This
preview
has intentionally blurred sections.
Sign up to view the full version.
This
preview
has intentionally blurred sections.
Sign up to view the full version.
This
preview
has intentionally blurred sections.
Sign up to view the full version.
This
preview
has intentionally blurred sections.
Sign up to view the full version.
Unformatted text preview: THE STUDY OF
ANCIENT EGYPT Egypt has been of almost continual interest to peo—
ple of other cultures, and has been written about by
authors from the Greek Hekataios of Miletos in the
6th century BCE {whose book is lost) to today. When
ancient Egyptian civilization disappeared in the
Byzantine Period it could no longer be an object of
contemporary study, but it was remembered through-
out the Middle Ages for its monuments, notably the
pyramids. A number of medieval pilgrims to Pales—
tine and Jerusalem visited Egypt, mostly to see sites
associated with Christ’s stay there; even the pyramids
were believed to relate to the Bible, being the ”gra— naries of Joseph." The first stages Interest in Mediterranean antiquity and knowledge
of it revived in the Renaissance, and among the first
Classical texts to be rediscovered and circulated in
the 15th century were two products of the early cen— turies CE that were probably composed in Egypt in
the Greek language. The first was the Hierogbiphica
of Horapollo, which gives symbolic elucidations of a
number ofhieroglyphs. The second was the Hermetic
Corpus, a set of philosophical tracts that contain Neo-
platonist and other material as well as genuine Egypt—
ian ideas. Texts of the latter type tended to support
the assumption, which goes back to early Greek
philosophers, that Egypt was the fount of ancient
wisdom. The same is true of the H ierogthhica, which
was held to describe a method of encapsulating pro—
found truths in pictorial signs. In the 16th century antiquarians studied the phys4
ical remains of antiquity rather more. In Rome, the
chief center of their researches, they were immedi-
ately confronted with Egyptian objects, most of
which had been imported for the prestigious Isis cult
in the early Empire, and included them in their pub—
lications. This material formed, with the obelisks that
are still a striking element in the Roman scene, a
nucleus that was generally recognized as being
Egyptian, and was interpreted with the aid of writ-
ings about Egypt by authors of Classical antiquity.
Illustrators of the time had no conception of the dif—
ferences in character between their own methods of
pictorial representation and those of ancient Egypt,
so that many of their reproductions resemble the orig-
inals only very remotely. The late 16th and early 17th centuries brought the
first visits to Egypt in search of antiquities. Pietro
della Valle [1586-1652) traveled all over the eastern
Mediterranean from 1614 to 1626, bringing Egypt—
ian mummies and important Coptic manuscripts back
with him to Italy. The manuscripts were in the latest
form of the Egyptian language, written in Greek let-
ters, which was regularly learned by priests in the
Coptic Church in Egypt, where it is used to this day
in the liturgy. They could therefore be studied by
those who knew Arabic, the language in which
primers of Coptic were written. Two centuries later
Coptic was fundamental to the decipherment of the
hieroglyphic script. It was also the initial study of the 22 Block statue of the Chief Lecter-
Priest Petamenope: engraving in
G. Herwart van Hohenburg,
Thesaunts Hierogbzpizicorum
[1620), the earliest published
collection of hieroglyphic
inscriptions. Herwart showed
the same object as two different
ones, using two iéth-century
manuscript sources as his
models. From Rome [?],
originally from Thebes; c. 650
BCE. i-‘aris, Musée du Louvre.
Another statue of the same man
is illustrated on p. 198. Obelisk and elephant:
illustration of an imaginary
mausoleum from Francesco
Colonna, Hypnerotomachia
PolifiIi (Venice, 1499}. The
"hieroglyphic" inscription is
mostly after a Roman temple
frieze that was believed to
contain Egyptian hieroglyphs. Map of ancient Egypt by
Abraham Orteljus, Amsterdam,
1395. The motto reads "Rich in
natural resources, Egypt places
all her trust in the Nile, and so
has no need of either foreign
trade or the rain of heaven"
[Lucan, Civil W'arSAtlfiflTv'). As
on many other pure—1800 maps,
north is placed on the right in
order to give a "landscape" of
the Nile. The map is a
remarkable achievement,
showing most towns and names (gt/W5 iflZféK Zea?) in their correct relative
positions. including Thebes 125
years before its site was
identified on the ground. The
information is almost all from
Classical sources, the only ones
then available for ancient Egypt,
so that, for example, the
Classical river mouths are
shown. Note the list of
unidentified places. The
topography is not based on a
survey and is inaccurate.
London, British Library. THE STUDY OF ANCIENT EGYPT aware _. .vmxwam is . “ mwrfxrxfifrmwnxr
. . - m., '.—-' ...... i. .. M vs = , .- . ” '_A3\! fiw'LOCA':-: ~- .1 ., .I" .6' .(‘ahhm‘t‘mhn
anthem». . a‘nfiémwlgasi-mm
“Hangs? . no .-.£vhm,_i ,« trawl-gas:- if:
,: mu. MW 5:161»,
flaw ms” LL"? If “CW-.1 .3:El.5rw.5'=VHu. 3w
53.5,. ,-r ,‘Tph'fifzw._-_
. 1 possum-art's" great Jesuit polymath Athanasius Kircher [1602e80],
who wrote numerous works about ancient Egypt and
was one of the first to attempt a deeipherment. A byway in the development of European know-
ledge of Egypt is revealed by a manuscript recording
the travels of an unidentified Venetian in 1589
through Upper Egypt and Lower Nubia as far south
as el-Derr. His is one of dozens of accounts by visitors
to, and residents of, Egypt, but the only one to prov
claim a disinterested fascination for the ancient mon-
uments. The author stated that he “did not travel for 1;?) ®
9 any useful purpose. but only to see so many superb
edifices, churches, statues. colossi. ‘obelisks. and
columns.” But ”even though I went a great distance.
none of the buildings I saw was worthy of admira—
tion, except for one. which is called Ochsur [Luxon
within which he included Karnak] by the Moors {the
Italian word for North Africans].” His evaluation foree
shadowed the 19th century, when Luxor became a
center of tourism. Of Karnak he said: ”Judge whether
this tremendous building is superior to the seven
wonders of the world. One of them still exists, one of 23 THE STUDY OF ANCIENT EGYPT the pyramids of the pharaohs; in comparison with
this construction it is a small thing. I am not sending
anyone who wishes to see this monument to the end
of the world; it is only ten days' journey from Cairo,
and one can go there quite cheaply.” This astonish—
ing work was not published until the 20th century
and seems to have had no influence on other writers. In the next century the most nearly comparable
text, known from secondary publications, is a nar—
rative of the visit of two Capuchin friars to Luxor and
Esna in 1668 where, they stated, "in human memory
no Frenchman had ever been." Like their predeces»
sor, they were pressed for time, but they succeeded
in crossing to the west bank at Thebes and seeing the
ValIey of the Kings, the prime later tourist attraction
that had eluded the Venetian. Travelers and antiquaries Explorations like those just mentioned cannot be
termed archaeological. The word can, however, be
used for the work of John Greaves (1602+52), an Eng—
lish astronomer who published his Pyramidogmphia,
or a Discourse of the Pyramids in Aegypt in 1646.
Greaves visited Giza on two occasions in 1638139,
measured and examined the pyramids thoroughly,
and made a critical analysis of ancient writings about
them; he also went to Saqqara. The resulting work
was more penetrating than any other of its time on
ancient Egypt; a notable feature is its use of medieval
Arabic sources. Essentially Greaves followed the
example of humanist scholarship of the Renaissance,
but his application of the methods to Egypt was
scarcely imitated by others. From the later 17th century onward the number of
travelers to Egypt increased gradually, and their writ—
ings started to incorporate usable drawings of the
monuments. The most significant advance in knowl—
edge was made by the Jesuit Claude Sicard [1677*
1726}, who was commissioned by the French regent
to investigate ancient monuments in Egypt. His stud—
ies were never finally completed and survive mainly
in the form of letters and a map. He visited Upper
Egypt four times, and was the first modern traveler
to identify the site of Thebes, and to attribute cor—
rectly the colossi of Memnon and the Valley of the
Kingsi on the basis of Classical descriptions. His most
important successor was the Dane Frederik Ludwig
Norden [170842], who visited Egypt in 1737—38,
and whose posthumously published volume of trav-
els, magnificently illustrated with his own drawings,
appeared in various editions from 1751 to the end of
the 18th century. The increase in the numbers of visitors to Egypt
went together with an improvement in the treatment
of Egyptian artifacts — and of antiquity and exotic
cultures as a whole ~— in major 18th century works,
of which the most important are the multi—volume
compilations of Bernard de Montfaucon (published
in 1719—24) and the Comte de Caylus [1752764]. Both
devoted a notable amount of space to Egyptian
objects, while also assigning to Egypt much that came
from elsewhere. Considerable collections of Egyptian
antiquities already existed; some, like a small group
that was in the Bodleian Library in Oxford in the sev-
enteenth century, even included forgeries. Decipherment of the hieroglyphic script Throughout the 18th century the hieroglyphic script
continued to be studied, although little progress was 24 ml" mI‘ w my
lawyer! .arwsumntniilni‘nml-Im- ’4‘? - -A'lf/I///IIIJ/ll//I'Ilrrr/, For left Part of the titulary of the
Roman emperor Domitian [Si—96 .
cs] on the obelisk in Piazza _
Navona in Rome: engraving from Athanasius Kircher.
Obeliscus Pamphilius{Ron1e, _
1550). The small numbers refer .
to allegorical explanations of the
signs in the text of the book. Left Bronze statuette of Ha'pyi, " _
the inundation, dedicated by-
Tjahapimu, son of Ptahirdis;
engraving from B. de Manta"
faucon, L'Antiquiré expliquée e: -.
représenrée en figures. Supplement
(Paris, 1724). The object, then'in
Montpellier, was acquired by-
the Musée des Beaux-Arts in
Lyon in 1835. Below Group of small objects -
that were in the Bodleian .'
Library in Oxford, including
some received from the
collection of Archbishop Willi-am
Laud [1573—1645) in 1635. The
two figures on the left are ' _
genuine, but those on the lower .
right are forgeries. No. 32 may
imitate an "Isis~knot” amulet; D
is a seventeenthmentury pseudo-
shawa bty. Oxford, Ashmolean' '
Museum. Blizom View of rockvcut shrines
and inscriptions at Gebel e1-
Silsila, from F. L. Norden,
Voyage d'Egypte at de Nubia
(Copenhagen, 1755). I rs to Egygt and Sudan
2 1800 ‘ f9 owns and sites marked are mnment in the records of ' ._1 s before Napoleon's .
"fdiiiiou of 1798. Some of the” mes-anii the dates of their
'are given in bold type. blished on their return to
min-Fe More than 200 accounts
tmvclrrs whose journeys
rtded Egypt survive from
mum. hristo h Ffirer van
gym'endérg aged 69, dated 33; from Itinerarium Aegypgi ' he, Syriae, aliumque '_ orientalium (Nfirnberg, 'rer' ean de T hevenot
£83967), frontispiece of
quages .15 M. are Thrdvenot rm 'e,_ A'sie & Afrique
A stéi‘daim, i727: originally
Pink/1665} The inscription says
d, you may know the Bottom Obelisk of Senwosret I at
I ”le35; the hierogiyphs are
egtble but quite urn—Egyptian in
sivle} and the landscape is pean. From Gemelli Careri,
jagé'a’u tour (it: mande 5’aris,
29 whose text implies that
elisk was in Alexandria. I _itine . -s'rle visiletjl by 1h . missus '
modern name
aléssicél name Aswan.
MEMPHIS acetatasououa. .'_dj. . '19 ms 1-!qu Land whp also bayafled tn Egypt. . -.
._ name 01 £351 Fabrj mmugn Sinai. 1453 - -- umj'avan mum'tmme'nnaemefied Séa' " -' .-
_Dl'l the 15M'Qentuyy map'Egyprus naveioj ' of French Jesuits and italian - -
Fransctscane naming to Emiupia,-169§-1TI n ‘itin'erani or'mees'arnee; 17714.2 _ '.
S'i1e_ visited Ynn’ls Chflsfian associations . Hi 92° MEDtTEHHANEANjSEA THE STUDY OF ANCIENT EGYPT . 4 - 2
}%g;fSlAmhbn I R Lamar! IH Monastery dis: Pam . A ura 1:195-
't'é'gmy r422 FfSFq-IISCJTIS .-
Tu etaebel ' '
mnoamtts! 5i?” "m5 _ Vuuteb mm; film! ems E
' i
i i
1
i “was?
i Grangcrs‘nx 4
. n ._..t N {I of e Kin em cm I a By mama Frriaun¥ols1fisesé
7“ - Armant_?_/ Lucas 1116‘
Panache 1731‘ }
quei el-Silsila
Pocockn 1737 Mania-11137 ”w ' flabud-
magma a a I Jaws" 11337' FEEE“ I Sah—a—g a 1
Iei-Dakka. \Gm Harden 1738 , elSebu'a
Nurden 1738 ‘Amada
Harden 1738 L ta Kum ()th . 7 n
' ELEPH N ‘ a "‘"Medicé‘?
i PHME—\ Slamming???“ " 3| \ ‘ Monasiéryiof
rt \\ E5;: @212: \Gusair '
' Baum: da lmnln 74m . "Sibrit" { w \_ . _ ' '
Genassi 1....1 W ' _ _ g
Noreen 1745 a 3 g 3 i . Dendurl 3. .____ _% '- 31 a
'Manghiha'uh\,\\=
E Holden 1138 sséin -9;th
2%. FUN KING ' '3mnyénfiona] itineréry'oi muse medieval piigrinie '9 anonymous Venetian In 1589 '- El Cllrllaudl _ Musaww atelx‘Sufi-a I .
“Linemde landnaz1;_- '3 ca: laud132_2 I Na 3' .
LI maeBeIMonduam; . . THE STUDY OF ANCIENT EGYPT made toward a decipherment. Antiquarian and iin—
guistic interest in Egypt culminated with the Dane
Georg Zoéga [1755—1809], whose two major works, a
treatise on obelisks, which includes a section on the
hieroglyphic script, and a catalog of Coptic manu—
scripts in the Vatican collections, are of lasting value.
The 1797 work on obelisks marks a peak in Egypt—
ian studies before Napoleon's expedition in 1798.
Although the script could, and no doubt would, have
been deciphered without the discovery of bilingual
inscriptions, Egyptology as we know it is a product
of that expedition, during which the Rosetta Stone
was unearthed, of the associated surge of enthusiasm
for Egypt, and of graduai changes in the intellectual
climate of western Europe. Napoleon’s expedition was accompanied by a vast
team of scholars who were sent to study and record
all aspects of Egypt, ancient and modern. The Rosetta
Stone soon passed into British hands, but the team
produced a fundamental multi-volume work, the
Description dc I'Egypte, first published in 180%30.
This was the last, and much the most important, such
work produced before the decipherment of the script
by Jean—Francois Champollion le Jeune (1790—1832}
in 182.2724, which signals the beginning of Egyptol—
ogy as a distinct subject. Champollion and the Pisan
Ippolito Rosellini (1800—43) mounted a joint expedi—
tion to record monuments in Egypt in the late 18205,
but by that time they were latecomers on the scene.
In the previous twenty years numerous travelers had
visited Egyptian and Lower Nubian sites and had
rifled them for antiquities, written books about them,
or both. Prominent among them were several consuls
of European nations, the Italian strongman Giovanni
Belzoni (1778—1823), the French sculptor Jean
Jacques Rifaud [1786—1852], the Swiss traveler
Johann Ludwig Burckhardt (1784—1817), and the
Franco-German Franz Christian Gau (1790—1853).
The collections some of these men gathered formed
the nuciei of the Egyptian sections of the British
Museum in London, the Louvre in Paris, the Rijksmu-
seum van Oudheden in Leiden, and the Museo Egizio 26 in Turin [there was no Egyptian Museum in Cairo
until the late 18505). In the first half of the 19th cen— tury digging in Egypt was primarily for objects. The recovery of information, as against objects, came a poor second.
Before his death in 1832 Champoliion had made great progress in understanding the Egyptian lan- guage and in reconstructing Egyptian history and
civilization, but this work had little impact, both
because of deiays in publication and because of its
strictly academic nature. By 1840 the first generation
of Egyptologists was already dead, and the subject
retained a precarious existence in France, with
Vicomte Emmanuel de Rouge [1811—72], in Holland
with Conrad Leemans [180%93], and especialiy in
Prussia with Carl Richard Lepsius [islthti]. Lepsius's Above Frontispiece of F. L.
Norden, Voyage d‘Egypte a: tie
Nubia (Copenhagen, 1755]. The
central aliegory shows: Fame:
Ancient Egypt displaying her
treasures; a Iion with the arms of
ancient kings of Denmark; and
the Nile. There is also a Classical
figure of Isis, as weli as Egyptian
monuments and other motifs. Left Pyramidion of the obelisk of . .
Psammetichus It by the Palazz-J
di Montecitorio in Rome; from
G. Zoéga, De origine at am
cber‘iscorum (Rome, 1797]. The
copy is accurate and legible, but
its style is rather unvEgyptian. xcavan'ons in the First
Intermediate period town at
ydos, south of the Osiris
temple, 1979 season. The site is
dug in squares that are extended
a trenches, with the sections
as a' check on stratification.
is is one of relatively few
__wnsites that have been
excavated in Upper Egypt.
PennsylvaniaFYalewlnstitute of
" e Arts expedition to Abydos. lZ-volume Denkmaefer ans Aegypten and Aethicpien
[184%59], the result of an expedition up the Nile as
far as Meroe in 1842—45, is the earliest reliable pub-
lication of a large selection of monuments, and
remains of fundamental! importance. The English pica
neer Wilkinson is treated in detail on pages 106%)7. The growth of Egyptology
In the mid-19th century Lepsius, his younger con“
temporary Heinrich Brugsch (1827—94), and a hand-
f ul of other scholars continued to advance the subject,
while Auguste Mariette {1821e81}, a Frenchman who
was originally sent to acquire Coptic manuscripts for
the Louvre in 1850, placed work in Egypt on a per—
manent footing. Mariette entered the service of the
Khedive Said in 1858, excavated at many sites before
and after that date, and founded the Egyptian
Museum and Antiquities Service {now Supreme
Council of Antiquities). The aims of the latter were
to preserve and record the monuments, to. excavate,
and to administer the museum. Until the Egyptian
Revolution of 1952 its directors were European, the
best known of them being Gaston Maspero
(1346—1916). The aims of scientific excavation in Egypt were first
stated in 1862 by the Scot Alexander Rhind
(1833—63), but they were not realized on any scale
until the work of Sir William Matthew FlinderslPetrie
(185371942). Petrie first went to Egypt in 1880 to
make measurements of the Great Pyramid for the sup—
posed arcane secrets it embodied — a pursuit gener-
ally termed ”pyramidology”. He was soon convinced
of the spuriousness of pyramidology and went on to
excavate at sites all over Egypt, publishing a volume
almost every year on the results of the preceding win—
ter. Among his excavations were major discoveries,
but his work was far more important in providing a
framework of method, information, and typology
about the different areas and periods, often resulting
from reworking sites that had already been excavated THE STUDY 0F ANCIENT EGYPT summarily by others. During his own lifetime Petrie's
standards were overtaken, notably by the American
George Andrew Reisner {1867—1942}. but Reisner published relatively little of his results.
From about 1880 to 19M there was much archaeo— logical work in Egypt, and sites in Nubia came into
prominence with the completion and subsequent
raising of the first Aswan Dam [1902 and 1907). The
end of the 19th century saw major advances in the
understanding of Egyptian language and chronology,
made in Berlin by Adolf Erman (185471937) and
Eduard Meyer (185 5—1930} respectively, and the dis
covery of sites from all historical periods, as well as
Predynastic phases from Naqada I on. Work since
then has developed knowledge greatly in all areas,
but only in a few has it changed the outlines funda-
mentally. In comparison, the 19th century was a time
of continuous change. Until about 1870 most Egypv
tological knowledge related to late stages of the civ-
ilization, while there was no proper division of the
physical remains or of the language into periods. As
knowledge advanced, interest tended to focus on the
earlier, more “classical” phases of both. Excavation in the 20th century
The public image of 20th century excavation was
dominated by a...
View
Full Document
- Spring '09
- MONROE, C
-
Click to edit the document details