bklyov Bovfiao~Tios irokios. Uapd nd.Tovp.ov
Se rrjv 'Apafiirjv iroktv ecre'^et St) e's tt)v 'Epvdprjv
ddkao-crav. " The water is derived from the
Nile a little above Bubastis, and it runs into
the Red Sea near Patumos, the Arabian city."
The sentence is perfectly symmetrica], the
description fluent, and quite parallel to the
sentence of Ptolemy, who, after giving the
latitude of Heroopolis, adds : St" rjs /cat Baj8u-
kcovos 7ro\ew5 Tpa'iavbs troTapbs pel, through
which and through Babylon flows the canal of
Trajan (Amnis Trajanus). Babylon being the
starting-point on the Nile, near Memphis, it is
clear that Ptolemy gives here the two ends,