another tomb. Here, then, in three cases different evidences require us to take 1300 B.C.as the date, and in one case a rather earlier and the last a rather later age. Each discovery is entirely independent, and is dated by different classes of objects, yet all agree closely in the age to which we are to assign this pottery. Nor is this age so very different to what is already proposed by Furtwaengler, and which is shown by the metal work of Egyptian fabric found at Mykenae. It will be noticed that this pottery is like the earliest of Mykenae, and not the later and more ornate styles ; and hence we may now feel that firm ground has been reached for dating the beginning of the pottery of Mykenae and Thera to about 1300 B.C.
The other styles of pottery here are also instructive. The pilgrim bottle of early Cypriote make (18), the handle with lines (13), and the bands with wavy lines between (11, 14), which are both characteristically Cypriote: the only two bits of animal figures (9, 12); and the remarkable rude figures (2, 3, 5, 6, 16, and XXI, 47 from a tomb), like those of Mykenae. All of these well-known types are found intermingled in the town which we have seen good reason to date between 1400 and 1200 B.C. So far as a difference in age can be detected it seems as if the later - north - town, which we have seen is more likely to be of the time of Ramessu II, contained but little of the buff (figs. 1 and 7), and mostly the white pottery with black lines, the Cypriote (figs. 8 to 14, and 18). So this may point to a first settlement of Aegean races, and a later influx of Cypriotes. At Kahun also some fragments of Mediterranean pottery were found, all dissimilar to those of Gurob ; but as they were none of them on the doors of the chambers, or in unequivocally early positions, they may be later intrusions, and dropped by chance passers, and some are almost certainly late. It is a fair question, however, if some of them may not be of the XIIth dynasty, a question which we may hope to settle in further work there.
83. Finally, the most important remains of foreign influence here are the signs found scratched on the pottery, some done by the potter before baking (marked P in the copies), others marked by the owners, probably with flint scrapers. Those found at Kahun are on Pl. XXVII, those from Gurob on Pl. XXVIII. First, with regard to the age of these marks. At Kahun on a large jar sunk in the floor of a chamber, to store corn or water in, one sign (141) was found; above it in the room were tools (find 53) and a papyrus of the Middle Kingdom. Hence the mark must be as old as the use of the house in the XIIth dynasty. In a pit in the floor of a room was found a beautiful spoon-handle with a lion's head, and a plain amethyst scarab, both of the XIIth dynasty style, and a potsherd marked (21). In a pit in the floor of another room was broken pottery, with the marks 42, 95. In another place with two pieces of glazed figures of the style of the XIIth dynasty, were found pots with the marks 30, 53, 132. And in the temple foundation deposits of Usertesen II were potter's marks on the jars, 125, 126. These cases are all proved by these evidences to be of the XIIth or perhaps XIIIth dynasty. But a far stronger kind of proof, though not so individual, is given by the character of the pottery on which the marks are found. All the pottery of the XIIth dynasty is characteristically different from any later kind, both in forms, in paste, and specially in the streaking upward inside by the fingers. And these marks are incised on this class, which cannot be mistaken for that of any subsequent age. No stronger proof - or less open to casual error - could be given for the age assigned to these marks.
At Gurob two marks were found on potsherds in a rubbish-hole, which had been built over when the houses were begun on the ruins of the temple, probably by Khuenaten : these marks (XXVIII, 23, 42) therefore date from about 1370 B.C. The same kind of proof is given here, as at Kahun, by the pottery. The sherds on which the marks are found are exactly like the pottery at Tel-el-Amarna of the end of the XVIIIth dynasty, and quite different in form and material to the pottery of the XXIInd or any later age.
84. I do not propose now here to enter on an analysis of these characters. That is a research which would occupy weeks or months; but my present duty is to place them before those who can discuss them, with all the collateral information, while I hurry back to rescue whatever else may remain in these towns. It may clear the subject to briefly point out what the existing beliefs and theories are; as we can then see in what way the apparent evidence of these discoveries agrees or disagrees with our expectations, and what we should accept as probable, or regard with doubt
It has been generally agreed for many years past, that De Rougé's theory of the origin of the Phoenician alphabet - and with it the Greek and Western alphabets - from the Egyptian hieratic writing, is the
home - previous page - next page