DOI Seite / Zitierlink:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.49512#0381
CAUSES DOWN TO THE REIGN OF CHEOPS
345
I conceive therefore of the original tribes as having spoken different dialects of these two languages.
There would have been difficulties between some in understanding each other, and probably dialectic
peculiarities persisted for ages in certain districts. But relations between the tribes, in particular
exchange by river transport, would have tended to produce one common language. When the two
lands were united under Menes the probability is that the dialect used in his district would have been
forced on administrative officials over the whole country. The invention of writing and its utilization
for official purposes would have assisted materially in the development of one common language. Else-
where I have dealt at length with the invention of writing in Egypt (see Reisner, Naga-ed-Der, I,
pp. 122-126). It is clear to me that its early use was entirely practical, marks of ownership, the con-
veyance of authority and orders, and the administrative registration of time in years. The needs of the
first administration controlling the whole land would have forced the invention of a system of writing,
and it is obvious that Menes did use the hieroglyphic system of writing, in its primitive ideographic
stage, for administrative purposes. It is possible that the invention of writing may have taken place
under one of the unknown kings of the Delta, but in its ideographic state it could in that case have been
easily adapted to the language used by Menes as chief of the Thinite Nome. I see no escape from the
conclusion that the language of Egypt was developed from that of the Thinite Nome, and the develop-
ment of writing was based on the hieroglyphic system used by Menes for the purpose of the military
monarchy which he created.
5. PREDYNASTIC EGYPT
a. Grave Types: Prototypes
The burial of man in graves dug in the ground is not certainly known previous to the neolithic
age. In Egypt the graves of the Early and Middle Predynastic periods and all the better graves of the
Late Predynastic were simple pits of oval or rectangular form excavated in the gravel beds bordering the
cultivable land and covered by grave-mounds composed of the surplus gravel left over from the filling
of the grave after the burial. This type of grave continued in use for poor people down to the end of
the Old Kingdom and beyond, but, more than this, it was the type which dominated the main line of
development during Dyn. I—II in Upper Egypt and during Dyn. I in Lower Egypt. It is to be noted
that the excavation of these simple open pits was within the technical means provided by the flint and
other primitive instruments at the service of neolithic man. The oval graves appear to have been
characteristic of the Early Predynastic, while the larger and more richly furnished rectangular graves
were certainly more common in the Middle Predynastic period. This middle period also presents us
with the first examples of an improved protection for the burial chamber itself, consisting of a lining
or a chamber of wooden boards lashed with thong at the corners and covered with a wooden roof.
I assume that it was the grave-mounds of the rectangular tombs which were first protected by wattle
or wooden walls in the form taken by the later coffins of the qrst type. It is also in this period that
burial trays or biers are found made of woven twigs or wattling, strengthened by a wooden frame.
Carpentry had already made a considerable advance, although the dressing of wood was still done without
the use of metal, and joints were lashed with thong instead of being made with wooden dowels or pegs.
These facts suggest that by this time the Egyptian carpenters had produced a much more serviceable
house than the hide-covered tent and the open reed shelters which are to be presupposed for the
earlier period.
The use of the wooden chamber or grave-lining continued into the Dynastic period for the larger
graves. In the Late Predynastic a new type was introduced for poor graves, which improved the
Yy
345
I conceive therefore of the original tribes as having spoken different dialects of these two languages.
There would have been difficulties between some in understanding each other, and probably dialectic
peculiarities persisted for ages in certain districts. But relations between the tribes, in particular
exchange by river transport, would have tended to produce one common language. When the two
lands were united under Menes the probability is that the dialect used in his district would have been
forced on administrative officials over the whole country. The invention of writing and its utilization
for official purposes would have assisted materially in the development of one common language. Else-
where I have dealt at length with the invention of writing in Egypt (see Reisner, Naga-ed-Der, I,
pp. 122-126). It is clear to me that its early use was entirely practical, marks of ownership, the con-
veyance of authority and orders, and the administrative registration of time in years. The needs of the
first administration controlling the whole land would have forced the invention of a system of writing,
and it is obvious that Menes did use the hieroglyphic system of writing, in its primitive ideographic
stage, for administrative purposes. It is possible that the invention of writing may have taken place
under one of the unknown kings of the Delta, but in its ideographic state it could in that case have been
easily adapted to the language used by Menes as chief of the Thinite Nome. I see no escape from the
conclusion that the language of Egypt was developed from that of the Thinite Nome, and the develop-
ment of writing was based on the hieroglyphic system used by Menes for the purpose of the military
monarchy which he created.
5. PREDYNASTIC EGYPT
a. Grave Types: Prototypes
The burial of man in graves dug in the ground is not certainly known previous to the neolithic
age. In Egypt the graves of the Early and Middle Predynastic periods and all the better graves of the
Late Predynastic were simple pits of oval or rectangular form excavated in the gravel beds bordering the
cultivable land and covered by grave-mounds composed of the surplus gravel left over from the filling
of the grave after the burial. This type of grave continued in use for poor people down to the end of
the Old Kingdom and beyond, but, more than this, it was the type which dominated the main line of
development during Dyn. I—II in Upper Egypt and during Dyn. I in Lower Egypt. It is to be noted
that the excavation of these simple open pits was within the technical means provided by the flint and
other primitive instruments at the service of neolithic man. The oval graves appear to have been
characteristic of the Early Predynastic, while the larger and more richly furnished rectangular graves
were certainly more common in the Middle Predynastic period. This middle period also presents us
with the first examples of an improved protection for the burial chamber itself, consisting of a lining
or a chamber of wooden boards lashed with thong at the corners and covered with a wooden roof.
I assume that it was the grave-mounds of the rectangular tombs which were first protected by wattle
or wooden walls in the form taken by the later coffins of the qrst type. It is also in this period that
burial trays or biers are found made of woven twigs or wattling, strengthened by a wooden frame.
Carpentry had already made a considerable advance, although the dressing of wood was still done without
the use of metal, and joints were lashed with thong instead of being made with wooden dowels or pegs.
These facts suggest that by this time the Egyptian carpenters had produced a much more serviceable
house than the hide-covered tent and the open reed shelters which are to be presupposed for the
earlier period.
The use of the wooden chamber or grave-lining continued into the Dynastic period for the larger
graves. In the Late Predynastic a new type was introduced for poor graves, which improved the
Yy