Hibis Temple

PUBLICATIONS OF
THE METROPOLITAN MUSEUM OF ART

EGYPTIAN EXPEDITION
VOLUME XIII
EGYPTIAN EXPEDITION
THE TEMPLE OF HIBIS

IN EL KHARGEH OASIS
PART I
THE EXCAVATIONS
BY
H. E. WINLOCK
WITH PLANS AND DRAWINGS BY

LINDSLEY F. HALL, WALTER HAUSER
WILLIAM J. PALMER-JONES, AND
GOUVERNEUR M. PEEK
NEW YORK
1941
COPYRIGHT BY THE METROPOLITAN MUSEUM OF ART, 1941
ERRATA
On page 9, note 9, read "and 59" for "and 57."
On page 15, note 25, read "p. 18" for "p. 17."
PREFACE
T
HE Metropolitan Museum Egyptian Expedition started work on the Temple of
Hibis on December 3, 1909. Since A. M. Lythgoe and A. C. Mace, the two senior
members of the Expedition, were then in New York, I was in charge of the excava-
tions, with H. G. Evelyn White to copy the Greek inscriptions and to give me general
assistance with the digging. It was arranged with Gaston Maspero, Directeur general du
Service des Antiquites, that while the Metropolitan Museum was clearing the temple the
Service would consolidate it and restore it as far as might be possible. For this purpose he
sent out to the Oasis Emile Baraize, then Ingenieur du Service and now Directeur des
Travaux Techniques. Baraize made a preliminary visit on December 17, and on January
12, 1910, started the restoration with the skilled workmen and equipment of the Service.
He lived with us in our Expedition house, and at that time the Expedition began a close
collaboration with him which has continued on many Egyptian sites for over a quarter
of a century. Norman de Garis Davies, the chief of the Expedition's graphic section, arrived
in the Oasis on March 1 and spent the next three weeks copying reliefs in the temple.
Friedrich Koch was lent to us by Dr. Hermann Junker to photograph the reliefs from
March 4 to 17, and in that fortnight he made between two and three hundred negatives.
On March 4 also arrived William J. Palmer-Jones, of the Museum's Expedition, from the
Christian monasteries in the Wadi 'n Natrun, and he drew the plans of the temple as far
as it was possible during that season. The work in the Oasis ended at the beginning of
May, and the account of that first winter's results will be found in the Bulletin of The
Metropolitan Museum 0} Art.1
Since the temple proper was cleared by the end of the season, and since it was obvious
that the site could add little to the Metropolitan Museum's collections, I was transferred
to Thebes to excavate there in 1910-1911. Baraize, however, continued his work of restora-
tion throughout that winter. Evelyn White joined him on February 14 to clear the avenue
through the gateways, and in doing so he discovered the Sphinxes; but about ten days
after his arrival he had to be taken to Cairo, suffering from a serious attack of malaria
such as Baraize and I had had at the end of the previous season. When he returned to the
Oasis the following winter he finished the clearing of the avenue, 2 and in 1912-1913 he
continued his work on the Greek inscriptions, which have recently been published as
Part II of the present series on the excavations of Hibis. 3
1 2
Bulletin, IV (1909), p. 199, and V (1910), p. 222. Bulletin, VII (1912), p. 184.
3
H. G. Evelyn White and James H. Oliver, The Temple of Hibis in el Khargeh Oasis, Part II: Greek
Inscriptions (The Metropolitan Museum of Art Egyptian Expedition). New York, 1939.
PREFACE
Meanwhile Baraize spent a part of each season restoring to their original places the
fallen blocks which we had uncovered, and in 1912-1913 Davies added to his copies of
the reliefs and Ambrose Lansing continued the photographing of the temple.
Apropos of the restoration, it should be said that neither Maspero nor I had realized
that so complete a reconstruction could be made, even with Baraize's ingenuity. The
architraves of the portico, for example, had been so shattered that it seemed impossible
to replace them, and by the end of the first season practically nothing of its east facade
had come to light except the base and the capital of the southeast column with its well-
preserved color. Thus it was that when, acting under Lythgoe's instructions, I asked
Maspero for the capital in 1910, he decided to give it to the Metropolitan Museum as
practically its sole return for an outlay which had made the restoration of the temple
possible. Three years later, when Baraize was finishing the portico, he made a rough-
hewn block to take the place of the capital on the top of the restored column.
During the war years—1914 to 1918 —the Oasis was threatened by Western Desert
tribes, and the Expedition house was occupied as an outpost of the British Army. Ex-
traordinary care was taken of our property, and little was mislaid except the pottery which
had still to be mended and drawn and for which the preliminary field notes were very
scanty.
After the interruption caused by the war, members of the Expedition made frequent
short trips to the Oasis to add to the copies of the reliefs, the plans, and the photographs
of the temple. In the spring of 1924 Harry Burton photographed the portico, which
Baraize had restored just before the war, and during the next winter it was found possible
to finish the plans of the temple, including all Baraize's restorations. That year I went
out to the Oasis with Walter Hauser and Gouverneur M. Peek to complete the survey
started years before by Palmer-Jones, and at the same time Davies and Charles K. Wilkin-
son continued work on the reliefs. It was in that season, while making a sketch plan of the
site of the city of Hibis, that we became aware of the fact that there had been a lake in
the middle of the city.4 From 1926 to 1939 Davies, sometimes alone and sometimes with
either Wilkinson or Burton, made numerous short trips to the Oasis to complete the
copies of the reliefs. During these visits he verified a number of points which arose in the
preparation of the description of the temple. 5
Twenty-five of the photographs appearing in the plates were taken by Burton; a few,
of objects, were taken in the Museum; and the rest were taken by me.6 The final drafting
4
Bulletin, XXI (1926), Mar., part 11, p. 7.
5
Bulletin, XXI (1926), Mar., part 11, p. 41; XXIII (1928), Feb., sect. 11, p. 59, and Dec, sect. 11, p. 48;
XXIV (1929), Nov., sect, n, p. 35; XXVII (1932), Mar., sect. 11, p. 51.
6
Burton's photographs are plates III-VII, ix B, XII-XIV, xvm-xxi (except xix B), and xxvi. The Museum
photographs are plates vm, xxvn, and xxvm.
vi
PREFACE
of the maps and plans reproduced in this volume has been the work of Lindsley F. Hall
of the Museum's staff. To Edward T. Newell, President of the American Numismatic
Society, we owe the identification of the coins found on the site as given in Appendix I.
In the preparation of the chapters describing the temple Charlotte R. Clark has given
mvaluable assistance, and Norman de G. Davies, Ambrose Lansing, Ludlow S. Bull, and
William C. Hayes have made numerous valuable suggestions.
The reader will undoubtedly recognize how fortunate we are in having so complete a
monument to represent the transition from the architecture of the Theban Empire to
that of the Ptolemaic period. While the Temple of Hibis was built under the Persian and
the immediately succeeding dynasties, it constitutes the best-preserved structure in the
style of the great Saite renaissance which immediately preceded its erection, and it shows
that much which we have usually regarded as innovation of the Ptolemaic period was
actually earlier.
H. E. WINLOCK.
New York, January, 1940.
vn
CONTENTS
PAGE
PREFACE . . . . . . . . . .
TABLE OF CONTENTS . . . . . . . . ix
LIST OF PLATES . . . . . . . . . xi
KEY TO REFERENCES CITED . . . . . . . xv

CHAPTER I. T H E SITE OF HIBIS AND THE EARLIER TEMPLE OF AMUN
Location of Hibis—junction of desert roads—town site—cemeteries—ancient

lake. Site of an earlier temple—stones from it—Southern Buildings I and 11—
dating from the XXVI Dynasty
CHAPTER II. T H E EARLIEST PART OF THE TEMPLE, A-M . . . . .
i. THE DATE OF THE FIRST BUILDING PERIOD, 510-490 B.C. First building period—
cartouches of Darius—Darius III to be eliminated—Darius II to be elimi-
nated—Darius I the builder of the first period—510-490 B.C.
2. THE PLAN OF THE EARLIEST PART OF THE TEMPLE. Sanctuary, A. Hypostyle
hall B—its columns. Crypts C-D. Stairway E—chapels Ei, E2—roofs E3-E5—
rainspouts. Chambers F, G, I, J. Stairway H—Osiris chapel, H1-H3. Chapel
K-K2. Chamber L—composite capital. Hypostyle hall M—columns—screen
wall—original facade. Exterior of the temple. . . . . . .
3 . THE CONSTRUCTION AND DISINTEGRATION OF THE ORIGINAL STRUCTURE. W a l l
construction. Bedrock under the temple—subsidence of the foundations—•
fissures in the walls—repairs to the structure—patches in the outer walls—
consolidation of the foundations. Damage done in the XIX century. 15
CHAPTER III. ADDITIONS TO THE TEMPLE, N-R . . . . . . 20
1. HYPOSTYLE HALL N. Added to the temple—probably in 391-378 B.C. Founda-

tions of the walls—of the columns—construction of the walls—iron wedges
in the masonry. Great east door—wicket gates—north doorway. Chambers
O, P. Columns—roof of the side aisles—of the central aisle—drainage—lighting.
Structural weaknesses—collapse of the roof. . . . . . . 20
2. THE PORTICO, Q. Added to the temple—between 378 and 341 B.C. Composite
papyrus capitals—lotus capitals—campaniform and palm capitals. Doors—
pivots and bolts. Roof—beams—wooden roof—other wooden portico roofs—
other possible wooden roofs—their origin Egyptian. Foundations and collapse—
restoration. . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
ix
CONTENTS
PAGE
CHAPTER III. ADDITIONS TO THE T E M P L E , N-R—continued
3. THE GIRDLE WALL, R. Plan—construction—doorways—date, 283-245 B.C. . 32
CHAPTER IV. T H E T E M E N O S . . . . . . . . . . 34
1. THE AVENUE AND THE ENCLOSURE WALLS. Earliest enclosure wall—Inner Gate-
way—masonry. Obelisk Bases (?). Later enclosure wall—Great Gateway—
date. Date of the lower avenue—Quay—Avenue of Sphinxes. Outer Gateway—
date. Hermeias pavement. . . . . . . . . . 34
2. BUILDINGS AND OBJECTS IN THE TEMENOS. Southern Building II. Northern
Building. Ptolemaic reliefs—date. Inscriptions of the early garrison. Temple-
shaped shrine. Remains of statues. Sculptors' models. Temple vessels. Late
pagan rubbish south of the temple. Deposit of bronze figures. . . . 38
CHAPTER V. BUILDINGS OF THE C H R I S T I A N P E R I O D . . . . . . 44

Late houses in the temenos—houses A—B—C and D—E. Church beside the
portico—plan—rebuilding of the roof—nave columns—sanctuary columns—
fragment of sculpture—inscriptions. Buildings around the temple—in the
temple. Date of intrusive buildings—of their destruction
A P P E N D I X I. T H E C O I N S F O U N D IN THE EXCAVATION OF T H E T E M P L E , by
Edward T. Newell . . . . . . . . 5 1
APPENDIX II. CHRONOLOGICAL T A B L E . . . . . . . . 57
APPENDIX III. NINETEENTH-CENTURY GRAFFITI . . . . . . 59
PLATES . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
LIST OF PLATES
I. A. View looking northwest across the vestiges of the lake toward the temple,
the gateways, and the Quay on the edge of the palms.
B. The lakeside Quay, looking northeast.
II. A. The Outer Gateway, looking northeast.
B. The Great Gateway, looking northwest.
III. Two of the Sphinxes re-erected on the avenue in front of the Great Gateway.
IV. A. The Inner Gateway and the temple after restoration.
B. View from the top of the temple, looking eastward down the avenue.
V. The restored temple from the northeast, with an Obelisk Base (?) on the left.
VI. The restored temple from the southeast, with an Obelisk Base (?) on the right.
VII. The south elevation of the portico, looking across the remains of the girdle wall.
VIII. Capital from the southeast corner of the portico. (The column drum is restored.)
IX. A. Original face of re-used block in the screen wall of hypostyle M.
B. Foundation inscriptions of Nektanebis I found under the portico. Scale i -.4.
X. A. The north side of the portico with the remains of the church, during
excavation.
B. Sill of the north doorway of the portico.
XI. A. The portico, when first cleared of drift sand.
B. Columns, architraves, and cornice of the south side of the portico, when
first cleared.
XII. The central aisle of hypostyle N restored. .
XIII. The north side of hypostyle N restored.
XIV. View from the front of the temple, looking toward the back, after restoration.
XV. A. Capital of column 4, hypostyle N.
B. Capital of column 2, hypostyle N.
XVI. A. Baseof column 10, hypostyle N.
B. Foundations of column 10, hypostyle N.
c. Roofing slab with skylight hole, lying upside down. Hypostyle N.
D. Roofing slab with funnel hole for pouring mortar. Hypostyle N.
XVII. A. Fallen roofing slabs in chamber L. (The brickwork beyond is restoration.)
xi
LIST OF PLATES
B. Joint between masonry of the first and second building periods, in the south-
west corner of hypostyle N.
XVIII. A. The east face of the screen wall between hypostyles M and N, looking
south.
B. Doorway from hypostyle M to hypostyle B restored.
XIX. A. Detail of a capital in the screen wall of hypostyle M.
B. Capital of the column in chamber L.
XX. Columns on the north side of hypostyle B.
XXI. View from the back of the temple, looking toward the front.
XXII. A. Looking northeast from E across E2.
B. Looking east from H3 into Hi and H2.
XXIII. The west end of the temple and the west doorway in the girdle wall restored.
XXIV. A. Section of the west exterior wall, looking north.
B. Section of the west exterior wall, looking south.
XXV. A. Doorway, restored, and porch of Southern Building II, looking northwest.
B. Southern Building II, looking southwest, during the excavations.
XXVI. Small objects found in the temenos (A-G), and wedges and door socket from
hypostyle N (H and j). Scale 1 :i.
XXVII. Roman bronzes found in the southern part of the temenos. Scale 1 \2.
XXVIII. Limestone capital from the church, restored. Scale 1 -.4.
XXIX. Map of the city of Hibis and its surroundings.
XXX. General plan of the Temple of Hibis, its avenue, and the buildings excavated
in the temenos.
XXXI. The Inner Gateway built by Darius I. Scale 1:100.
XXXII. Key plans of the temple.
XXXIII. Ground plan of the temple. Scale 1:100.
XXXIV. Plan of the upper floors of the temple. Scale 1 :ioo.
XXXV. South elevation and longitudinal section of the temple. Scale 1 :ioo.
XXXVI. West elevation of the temple, and section through hypostyle B, looking west.
Scale 1 :ioo.
X X XV11. Sections through chambers in the west end of the temple. Scale 1:100.
XXXVIII. Sections through hypostyle B, looking east, and hypostyle M, looking west.
Scale 1 :ioo.
XXXIX. West and east elevations of the screen wall between hypostyles M and N,
with temporary cornice restored. Scale 1 :ioo.
xii
LIST OF PLATES
XL. Sections through hypostyle N and chambers O and P, and east elevation of
the temple. Scale i :ioo.
XLI. Section and front elevation of the portico. Scale i :ioo.
XLII. A. Restoration of the front of the temple in its final form under Ptolemy II.
Scale i :ioo.
B. Restoration of the inscribed lintel of the southern postern. Scale i :io.
XLIII. Columns in hypostyle B, and lower part of the original west wall of the
sanctuary.
XLIV. Campaniform capital in the screen wall of hypostyle M. Scale i :i5.
XLV. Palm capital in hypostyle N. Scale i: 15.
XLVI. Composite capital from the south end of the portico facade. Scale 1 :i5.
XLVII. Lotus capital from the center of the portico facade. Scale 1:15.
XLVIII. Details of masonry construction.
XLIX. A. Porch of Southern Building II.
B. Christian houses built over Southern Building II.
L. Ptolemaic sculptures found north of the temple. Scale 1:6.
LI. Fragments of doorways erected by officers of the garrison of Hibis, and blocks
from a temple-shaped shrine.
LI I. Church built against the portico in the fourth century A.D.
xm
KEY TO REFERENCES CITED
Ball. John Ball, Kharga Oasis: Its Topography and Geology Gayet. Al. Gayet, L'Art copte. Paris, 1902.
([Egyptian] Survey Department, Public Works Handbook. A Handbook of the Egyptian Rooms (The
Ministry. Geological Survey Report, lSgg, part II). Metropolitan Museum of Art). New York, 1911.
Cairo, 1900. Holscher, Communications. Uvo Holscher, Medinet Habu
B.A.R. James H. Breasted, Ancient Records of Egypt. Reports, II: the Architectural Survey, lgig/jo
Chicago, 1906. (Oriental Institute [of the University of Chicago]
Beadnell, Dakhla. Hugh J. L. Beadnell, Dakhla Oasis: Its Communications, no. 10). Chicago, 1931.
Topography and Geology ([Egyptian] Survey De- Holscher, Excavations. Uvo Holscher, The Excavation of
partment, Public Works Ministry. Geological Survey Medinet Habu, vol. I: General Plans and Views.
Report, i8gg, part iv). Cairo, 1901. Chicago, 1934.
Beadnell, Oasis. H. J. Llewellyn Beadnell, An Egyptian Holscher, Vorbericht. Uvo Holscher, Medinet Habu.
Oasis, an Account of the Oasis of Kharga, . . . Its Ausgrabungen des Oriental Institutes der Univer-
History, Physical Geography, and Water Supply. sitat Chicago. Ein Vorbericht (Morgenland: Darsiel-
London, 1909. lungen aus Geschichte und Kultur des Osiens, vol.
Bisson de la Roque. M. F. Bisson de la Roque, Rapport 24). Leipzig, 1933.
sur les fouilles de Medamoud (ig26) (Fouilles de Hoskins. G. A. Hoskins, A Visit to the Great Oasis of the
I'lnstitut francais d'archeologie orientale du Caire). Libyan Desert. London, 1837.
Cairo, 1927. Jequier, Manuel. G. Jequier, Manuel d'archeologie egyp-
de Bock. W. de Bock, Materiaux pour servir a I'archeo- tienne: les elements de Varchitecture. Paris, 1924.
logie de VEgypte chretienne. St. Petersburg, 1901. Jequier, Temples. Gustave Jequier, Les Temples ptole-
Borchardt. Ludwig Borchardt, Zur Baugeschichie des maiques et remains (UArchitecture et la decoration
Amonstempels von Karnak. Leipzig, 1905. dans I'ancienne Egypte). Paris, 1924.
Brugsch, A. Z. Heinrich Brugsch, "Cber die Oase Legrain, Annates. Georges Legrain, "Le Temple de Ptah
Khargeh," in Zeitschrift fiir dgyplische Sprache und Ris-anbou-f dans Thebes," in Annales du Service
Altertumskunde, vol. 13 (1875), pp. 51-55. des Antiquites de I'Egypte, vol. m (1902), pp.
Brugsch, Reise. Heinrich Brugsch, Reise nach der grossen 38-66, 99-114.
Oase el Khargeh. Leipzig, 1878. Legrain, Karnak. Georges Legrain, Les Temples de Kar-
Bulletin. Bulletin of The Metropolitan Museum of Art. nak. Brussels, 1929.
Burchardt. Max Burchardt, "Datierte Denkmaler der Lepsius, A. Z. R. Lepsius, "Hieroglyphische Inschriften
Berliner Sammlung aus der Achamenidenzeit," in in den Oasen von Kharigeh und Dakhileh," in
Zeitschrift fiir agyptische Sprache und Altertums- Zeitschrift fiir dgyplische Sprache und Altertums-
kunde, vol. 49 (1911), pp. 69-80. kunde, vol. 12 (1874), pp. 73-80.
Cailliaud. Frederic Cailliaud, Voyage a I'oasis de Thebes, Lepsius, Konigsbuch. C. Richard Lepsius, Konigsbuch der
edited and published by M. Jomard. Paris, 1821. alien Agypier. Berlin, 1858.
Calverley. Amice M. Calverley, The Temple of King Lyons. Captain H. G. Lyons, A Report on the Island and
Sethos I at Abydos, vol. 1. London and Chicago, Temples of Philae. London, 1896.
1933- M.M.A. ace.-no. The accessions catalogue numbers of
Chassinat. E. Chassinat, Le Mammisi d'Edfou (Memoires objects in The Metropolitan Museum of Art.
publies par les membres de I'lnstitut francais Meyer. Ernst Meyer, "Zur Geschichte der 30. Dynastie,"
d'archeologie orientale du Caire, vol. xvi). Cairo, in Zeitschrift fiir dgyplische Sprache und Alter-
1910. tumskunde, vol. 67 (1931), pp. 68-70.
Fakhry. Ahmed Fakhry, "Bahria and Farafra Oases," in Milne. J. Grafton Milne, A History of Egypt under Roman
Annales du Service des Antiquites de I'Egypte, vol. Rule. London, 1913.
xxxvm (1938), pp. 423-429. Naumann. Rudolf Naumann, "Bauwerke der Oase
Gauthier, Diet. Henri Gauthier, Diclionnaire des noms Khargeh," in Mitteilungen des Deutschen Instituts
geographiques conlenus dans les iextes hierogly- fiir agyptische Altertumskunde in Kairo, vol. 8
phiques (Societ'e royale de geographie d'Egypte). 7 (1938), pp. 1-16.
vols. Cairo, 1925—1931. Newberry. Percy E. Newberry, Beni Hasan, part II.
Gauthier, Rois. Henri Gauthier, Le livre des rois d!Egypte London, 1894.
(Memoires publies par les membres de I'lnstitut Oswald. Felix Oswald, Index of Potters' Stamps on Terra
francais d'archeologie orientale du Caire, vols. Sigillata "Samian Ware." East Bridgford, Notts,
XVII-XXI). 5 vols. Cairo, 1907-1917. 1931.
XV
KEY TO REFERENCES CITED
Part II. H. G. Evelyn White and James H. Oliver, The Spiegelberg. Wilhelm Spiegelberg, Die sogennante de-
Temple of Hibis in el Khargeh Oasis, part 11: motische Chronik des Pap. 21$ der Bibliotheque
Greek Inscriptions {The Metropolitan Museum of Nationale \u Paris. Leipzig, 1914.
Art Egyptian Expedition). New York, 1939. SteindorfT. Georg Steindorff in Baedeker's Egypt and the
Petrie, Apries. W. M. Flinders Petrie, The Palace of Sudan. Leipzig, 1929.
Apries (Memphis II). London, 1909. Wiedemann, A. Gesch. A. Wiedemann, Agyptische Ge-
Petrie, History. W. M. Flinders Petrie, A History of schichle, part 2: von dem Tode Tutmes' III. bis auf
Egypt, vol. in. London, 1905. Alexander den Grossen. Gotha, 1884.
Petrie, Memphis. W. M. Flinders Petrie, Memphis I. Wiedemann, Gesch. Alfred Wiedemann, Geschichie Aegyp-
London, 1909. tens von Psammetich I. bis auf Alexander den
Posener. G. Posener, La Premiere Domination perse en Grossen. . . . Leipzig, 1880.
Egypte {Bibliotheque d"etude, vol. xi). Cairo, 1936. Wilkinson. Sir Gardner Wilkinson, Modern Egypt and
Rohlfs. Gerhard Rohlfs, Drei Montae in der libyschen Thebes. London, 1843. (First published in 1827 in
Wuste. Cassel, 1875. briefer form as Egypt and Thebes, and in 1835 as
Schweinfurth. G. Schweinfurth, "Notizen zur Kenntniss Topography of Thebes and General View of Egypt.)
derOase El-Chargeh," in Petermanns geographische Winlock. H. E. Winlock, Ed Dakhleh Oasis . . . {The
Mitteilungen, vol. x (1875), pp. 384-393 and pi. 19. Metropolitan Museum of Art). New York, 1936.
Spanton. W. D. Spanton, "The Water Lilies of Ancient
Egypt," in Ancient Egypt, 1917, pp. 1-20 and
frontispiece.
XVI
THE EXCAVATIONS
CHAPTER I
THE SITE OF HIBIS AND THE EARLIER
TEMPLE OF AMUN
T
HE large depression in the Libyan Desert which forms the Great or Outer Oasis— Location
el Wah el Khargeh* —is about 160 kilometers long from north to south and some
25 kilometers wide. Its northern end and its eastern side are sharply defined by
high, sheer cliffs in which practicable descents for caravans are widely separated. On the
northwest it is bounded by an isolated mountain, Gebel et Taref, and on the west by a
broad belt of high sand dunes which extend from the mountain, almost without a break,
into the distant south. The bottom of the depression is fairly flat and in many places is
covered with soil which can be cultivated when irrigated by water from drilled wells.
There are few hills in the Oasis. Of them the largest is Gebel et Teir, which rises in the plain
east of Gebel et Taref, its foothills stretching southwards abreast of those of the latter
mountain. The ancient city of Hibis2 grew up at the southern end of the foothills of Gebel
et Teir in an almost level plain, broken by but one outlying hill, which rises, about a kilo-
meter to the southeast, with smooth, easy slopes about 75 meters above the surrounding
country. The hill's Arab name, Nadureh —"The Lookout" —may well be a translation of
an ancient one, for the summit commands a view over a wide extent of the Oasis. Upon it
stand the ruins of a temple built under Hadrian and Antoninus Pius. 3
In antiquity Hibis was the junction of most of the caravan roads in this part of the junction
Libyan Desert, and even in Arab times the meeting point moved only 4 kilometers south- roads
wards to the present el Khargeh village.4
To the north a road led to Lycopolis (Asyut) in Middle Egypt. Northeast went a road
to the Roman fortress beside Gebel Umm el Ghena'im, and there it ascended the eastern
cliff, crossed the desert plateau, and descended to the Nile at Diospolis Parva, the seat
of the administration of the oases in dynastic times.5 Eastward went roads to Hermonthis
and Latopolis (Esneh), above Thebes. By these routes the Nile was from 190 to 220 kilo-
1
Winlock, p. 55.
2
The variant spellings of the name in Egyptian, Coptic, Greek, and Latin are given by Gauthier, Did.,
IV, p. 4.
3
Of this temple and of the others mentioned in the following paragraphs, plans, brief descriptions, and
bibliographies are given by Naumann.
4
The roads to the Nile and to the south in modern times are described by Ball, p. 18; those to the west by
Winlock, p. 56 and passim.
5
Winlock, p. 58.
THE TEMPLE OF HIBIS, I. THE EXCAVATIONS
meters distant and could be reached by a camel caravan in from fifty to sixty hours'
marching time.
Directly south led the continuation of the road from Asyut to the Sudan. This was one
of the great trade routes of the desert —called by the Arabs "The Forty Days' Road" —by
which slaves and ivory were brought into Egypt. At a distance of 20 kilometers south of
Hibis it passed a town marked by the temple called Kasr el Ghuweideh, dating from the
reign of Ptolemy 111 or earlier. Five kilometers beyond was the town of Tchonemyris, with
a temple (Kasr ez Zayan) built in the name of Antoninus Pius, and 70 kilometers further
was Kysis (Dush), with a temple erected under Trajan. Kysis was the extreme southern
limit of the Great Oasis. From it the Forty Days' Road extended west of south into the
desert, and to the east another proceeded to Syene at the First Cataract of the Nile.
Westward from Hibis ran the roads to the Inner Oasis —ed Dakhleh. One, leading to
the northwest, ascended to the plateau at the Roman temple built beside a spring, <Ain
Amur, crossed the high desert, and descended into the Dakhleh depression near the village
of Tenideh. The other, starting in a southwesterly direction, led round the scarp to the
same town. The Inner Oasis could be reached by the first of these roads in a little under,
and by the second in a little over, thirty hours of marching.
Town Not only was the plain at the southern end of the Gebel et Teir the natural junction for
site
Plate XXIX most desert travel, but it was also one of the most advantageous spots for man's settlement
in the Oasis, since there the depression is low enough for the artesian waters to be easily
tapped and just to the south lies its largest cultivable area. The site covered by Hibis at
its greatest development is today largely under cultivation, but wherever the ground is
plowed fragments of pottery are turned up, and on the edges of the site where the cultiva-
tion has not extended there still exist ruins of sun-dried brick buildings. The northern-
most part of the town proper was built on the mound of earth which was raised in the
drilling of the ancient well ("Ain et Turbeh. This mound had at one time been occupied by
a part of the city cemetery; but in the third century A.D. dwelling houses had encroached
upon and had been built over the subterranean tombs, and throughout the following
century well-constructed, vaulted brick houses covered at least the whole eastern side of
the elevation.6 The westernmost extension of the town is marked by large mounds of
rubbish and potsherds. Beyond the city limits to the west, south, and east there is bare
desert which was never built upon. The town site so bounded is roughly 1,000 meters from
north to south and 1,200 meters at its widest from east to west.
Cemeteries On the northern and eastern edges of the city were the pre-Christian, pagan cemeteries.
6
Bulletin, III (1908), p. 208, and IV (1909), p. 121. The earliest coins found by our Expedition were a
small hoard of copper pieces of the joint reign of Diocletian, Maximian, and Constantius (286-305 A.D.), all
practically unused, wrapped in a cloth, and hidden in a crack in a wall; the latest coins were of the reign of
Arcadius (395-408 A.D.).
SITE OF HIBIS AND T H E EARLIER TEMPLE OF AMON
From the extreme northwest to <Ain et Turbeh the graves were chiefly subterranean, with
but few stone structures built above ground. Just east of ("Ain et Turbeh the tombs were
cut into the low sandstone hillocks facing the town. East of the city, on the desert edge,
there were more pretentious stone structures in the Roman period —one an octagonal
building containing a domed chamber above and a vaulted crypt below. Southeast, at
the foot of the Nadureh Hill with its Roman temple, was a stone chapel with a wide front
hall and a narrower sanctuary behind, and more tombs were cut into the face of a low
outcrop of the desert rock near by. To the north of the town, on the southern tip of the
last of the foothills of Gebel et Teir, was the Christian cemetery, today called el Bakawat,
with its domed and vaulted brick tomb chapels of the fourth and fifth centuries A.D.7
The area within the city limits is fairly level except for a distinct hollow between the Ancient
larger, western part of the town, where the temple was located, and a smaller section on the p ) a t e s , XXIX
first rise of the Nadureh Hill to the east. This hollow, which the modern railway crosses x x x
on an embankment, has always been a natural catch basin for excess water from near-by
wells. Even today, when there is no strongly flowing well in the neighborhood and when
all available water is spread on the fields where most of it evaporates, there still
are brackish, undrained ponds on either side of the railway embankment. In ancient
times, when the city occupied most of the now cultivated land and far less water was
needed for irrigation in this neighborhood, a near-by well with a flow above the average
would easily have flooded the hollow to a level where the water could escape over the
lowest of its banks on the northeast to still lower-lying desert beyond. Under such cir-
cumstances a lake would have been formed, 750 meters long, 225 meters at its widest, and
at least 3 meters deep in the center, and as long as this lake had an outflow, its waters
would have been fresh.8 Such a lake would not necessarily have remained permanently at a
uniform level. It may have been nothing but a small pond during the early history of the
temple, but at least the bottom of the hollow was always marshy, for no trace of buildings
was found when the railway company dug there for earth for its embankment. Doubtless
it varied in size from time to time, but it was obviously flooded to its full capacity by
the late Ptolemaic or the early Roman period when a waterside Quay, or landing stage,
was built at the end of the temple avenue, on the shore at the maximum level to which the
waters could rise before escaping to the northeast. 9
7
See p. 48. For the name of the cemetery see Winlock, p. xi.
8
There is ample precedent for newly drilled wells gushing up and flooding low land in their neighborhoods.
Such a well had been drilled near el Khargeh village some years before we began our excavations. It made a still-
existing pond, 600 meters long and 300 meters wide—almost exactly as large as the one on the site of ancient
Hibis. As was the case with the lake at Hibis, the size and permanence of this body of water are obviously
due to the fact that most of the near-by land is taken up by a village and not by cultivation. Other examples
of flooding are mentioned by Ball, p. 51, pi. v; by Beadnell, Dakhla, pp. 46 and 48, and Oasis, p. 121; and by
Winlock, p. 23. In these instances the wells were used for irrigation, and therefore the ponds which they
formed were smaller than they would have been if the nearest lands had been occupied by towns.
9
See p. 36.
Site The Temple of Amun of Hibis, with which this volume deals, was situated in the center
of an
earlier of the city just over ioo meters from, and on land about 2 meters above, the highest possible
temple level of the waters. The structure was started about 510 B.C.10 in the reign of Darius I,
but it is safe to say that Hibis, at the junction of the desert roads, was far older than the
Persian period11 and that the town had had a shrine of Amun centuries before the existing
temple was built. There is every probability that the rapidly increasing use of the camel
in late dynastic times, which resulted in an increase of desert travel, made of Hibis an
important administrative and military center. 12 As the city grew it would be but natural
if it found its early, provincial temple no longer adequate and substituted for it a more
sumptuous shrine erected upon the same, already hallowed spot.
Stones We discovered what appear to be traces of that earlier structure. One of the blocks
from the
earlier of sandstone masonry in the upper part of the northern end of the screen wall between
temple hypostyles M and N of the Darius temple had been originally used in an earlier temple,
Plate ix
for on what is now its back there are parts of sculptured, but not painted, scenes.13 Un-
fortunately, the one existing cartouche on the block is blank, and it is impossible to date
it more definitely than to state that it is prior to the reign of Darius I. Another block, in
all probability from the first temple, built into the top of the south exterior wall of the
earliest part of the existing structure, bears on one of its now hidden surfaces the signs
B ^ i from the end of a large horizontal inscription.14 Much more imposing is the
gigantic lintel block of the east doorway of hypostyle B, shown by Davies as having been
re-used. Both the lintel and jambs of the doorway are flush with the wall, as was regularly
the case on the inner faces of doorways in Hibis, but the lintel block had once been used
over the outer face of a doorway which had a projecting frame, and therefore the central
part of the block was originally in relief in respect to its two ends. As re-used, however,
the block was only approximately aligned with the dressed wall surface. Thus its present
north end, recessed since it was outside of the older doorframe, was set back from the new
wall surface and had to be filled in with plaster, now fallen. On the other hand, the south
end of the original raised lintel surface projected from the new wall and was therefore cut
away.15
«) See p. 8.
11
The very scant information on the early history of el Khargeh and ed Dakhleh is reviewed in Winlock,
P- 57-
12
See p. 39.
13
The block is the one marked "Re-used" in plate xxxix, q-r. Its original sculptured face was discovered
when the upper part of the screen wall was being dismantled for consolidation, and it had to be once more
hidden when the screen wall was rebuilt.
14
Marked "Re-used" in plate xxxv, South Elevation. This block also was replaced by Baraize.
15
What remains of the architrave decorations of both periods will appear in Davies's plates in Part III.
The location of the architrave is shown in plate xxxvm, section m-n, of the present volume. There, and
particularly in the east elevation of the same wall (o-p), settlement cracks will be noticed on either side of the
doorway, exaggerating the not unusual changes in the course lines of the masonry. Furthermore, the ends
SITE OF HIBIS AND THE EARLIER TEMPLE OF AMUN
Without question many another block of stone in the temple masonry first served in
the earlier structure and then was rebuilt into the temple of the reign of Darius with its
carved face turned inward or with its original decorations chiseled away.
In the south side of the temple temenos there is perhaps further evidence of the existence Southern
Building I
of earlier structures. Close to the girdle wall of the temple there had been at one time Plate xxx
a little one-room building (Southern Building I), 5.40 m. long by 3.80 m. wide. Of it
there exist only the foundations, a single course of stone aligned accurately on the inner
face and only roughly on the outer, as though for a stone-lined chamber in a brick building.
The entrance was on the east, and the axis diverged visibly from that of the Darius temple.
The level of the top of the foundations was below that of the existing temple court, and it
would seem probable that the building had been razed and the foundations covered over
when the Darius temple was built.
To the south there is an enigmatic complex of walls,16 including Southern Building II, Southern
Building II
which may also have been originally constructed before the Darius temple. These walls Plate xxx
were built of mud bricks which were neither of the size nor of the texture of the only other
pre-Christian bricks found —those in the great Ptolemaic enclosure wall. That they were
earlier than the Ptolemaic period seems certain, for the lower parts of them appeared to
have been buried in Ptolemaic rubbish, but they do not appear to have been built in the
Persian period, for their orientation does not conform to that of the existing temple but
does closely parallel that of Southern Building I. There is no reason to believe that there
ever was any important structure still further south of these two southern buildings which
could have controlled the direction of their layout. Had the temple of Darius's time
existed when they were first laid down, presumably, as the prominent building of the
locality, it would have given them their orientation. We are thus led to the conclusion
that whatever the date of the structures in the final form in which we found them, they
follow the line of the temple which preceded that of Darius. In fact, the main east and west
walls may even have been part of the temple enclosure wall of that period.17
On none of the few stones identified as from the earlier temple, and on none of the crude Dating from
the XXVI
brick walls assumed to be contemporary with it, was there any definite evidence of date. Dynasty
In Southern Building I, however, there was found a fragment of a dish bearing the name
of King Hophra,18 which must be accounted as from the temple furniture dedicated in
and center of the wall are built of stone from different parts of the quarries. But these facts do not necessarily
indicate that the center of the wall and the doorway belong to a later period than the ends of the wall. On
the contrary, both the ends and the center of the wall are bonded with the fronts of chambers H and I and
thus with the whole west end of the temple.
16
See p. 38.
17
Possible remains of other structures earlier than the existing temple are two doorjambs with inscrip-
tions by members of the garrison at Hibis. See p. 39.
18
See p. 41.
5
Hibis in the Twenty-sixth Dynasty. Perhaps a builder at the temple during the same
period is commemorated in a scene to the right of the east door of hypostyle B. Here a
priest censes the figure of ^ ^ ® , who may have been Darius himself, if we are to believe
that he appropriated, without any modification, the Horus name of one of his more recent,
native predecessors. Otherwise the figure is that of the dead Psametik II, and we may
suppose that the scene has been derived from an unaltered copy of a decoration in the
earlier temple. In this event the existing scene accidentally perpetuates one of the impor-
tant patrons of the shrine in the Saite period.19
19
Monuments of the XXVI Dynasty in Bahrlyeh are described by Fakhry, p. 423.
6
CHAPTER II
THE EARLIEST PART OF THE TEMPLE, A-M
1. T H E DATE OF T H E FIRST BUILDING PERIOD, 51(M90 B.C.
The existing Temple of Hibis was constructed at several different periods. It is obvious First
that the western half of the structure, A-M, containing all the essential elements of a peri0d
Plate x x x
temple, was the first part to be erected, and we shall see that the largest hypostyle, N, "
the porch, Q, and the girdle wall, R, were additions. Of these last only the first was con-
templated in any way in the original plan.
The earliest part of the temple is completely decorated within and without, and in Cartouches
these decorations the king's name is given as Darius, ^ Q j l - ^ Q W ^ O I . with only rare
and minor variations in spelling. The prenomen cartouches appear in three forms. Within
the hypostyles B and M they proclaim the king as "The Good God, 'Beloved of Amun-
Rer, Lord of Hibis, the Great God, Strong-of-the-Arm,' " I j Q g f g J»111P^)|; on
the outside of the south wall as "Beloved of Amun-Ref," (TMEEI!D ; anc * o n t ^ ie e x t e r i o r
of the west wall as (®P^j^J. This last may be read Setut-Re<, which probably means
"Made in the Image of Ref." Of these prenomens two are noticeably irregular, for neither
of them is an epithet of Ref. The first was clearly composed especially for the Temple of
Hibis, and the second would appear to be a mere abbreviation of it. However, the third
prenomen conforms to orthodox models, and, since the conferring of such a prenomen
appears to have been part of the historic coronation ceremony, it would seem that this
must be the name of a Persian ruler who actually came to Egypt. Cambyses was given
such a name when he was in the land, and as Darius I was probably the only other Persian
king who came in person to Egypt there is a very strong likelihood that it is he who is
named here at Hibis.1 The same conclusion follows from other considerations.
Three Persian kings named Darius ruled over Egypt. Darius III, the king defeated by Darius ill
Alexander at Issus and Arbela, we may readily eliminate from our consideration, as the eHmTnated
erection of the porch, Q, which took place in the third and last building period of the
temple proper, was completed before his reign (336-330 B.C).
Our choice must lie, therefore, between Darius I (521-486 B.C.) and Darius II (424-404 Darius 11
B.C). It has usually been assumed that the former built and partially decorated the e°im^nated
temple and that the latter finished the sculptures between three and four score years
1
For the conferring of the name at the coronation see B. A. R., II, §§54-60. Cambyses seems to have
been given his prenomen under similar circumstances; Posener, pp. 6, 12, and 176.
T H E TEMPLE OF HIBIS, I. T H E EXCAVATIONS
later. 2 But no evidence can be adduced from the styles of the reliefs to establish two such
periods, for differences in lighting and in scale between the decorations of the exterior and
the interior could account for any apparent differences in style as readily as could the
passage of time. Furthermore, if it be assumed that Darius 11 contributed to the decoration
of the temple, we are forced to the conclusion that his work would have been the sculptures
on the exterior walls. They would naturally be the last to be undertaken, for it is incon-
ceivable that the interior should have remained undecorated for the greater part of the
first century of the temple's use. However, as we shall see, the decorations on the exterior
were badly damaged by the settling of the structure which had already taken place before
the erection of hypostyle N between 391 and 378 B.C. 3 This settling was in all likelihood
due to the insufficiency of the foundations and probably progressed continuously, even if
slowly, from the very first erection of the building. Since the decorations obviously were
carved before the walls began to crack, we can hardly suppose that they were undertaken
over sixty years later than the construction of the building. Finally, the history of the
Persian dynasty in Egypt offers a strong presumption against the theory that any work
was done on the temple by any Persian king later than Darius I. During his last year
there was a revolt in Egypt which was not quelled until 484 B.C, after the accession of
Xerxes I. In 456 B.C another rebellion, led by Inaros against Artaxerxes I, was suppressed,
and again in 405 B.C, at the end of the reign of Darius II, there was the successful war of
liberation conducted by Amyrtaeos. To the entire period, from 486 to 398 B.C, with its
frequent civil wars, no existing buildings in the whole of the Nile Valley can be assigned,4
and it would seem highly improbable that additions would have been made to so remote
a temple as that at Hibis.
Darius 1 The theory which best fits all the known facts is that only one king is named in the
e
of t h e ' earliest part of the Temple of Hibis (A-M) and that he was Setut-Re r, the first of the name
first
Darius. He alone of the rulers of the first Persian dynasty favored the development of the
period
province of Egypt, and the great majority of the definitely datable monuments of the
dynasty belong to his reign.5 It was his policy to develop the newly conquered land, and
it was but natural that the interest taken in the Western Desert by Cambyses should
have continued in the time of Darius. Furthermore, the use of the camel unquestionably
became common after the Persian invasion, with a consequent growth in population and
2
Lepsius, A.Z., 1874, p. 75; Brugsch, A.Z., 1875, p. 54, and Reise, p. 17; Wiedemann, Gesch., p. 240, and
A . Gesch., p. 679; Petrie, History, III, p. 367; and Gauthier, Rois, IV, pp. 148 and 154.
3
See p. 17.
4
There are fairly continuous records of work in the quarries of the Wadi el Hammamat from the twenty-
sixth year of Darius I to the seventeenth year of Artaxerxes I, 496 to 459 B.C. (Gauthier, Rois, IV, p. 143
and passim). These inscriptions, however, probably record the quarrying of stone for sarcophagi and not
for buildings.
5
Posener, p. 179, mentions his buildings at Sai's, Busiris, el Kab, and Edfu in addition to the Temple of
Hibis.
8
riches in the oases. To Darius I, therefore, we may safely assign the removal of the Twenty-
sixth Dynasty temple and the erection of the most important parts of the larger and still
existing shrine of Amun of Hibis. If this much be granted, we can date the new temple
still more closely.
The Egyptian alphabet apparently had no symbol which exactly rendered the d of the First
Persians. In all the existing monuments down to the twenty-seventh year of Darius I period^
his name is spelled Taryush, with minor variations. 6 At least as early as his twenty-fifth 510-490 B.C
year (497 B.C) the letter n was invariably prefixed to the initial t in Egyptian inscriptions,
to emphasize the latter's sound much as nd is written for d and mp for b in modern Greek.
Since the writing in the Temple of Hibis is invariably Ntaryush, we may date all the
decorations in the temple to 497 B.C or later. As we must make a certain allowance of
time for the construction of the temple before its decoration, we are probably fairly safe
in dating the first building period at Hibis from about 510 to 490 B.C Darius apparently
did not arrive in Egypt before 517 B.C, and perhaps not until several years later.7
2. THE PLAN OF THE EARLIEST PART OF THE TEMPLE
In Hibis the characteristic temple plan of the Theban period with its triple holy of Sanctuary, A
Plurps xxxiii
holies was abandoned for a single sanctuary, A, on the temple axis. A surviving bolt hole x x x v
in the pavement to the left of the axis indicates that the sanctuary door was originally
double-valved. As first planned, the room was to have had its back wall fashioned into a
false door, but before the intended torus moldings dividing its panels had been rounded off
and before the walls of the chamber had been decorated, this false door was partially
chopped away and a wall was built in front of it, so completely masking it that it was only
discovered when Baraize was consolidating the west end of the temple. After the com-
pletion of the chamber and the decorations on its side walls, it was separated into two
rooms, an inner and an outer sanctury, by the erection of shallow jambs, sill, and lintel
about midway in the length of the room.8
The pronaos was the four-columned hypostyle hall B, with a very wide central aisle. Hypostyle
The architraves —none of which are now in place9 —ran east and west, with the roof slabs p^
of the side aisles resting upon them and capping the tops of the north and south walls, xxxin-xxxvi,
xxxvm
The wide central aisle, with a clear span of a little more than 4 m., would have required
thicker roofing slabs, and in our restorations their upper surfaces have been shown flush
6 7
Burchardt, p. 79; Posener, p. 161. Posener, pp. xii, 2, and 176.
8
Similar jambs divided the sanctuaries at Abydos (Calverley, I, pis. \A and 24). Those at Hibis were
still in place in the beginning of the nineteenth century (Hoskins, p. 107), but only fragments were found
when we cleared the structure. Davies suggests that a narrow block decorated with a plain winged disk,
built by Baraize into the west wall of the sanctuary, was really this lintel.
9
The architraves from B were cut up by Ayme (see pp. 18, 39, note 17, and 57), but some fragments
were found and reassembled on the ground by White and Baraize. See pi. xx.
with the upper surface of the roof of hypostyle M. They must have measured, like those
in chamber L, about 70 cm. in thickness and 475 cm. or more in length. Since strong
illumination of hypostyle B was not desired, whatever light it had must have come through
skylight holes in the ceiling.1"
Columns in The four columns in B were never finished. While their capitals were being carved the
hypostyle B
Plate XLIII work was abandoned, perhaps because it was realized that if the shafts were lightened
they could not support the roof. The sculpture already begun was masked with plaster to
make straight-sided columns with simple campaniform capitals, and the new surfaces
were decorated with paint which has survived where it was applied directly to the stone
but has been lost where the plaster filling has fallen away. However, the carving on the
northwest capital had been carried far enough to indicate the proposed design. In all
probability this called for little more carved detail than was completed. The stems of the
individual papyrus plants were shown as semicircular flutings as far down as the hori-
zontal neck bands, and the bases of the flower clusters were molded in their larger masses,
but the continuous rim of the original campaniform capital was obviously to be preserved
and not to be divided into lobes representing individual plants. 11 Here we have the simple
campaniform capital in process of development into the composite type hitherto judged
an invention of the Ptolemaic period.12
One of the most interesting facts to be learned from the Temple of Hibis is that the
composite capital had already been invented before the fifth century B.C. and without any
question should be credited to the immediately preceding Saite period. How far the
design may have been elaborated in the Twenty-sixth Dynasty we are not yet in a posi-
tion to state, but the Temple of Hibis does show that it had been carried to its full flower
by the reign of Nektanebis II (359-341 B.C.).13 Thus, while popular in the Ptolemaic period,
the composite capital was, nevertheless, originally a purely native Egyptian invention.
Crypts C-D In the southwest corner of hypostyle B there was a doorway which led to a complex
Plates xxxn,
xxxm, xxxvn series of stairways and rooms. Immediately inside the doorsill there was a trap door,
doubtless covered with a stone slab which would have been difficult to identify among
the paving slabs around it. In the wall opposite the doorway there was a small opening,
probably also disguised by a thin slab of stone. These two openings led into two levels of
undecorated crypts which, from their closeness to the sanctuary, we may assume were the
principal treasuries of the temple. The trap door, C, led to two chambers, Ci and C2,
below the floor level of the temple. The upper doorway led to three chambers, D, Di,
and D2, the first two directly above the two on the lower level.
10
As in K2, L, and N. See pp. 12, 13, and 25.
11
A somewhat similar example of this primitive design for a composite capital exists at Kom Ombo
(Jequier, Manuel, p. 241, fig. 153).
12
Jequier, Manuel, p. 230.
13
See pp. 13 and 26.
10
THE EARLIEST PART OF T H E TEMPLE, A-M
Stairway E gave access to a second floor above the chambers at the west and north Stairway E
Plates x x x m ,
sides of hypostyle B. The second step up from the pavement of the hypostyle brought xxxiv, xxxvn
one to the landing from which the crypts were entered, the eleventh and seventeenth to
two square landings from each of which one turned to the right, and the twentieth to an
elongated platform at the top.
While the walls of the stair well were undecorated, those of the chapels Ei and E2 on Chapels
Ei, E2
the second floor were sculptured. 14 The floor of Ei was raised one step above the plat- Plate xxn
form, E, and on this step was a porchlike facade, supported by a single central column of
which nothing is left except the mark of the base on the floor and a part of a drum. The
still-existing cavetto cornice blocks of its entablature are just long enough to extend from
one pilaster to the other. They had been removed at some time, their projecting edges
had been cut away, and they seem to have been ranged in a row at the back of the chapel;
and for some reason the floor in front of them was roughly chiseled down. Later, all but
two were moved out onto the platform in front of the chapel E2. The latter was opposite
Ei, but on a slightly higher level, and was approached by four steps. Its floor slabs, which
formed the ceiling of the first flight of stairway E, and its north and south walls have
disappeared—as well as its west wall, unless it was an open porch like Ei.
In the north end of the platform between Ei and E2, there was probably a doorway Roofs E3-E5
which gave access to two large undecorated areas, E3 and E4, above the sanctuary and
the chambers north of hypostyle B. From the far end of E4 a stairway, E5, led to the roofs
of hypostyles B and M. The area E3 appears to have been open to the sky. The northern
section, E4, was eventually covered with a wooden roof, of which the beam holes still
exist. There is always the possibility that this roof belongs to the late occupation of the
temple, during the period of its degradation and secular occupation in the Christian
period, but on the other hand it is equally possible, in view of the former existence of other
wooden roofs in the original temple, 15 that it was constructed during the pagan period.
Such a roof, however, was not originally contemplated, as the rainspouts show.
Since the exterior wall of the temple was higher than the roofs of the chambers sur- Rainspouts
Plates xxxiv-
rounding hypostyle B, drainage through the wall was essential for the escape of rain water xxxvi
which otherwise would have been impounded. On the north, two outlets for rain were
provided to drain E3 and E4. At some subsequent period the projecting parts of these
gargoyles were cut off flush with the exterior walls of the temple, but it would appear that
originally they were identical with the existing gargoyle on the south. The latter provided
an escape for any rain which fell in the open spaces Hi and H3 and on the roof of H2.
14
T h e reconstruction of chapels E i , E2, and H 1 - H 3 as given in the plans is largely based on a re-exami-
nation of the ruins m a d e by Davies in 1937—1938. He notes t h a t four small, symmetrically placed sockets
in the floor of the facade of Ei and a roughness of the north face of its southern pilaster suggest t h a t some
other t y p e of facade was originally contemplated.
15
See p p . 12 and 29.
II
This rainspout consisted of a rectangular block (47 cm. wide, 60 cm. high, and projecting
85 cm. from the wall) with the forequarters of a lion upon it.16 Between the lion's paws
was the outlet of a water channel (11.5 cm. wide and 8.5 cm. deep) which started in the
corner of the floor of H3. No drainage appears to have been provided for stairways E and H.
Chambers In hypostyle B there were three doorways symmetrically arranged in both the north
F, G, I, J
Plates xxxm, and south walls, four of them leading to chambers F, G, I, and J. None of the latter present
xxxvi, xxxvn any remarkable features of plan or construction.
Stairway H Stairway H required a greater area than the adjoining chambers, since space had to be
Plates xxxm,
xxxiv, xxxvm provided for its door to swing inward clear of the bottom step. Therefore its front pro-
jected into hypostyle B, and the front of chamber I was advanced also, probably for
symmetry. In this stairway three flights (steps 1-7, 10-14, and 17-21) and additional
steps in each of the three long landings (8 and 9, 15 and 16, and 22-24) brought the head
of the main stairway to another group of second-floor chambers practically on the level
of Ei and E2.17 At the top landing (step 24) the south wall of the temple was thinned down
to little more than 50 cm., and in the space thus gained a narrower stairway (steps 25,
26-33, a n d 34~45) ascended to the roofs of hypostyles B and M. The upper landing of the
main stairway and the whole of these upper flights were never roofed.
Osiris The door at the head of the stairway led into an open vestibule, Hi, in front of a small
chapel, H1-H3
Plates xxn,
chapel, H2, which appears to have been dedicated to Osiris, to judge from the decorations.
xxxiv The partition wall at the west end of the vestibule had disappeared, but it was obviously
of stones only 42 cm. thick. The latter were joined to the north and south walls with mortar
and with wooden dowels, 2 to 3 cm. in section, placed at intervals of 15 to 20 cm. one above
the other. Another partition running east and west divided the narrow chapel from the
vestibule. This partition was only 20 cm. thick and was doweled into place as was the other.
Around the top of the decorated walls inside H2 there was a frieze of khekhers such as
always appear just below a ceiling. Together with a narrow slot and the profile of a cavetto
cornice on the east wall, they make it probable that the chapel was covered with a wooden
roof about 10 cm. thick.18 From the vestibule a door led westward into the undecorated
and probably unroofed space H3.
Chapel K-K2 In the northwest corner of hypostyle B a doorway led into the small chamber K, which
Plates xxxm,
was similar to the other rooms opening off the sides of the hypostyle but served as the
antechamber of a curiously contrived chapel. From the back of K there opened a narrow
16
Nearly the whole of this rainspout had broken off close to the wall, but most of the missing parts were
found in the excavations and were replaced by Baraize in 1913.
17
The steps of the lowest flight in stairway H had almost entirely rotted away with damp salt, and the
upper flight had been broken through by the fall of heavy stones from above. It was possible, however, to
trace the profiles of the steps on the side walls with complete assurance.
18
The reconstruction of the partition wall between H1 and H2 will be given by Davies in Part 111 of this
publication.
12
stairway, Ki, which ascended 1.75 m. to the floor of chamber K2, the latter lighted only
by a small skylight hole in the roof just inside the door. In the back of chamber K2 a
rough pit descends through the massive foundations to bedrock 3 m. below the floor.
Unquestionably this pit was originally covered over, but it is extremely likely that it was
intended for some such purpose as the housing of the apparatus connected with an oracle.19
A doorway in the northwest corner of hypostyle B, somewhat larger than the corre- Chamber L
Plates xvn,
sponding doorway leading to stairway E but smaller than that of the sanctuary, was the x x x m , xxxiv
entrance to the decorated chamber L. The most interesting feature of the room from the
point of view of construction is its roof. The massive blocks of which the latter was com-
posed were 4.75 m. long, or about the length of those which spanned the central aisle of
hypostyle B. They were 70 cm. thick, smooth-dressed beneath, where their surfaces were
the ceiling of the chamber, and on top for a space of from 12 to 15 cm. on either side of
their joints. Between these latter smoothed surfaces the upper faces of the blocks were
left roughly pick-dressed. In the joint between two of the slabs, approximately above the
center of the chamber, was a skylight hole with an opening 27.5 cm. square on the upper
surface of the roof and widening out to 35 cm. below in the ceiling of the chamber.
All the roof slabs had cracked along the line of the chamber's southern wall. The first Composite
capital
block broke while the temple was still prosperous, and it was supported by a sandstone Plate xix
column. The composite papyrus capital of the latter was of the same type as two on the
front of the Porch of Nektanebis except that it was composed of but four, instead of eight,
umbels.20 When Baraize removed the column to repair it, there was found, protected by
the abacus, the ceiling design of yellow five-pointed stars with red outlines, painted on a
field of blue.
The full width of the front of the temple built under Darius I was occupied by hypostyle Hypostyle
hall M
hall M, which in his day was actually an entrance porch with two rows of columns, one in Plates xvn,
the screen that for the time being made the temple facade and another inside. The north xvm, xxxiii-
XXXV,
and south temple walls were continued a short distance east of the screen and were left XXXVIII-
XXXIX
unfinished, indicating that there was some intention of adding another element to the
front of the temple. Builders' marks on these two stubs of walls can still be traced inside
hypostyle N, where they would seem to indicate that it was at first planned to give the
screen wall a batter similar to that of the exterior of the temple. The contemplated element
which was to have been added in front of hypostyle M was doubtless to have been a
peristyle court, like those characteristic of both earlier and later temples. Had a columned
hall been originally contemplated, the central aisles of the three hypostyles should have
formed one continuous processional way, and the architraves along the temple axis would
19
It appeared to us t h a t the pit was in the original temple plan and was not made by late treasure seekers.
20
See p. 27.
>3
have been laid continuously from east to west, as they were in B and N. In M, however,
the inner and outer rows of columns are not accurately aligned with each other or with the
jambs of the doorway from M to B, showing that the architraves on the inner, as on the
outer, row of columns were laid continuously from north to south —an arrangement
appropriate enough for a porch facing a peristyle court. To avoid the use of the eastern,
axial doorway of hypostyle M for other than ceremonial purposes, a postern doorway in
the northeast corner of the hall was provided for access to the buildings in the northern
part of the temenos.
Columns The shafts of the columns in hypostyle M belled outward from the bottom and then
Plates xix,
XLIV
gracefully tapered to the five neck bands below the capitals, which were of the traditional
campaniform type. Perhaps the columns in hypostyle B would have taken the same shape
had they been finished, but it is noticeable that the columns with campaniform capitals
in hypostyle N and the porch, Q, erected somewhat over a century later, had straight
sides from base to capital. The capitals of the inner row of columns in hypostyle M showed
no details, although it is possible that they were intended to be carved in the same fashion
as those in the facade row. Even in the case of the latter the carving was not entirely
completed, but all the details were drawn out in red to guide the sculptors. Where finished,
the capital was the conventionalized umbel of the open papyrus flower, the surface covered
with the flowerets and buds of the papyrus crown, springing from pointed bracts at the
base. 21
Screen wall The east side of hypostyle M—for well over a century the facade of the temple —was a
Plates xvm,
xxxix
screen engaging the front row of columns. The pylonlike jambs of the central doorway
were not joined by a lintel, and the double-valved door was pivoted above in a light wooden
beam which caused the minimum of obstruction to the view along the temple axis. On
either side of the doorway a low screen joined the columns, and apparently it was originally
intended that the walls between the end columns and the sides of the temple should like-
wise be screens, although higher than those in the center. This plan was changed, how-
ever, and the two end walls were built up to the cornice after the carving of the decorations
on the end capitals was almost completed. The upper courses of these walls were therefore
not bonded either with the upper drums of the columns or with the side walls of the
temple. Like the capitals of the columns, the torus moldings on the doorjambs and the
screens were, in places, left uncarved with the unfinished details indicated for the sculptors
in red.
Original While the projections of the north and south side walls of the temple show that the
fajade
Plate xxxix structure was to be continued eastward, the front of the temple of Darius I was a com-
21
Jequier, Manuel, p. 220, fig. 144. These capitals at Hibis still follow the model of those in the hypostyle
hall at Karnak.
14
pleted facade.22 Above, as its topmost element, there was a cavetto cornice decorated with
the usual winged disk in the center over the entrance, flanked by a frieze of blank car-
touches. When the roof of hypostyle N was built this cornice interfered with the placing
of the architraves and roofing slabs of the new hall, and it was removed. After its demoli-
tion the already thin blocks of which it was composed were dressed into flat slabs about
35 cm. thick by chiseling away their upper projecting edges and their torus moldings. We
found a number of these slabs stacked on top of the roof of chamber P, and others, which
had probably fallen with the roof of hypostyle N, were found on the floor of the hypostyle.
They had clearly been reshaped for use somewhere on the top of the structure but had
never actually been so employed.
The cavetto cornice of the facade ran around the top of the building, but on the sides Exterior
and back the cartouches were omitted. Directly below the cornice there was a single tempie
horizontal band of inscription, 23 and below that, on the sides and back, were sunken reliefs P'ates xxm,
xxxv, XXXVI
representing the king making offerings to innumerable groups of gods. Each side wall was
divided into two monotonous zones, merging on the west wall into one gigantic scene in
which the king, accompanied by Hat-Hor and by his ka, stood on either side presenting
oblations to the triad of Amun, Mut, and Khonsu. Long past is the Theban convention
which devoted the exterior of a temple to the earthly triumphs of the sovereign, and we
have here the motive which makes the decorations of the exteriors of the Ptolemaic
temples so banal. 24 As this type of decoration for the exteriors of temples was fully de-
veloped here at Hibis over two centuries before the earliest Ptolemaic temple, we are
probably safe in assuming that it was the rule in Saite times.
3. THE CONSTRUCTION AND DISINTEGRATION OF THE
ORIGINAL STRUCTURE
Thanks to the breach made in the west wall of the temple during the first half of the Wall
last century, 25 we were able to study two excellent sections which showed how that wall construction
Plates xxiv,
was built. It is obvious that the stones of each succeeding course were moved into place X L V I I I
from the center toward the two ends, over the next course below. It is to be assumed,
therefore, that there was a builders' ramp against the middle of the back of the temple up
which the blocks were drawn on sledges and rollers. Each block had a lever hole near the
22
In the plate the cornice slabs have been drawn in, but they were not replaced in the actual reconstruction
as executed by Baraize. The ends, the torus moldings, and the upper edges have been restored in the plate,
although they no longer exist.
23
It doubtless was carved on the now lost architraves of the facade. It still exists on the north, west, and
south exterior walls.
24
Much larger than Hibis, Edfu has three zones on the sides and the large group at the back. Dendereh,
somewhat later, has the same arrangement with the addition of an extra zone above, on the back as well as
the sides.
25
See p. 17.
top of its end. Under its bottom edge and in the top surface of the block below there were
other lever sockets, doubtless for the last manoeuvring of the block into its final position.
The joints of the blocks were smooth-dressed on the ends for a short distance from the
outer surfaces and were hollowed out with pick and chisel inside the joints to give a key
to the mortar which was poured between them. Where the walls were two blocks thick, the
dressed joint was only on the edges at the surface of the wall. So far as we could see in
breaches in the walls elsewhere, similar dressing of the blocks and lever holes was charac-
teristic of the whole structure throughout all its building periods.
Bedrock The temple stands on the highest ground within the limits of ancient Hibis, where the
under the
temple surface is a dark, clay soil with the bedrock shales nowhere visible today. We dug a trench in
Plate xxx
line with the back of the temple and exposed the foundations of the girdle wall resting in
a shallow, sand-filled cutting in the shale, there 1.50 m. below the pavement level. Our
second and third trenches to the east showed that the surface of the shale maintained the
same level, and the pit in chamber K226 showed that the shale surface under the north-
west corner of the temple differed but little from that in these trenches. However, the
fourth trench disclosed the fact that the upper surface of the shale to the east had begun
to slope downward to 2 m. below the ancient court level; the fifth trench showed that the
depth of the shale below the ancient surface was 3.30 m.; and further east, tentative
soundings showed that the bedrock was even deeper. Under the temple axis the contours
of the bedrock presented a different picture. Beneath the center of the west wall the shale
was about 2.50 m. below the present level of the temple pavement, rising to within 1.50 m.
of the sill of the east doorway of hypostyle B and then sloping gradually to 2 m. below the
front row of columns in hypostyle N. All these soundings show that there is a ridge of
bedrock about 1.50 m. below the temple pavement, extending diagonally under the
original part of the temple from the southeast corner of M to the northwest corner of the
building under K2. Since none of the foundations of the walls appear to be more than
1.50 m. deep, it can only be along this line that they rest on a solid footing.
Subsidence With the foundations of the massive walls resting so often on compressible clays and
of the
foundations made soil there has been a tendency for the structure to sink, and that sinking becomes
Plates xxxv, more and more noticeable as one leaves the line of the subsurface ridge and approaches
xxxvi
the sides of the temple where the greatest weight is concentrated. The eastern door of
hypostyle B, built directly on the subsoil ridge in the shale, has probably subsided no
more than 1.0 cm., if at all, and we may take its sill as the datum point in a study of the
floor levels of the structure. The southeast corner of M has sunk 2.5 cm. below this sill,
and the northeast corner 7.5 cm. because of the greater depth of soil over the bedrock
ridge. The southwest corner shows a subsidence of 6.5 cm., and the northwest corner is
about level with the northeast. The center of hypostyle B is today 4 cm. below the datum
26
See p. 13.
16
point; the sanctuary doorsill has sunk 8 cm.; the mid-points of the north and south walls
of B, where the weight of the side chambers is concentrated, have subsided 12 cm.; and
the footings of the back wall of the temple are as much as 25 to 40 cm. below their original
level.
Such unequal subsidence resulted in the opening of fissures in the walls of the structure. Fissures in
the walls
The process had not started before the decorations of the walls were completed about
490 B.C, but it probably began to be apparent soon afterward and a century later was so
obvious as to require extensive repairs. The tendency was for the walls to sink toward
the west, causing fissures in the north and south exterior walls just outside the northwest
and southwest corners of hypostyle B. Another fissure developed in the exterior walls of
the temple on the line of the partitions between chambers F and G, and J and K. West of
this fissure there was a third, starting in the sanctuary just inside its doorjamb, involving
the eastern side of chamber L, and appearing on the north exterior wall outside chamber
Ki. The southwest corner of the building was so compact a mass of masonry that this last
fissure was not widely opened in the south exterior wall, but on the top of the wall there
are clear traces of it; that this part of the temple did actually subside is obvious from the
large patch on its southwest outer corner, where the blocks were probably crushed in the
settling.
We have seen that the earliest part of the temple was finished by Darius I about 490 Repairs
to the
B.C, and we shall find that there is reason to believe that hypostyle N, the first important structure
addition, was probably begun just after 390 B.C 2 7 Between these two dates it is hardly
likely that any extensive repairs were made in the building, yet the foundations of the
original structure had probably been sinking throughout the century, with the consequent
Assuring of its walls. Thus, at the time hypostyle N was built, it was necessary to under-
take works of consolidation on the already existing structure.
The fissures in the walls were merely masked with thin slabs inlaid on the outer surfaces Patches
in the
to cover the cracks on the exterior. From one crack in the west wall, in the second and outer walls
third courses about 4.50 m. from the southwest corner, the inserted slabs had fallen away, Plates xxxv,
xxxvi
and in this case at least it could be determined that they were only 26 cm., or half a cubit,
thick. No attempt was made to carry the decorations over these patches, which were left
perfectly plain.
In the hope of preventing further settlement, an effort was made to bind the walls Consolidation
of the
together with wooden cramps, and the west end of the structure was heavily buttressed. foundations
The cramps were of the usual double-wedge type and are particularly obvious on the Plate x x x m
inside of the walls of the west end of the structure. The buttressing across the west end
of the temple consisted of a platform of two courses of sandstone blocks, each from 2 to
3 m. long, from 0.75 to 1 m. wide, and about 0.50 m. thick, in many instances linked to-
27
See p . 20.
17
gether by wooden cramps. Since blocks of similar dimensions were laid on either side of
hypostyle N at the time that the latter was erected, there can be very little doubt that the
consolidation of the west end of the temple —and doubtless the patching of the walls —
was contemporary with the building of N. In all probability this buttressing platform
behind the west end of the temple was a uniform mass with regular outlines when it was
first laid. When the girdle wall was built, however, some of the stones appear to have been
removed and used as a foundation for the northwest corner of this addition, and the spaces
thus left were paved with small blocks.
Whether this mass of masonry accomplished what its designers had hoped is question-
able. Along the fissure in the back of the temple the cracks widened after the patching and
after the cramps had been set in place. In fact, it seems likely that the additional weight
on the surface behind the west end of the temple further compressed the soil, causing a
continuation of the settlement of the walls and to some extent defeating its own purpose.
Damage done However, after the consolidation of the temple of Darius early in the fourth century
B c
xix century - - ^ seems to have suffered remarkably little serious damage for over 2,200 years. The
Plates xvm, r o o f 0 f hypostyle N fell in antiquity, but when Hoskins, Hay, and Catherwood were in
xx, x x m
el Khargeh in the autumn of 1832 the roof of the sanctuary was still intact, 28 and appar-
ently its door lintel, as well as that between hypostyles B and M, was in place, and the
architraves, in B at least, were still in position. The west wall of the temple appears to
have been complete except for the cornice blocks, which had fallen long before and were
deeply buried under soil and sand at the foot of the wall. Finally, the upper chambers
reached by stairways E and H were in all likelihood practically intact.
It was probably immediately after the departure of the English archaeologists that a
Frenchman, Ayme, began to quarry stone in the temple for an alum factory which he
was building somewhere near el Khargeh village.29 Traces of his work were everywhere
visible when Baraize undertook the task of restoration. The cornice above the doorway
between M and B had been thrown down and shattered, and the large lintel of hard,
close-grained sandstone had been split with wedges into smaller, easily transported blocks,
of which several were found outside the southeast corner of the temple. These were re-
assembled by White and replaced by Baraize, and a fragmentary architrave in B, too
shattered to be replaced, was restored by them on the pavement at the bases of the columns
from which it had been thrown down. The roof of the sanctuary, parts of its walls, and
much of the lintel over its door had entirely disappeared. This was also true of many of the
blocks from the outer west wall of the temple which Baraize had to reconstruct largely
with new materials. The position of the north wall of the chapel Ei still showed on the
pavement, and many of the blocks were found and reassembled by White and replaced
28
Hoskins, p. 108.
29
See pp. 9, 39, note 17, and 57.
18
by Baraize in their original positions. Finally, when an old mosque was recently demolished
in el Khargeh village, Davies recognized some twenty or twenty-five blocks as coming
from the chapel H2, and as a result he has been able to reconstruct that chapel in the
plates for Part III of this publication.
19
CHAPTER III
ADDITIONS TO THE TEMPLE, N-R
1. HYPOSTYLE HALL N
Hypostyle N We have already seen that at the end of the reign of Darius I, when the temple was finished
added to
the temple from the west end to the screen wall of hypostyle M, its plan called for another element
continuing the structure to the east. 1 The element contemplated was probably an open
peristyle court, and the north and south exterior walls of the original structure had been
carried for a short distance east of its facade to bond with this proposed addition. How-
ever, when in the course of time the building was completed, the new element took the
form of a covered hall, hypostyle N. The facade added to the temple with this hall antici-
pates Ptolemaic temples in not being a pylon. It may have been decorated, but if so only
the reliefs on the lintel of the east entrance have survived the erection of the portico, and
unfortunately all the cartouches on that lintel are, and always have been, blank. 2 Since
no inscriptions were ever carved elsewhere on the walls of this hypostyle, there is today
no direct evidence of the date when this addition was made to the temple or the ruler to
whom it should be credited.
Probably in However, we have seen that the decoration of the original temple up to the facade of
391-378 B.C.
hypostyle M was completed under Darius I, between 510 and 490 B.C, and that no further
work was done at Hibis under his Persian successors. Nor is it probable that any was
undertaken in the brief and troubled reign of the liberator Amyrtaeos, who alone con-
stituted the Twenty-eighth Dynasty. 3 It was only with the founding of the Twenty-ninth
Dynasty that temple building once more became the rule in Egypt. Under Nepherites I
(398-392 B.C), Psammuthes (391 B.C.), and Hakoris (391-378 B . C ) 4 monuments were
erected at different sites from the Delta to el Kab, and we may safely assume that it was
during the architectural revival in the twenty years of this dynasty that building once
more began in the Oasis. In fact, the probability is that hypostyle N at Hibis was actually
built in the reign of Hakoris, the last effective king of the dynasty, whose reign accounts
for more than half the duration of the period and whose names appear on the majority
of its monuments. This being assumed, it then appears that construction at Hibis was
going on more or less continuously from the building of hypostyle N (391-378 B.C),
through the laying of the foundations of the portico (378-360 B.C), to the latter's com-
pletion (359-341 B.C.).5
1 2 3
See p. 13. See p. 26. See p. 8.
4
Nepherites II, the successor of Hakoris, reigned only four months and left no monuments.
5
See p. 26.
20
The first task of the builders of hypostyle N was the consolidation of the already existing Foundations
of the
part of the temple. They benefited by the knowledge they gained in this work and laid as walls
foundations for the walls of the new hypostyle platforms of large sandstone blocks, two Plate xxxm
courses thick. Some of the blocks had a length of 2.25 m., a width of 1 m., and a thickness
of 0.60 m., the two courses making foundations at least 1.25 m. thick. The blocks were laid
from points about 4 m. west of the ends of the side walls of the original structure, for
distances of nearly 23 m. east and about 6 m. north and south of the proposed sides of the
addition. These large platforms of stone gave the new walls a sufficiently secure under-
pinning to prevent for a long time any settling as extensive as that which had taken place
in the earlier part of the structure.
The foundations of the columns were not so massive but appear to have been sufficient Foundations
of the
until the ground around the temple became waterlogged.6 Under column 10 —which was columns
the only one we dismantled —there was a layer of chip 1.14 m. deep between the bedrock Plates xvi,
XLVIII
and the bottom of the foundation. This last consisted merely of one layer of comparatively
small blocks, only 35 cm. thick, on which rested the massive base of the column. The
adjoining surfaces of the two blocks which formed the base were slightly hollowed and
roughened to within a short distance of the outer edges. Into this hollow mortar was
poured through a chimney, a, after the blocks had been manoeuvred into position with a
lever, for which a socket, c, was provided on the underside. In addition to this mortar,
wooden cramps, b, were introduced to hold the blocks together. The bed for the column
on top of the two base blocks was roughened and filled with mortar to within a very short
distance of the outer surface of the lowest drum.
Of the walls of hypostyle N the first parts erected were the jambs of the great east door- Construction
of the walls
way, as far as the large fissures in the facade on either side. At the same time the two walls Plates x, xi,
inside the hypostyle, which make a sort of vestibule aligned with the central aisle, were xxxm-
XXXV, XL
erected, and their surfaces were dressed smooth before the facade, the side walls of the
hall, and the chambers O and P were built. When the side walls were erected the new
masonry was bonded into the stubs of the side walls of the original structure, but the
course lines did not carry through continuously, and with the subsequent settling of the
foundations of hypostyle N the joints between the new and the old masonry opened up
and became strikingly visible. There were also differences between the earlier and the later
work in the dressing of the surfaces and in the thickness of the walls toward the top.
Embedded in the mortar, under stones which we had to move to consolidate the top Iron wedges
in the
courses of the north and south walls, we found three wrought-iron wedges averaging 93 mm. masonry
in length. At the top they are 67 mm. wide and 5 mm. thick, and at the bottom 63 mm. Plate xxvi, H
wide and 1.5 mm. thick.7 In the extraordinarily dry atmosphere of the Oasis two of them
6
See p p . 25 and 49.
7
M.M.A. ace. nos. 25.10.9-11. For wooden wedges in the masonry of the Inner Gateway see p . 34.
21
THE TEMPLE OF HIBIS, I. T H E EXCAVATIONS
still retained their original glossy black surfaces, and the third was only slightly rusted.
Their sides are scarred with irregular, crooked grooves, obviously made when the blocks
under which they rested were slid over them into place. While their presence in the masonry
was clearly due to such a use, it is scarcely probable that they were fashioned especially
for this purpose or that iron was so cheap that such wedges could be abandoned as a general
rule. Rather they appear to be the thin "feathers" or "shims" which masons pack into
holes on either side of heavier splitting wedges. Splitting wedges being longer than shims,
only the former should show signs of hammer blows, and the total lack of burring on the
edges of the three iron objects found indicates that they were not splitting wedges. As
for their presence in the walls, we may suppose that they were found handy when wedges
were needed to shift or to level stones and that once the blocks were placed the shims were
too far inside the joints to be removed.
Great east The great east door — the main entrance to the temple proper in its completed form — had
door
Plates xxxm, two wooden valves opening inward. To seat their top hinge pintles in the sockets under
xxxv, XL the stone ceiling, each valve was slid into a slot on either side of the vestibule and then
raised into place upon the lower pivot blocks. When closed, the valves were fastened by
bolts which dropped into the pavement. As these valves, each about 1.40 m. wide, about
5.90 m. high, and proportionately thick, were obviously very heavy, they were probably
rarely closed, and therefore an easily opened, light wicket gate was provided to keep out
stray people and animals when the great doors stood open.8
Wicket gates The original wicket gate was pivoted on wooden jambs let into the east face of the ma-
Plates xxxv,
XL
sonry of the doorway. These jambs were 20 cm. wide and 145 cm. high and were counter-
sunk into the stone 1.5 cm. They were fastened to wooden anchor blocks let into the stone-
work at their tops and into the first courses of the masonry above the pavement. Each
jamb was finished at the bottom with a quarter round, and a wooden sill was let into the
paving stones across the opening between them. On the erection of the portico and the
carving of the now existing decorations on the jambs of the great doorway, this wooden
wicket gate was removed, the slots in which its jambs had been set were filled with plaster,
and the anchor-block holes were plugged with stone. A new wicket gate was then erected
within the doorway, where the sockets and channels for the attachment of its jambs exist
on either side to a height of 145 cm. above the pavement.
North In the north doorway of hypostyle N, close by the west jamb, there was found the bronze
doorway
Plates xxvi, j ,
bearing from a door socket, which had obviously been let into a stone or wooden block.9 It
xxxm, xxxv measures about 8 cm. from point to point of its concave sides and 2 cm. in thickness, and
it has a socket in its upper face about 0.5 cm. deep, in which was seated the lower pintle
of the door.
8
"Service barriers" at Karnak, corresponding to these wickets at Hibis, are described by Legrain, Karnak,
9
pp. 32 and 145. M.M.A. ace. no. 25.10.8.
22
ADDITIONS TO T H E TEMPLE, N-R
Within hypostyle N, in its southeast corner, was built the chamber O with its counter- Chambers 0, P
Plates xxxm,
part, P, above. The lower half of the south end of the partition which separates these two XXXIV, XL
chambers from the hall was built against the already constructed but not yet smooth-
dressed lower courses of the south wall of the hypostyle, while the upper half was bonded
into that wall, and the floor of P was bonded into the east wall. The north end of the par-
tition, however, is nowhere bonded with the smooth-dressed surface of the vestibule wall.
From this it follows that these two chambers were built after the completion of the east
doorway and the vestibule, but during the course of the erection of the rest of the hypostyle.
Corresponding chambers were never built in the northeast corner.
The two chambers O and P were obviously store chambers or sacristies of some sort.
The entrance to the lower and otherwise unlighted chamber was by a door opening from
the southeast corner of hypostyle N. The upper chamber could only be entered by a
removable wooden ladder which led to a small door cut through the vestibule wall nearly
4 m. above the temple floor. Light and ventilation for this chamber were provided by an
inaccessible window opening high up in the hypostyle and by a skylight hole in the roof.
Twelve columns dividing hypostyle N into five aisles supported its roof. The central Columns of
hypostyle N
and widest aisle was in alignment with the two walls which formed the vestibule. The first Plates xn-xv,
and last pairs of columns on this aisle (4, 7, 6, 9) had palm capitals of a type evolved in xxxv, XL, XLV
the Old Kingdom, with the loops below the neck bands facing the aisle.10 The middle
pair of columns on the central aisle (5, 8) and all the columns in the extreme south and
north rows (1-3, 10-12) were of the campaniform type, similar to those in the screen wall of
hypostyle M except that they had no details carved upon them. This diversification of
capitals has an interest in the history of Egyptian architecture. The earlier Egyptian
architect had shown no inclination to vary the capitals within a single row. Even here at
Hibis the capitals in hypostyles B and M were uniform, but in the central aisle of hypostyle
N we find a very simple alternation of types within a single row, and we shall find it again
in the facade of the portico, anticipating in both cases the complete diversification of
Ptolemaic times. 11
Architraves still remaining over the northern and southern aisles show that there they Roof of the
side aisles
ran north and south from the exterior walls of the temple to the central aisle, with the Plates xv,
roof slabs resting at right angles upon them. The ends of the architraves where they joined xvi, xxxiv
one to another were slightly hollowed and roughened for mortar, like all the other masonry
joints in the temple, and, in some cases at least, the joints were given further strengthening
with wooden dovetail cramps. The joints of the ceiling slabs had the same hollowing, and
10
Jequier, Manuel, p. 196. Herodotus, Book 11, mentions the palm capitals in the colonnade around the
tomb of the XXVI Dynasty King Apries in the temenos at Sais.
11
See pp. 26 f. Jequier (Manuel, p. 232) attributes the principle of diversity to the Greeks, who, however,
surely never practiced it in their own architecture.
23
here and there funnels were provided for running the liquid mortar into them. We found
quantities of fragments of these roof slabs, fallen to the floor from the easternmost row
of columns westward to the screen wall which separated hypostyles M and N. In the
southeast corner, the span between the columns and the wall of chambers O and P, while
3.90 m. wide, would require roofing slabs no longer than those actually found in chamber L.
While we identified no slabs from this part of the roof, we may assume that a roof had
existed as far as the north vestibule wall. In the northeast corner of hypostyle N, however,
there was no wall corresponding to the front of chambers O and P, and as far as we can see
this area must have been left open to the sky, for it is inconceivable that a sandstone archi-
trave could have been provided to span the void of 5.60 m. between the vestibule and
the north wall and also to support a roof. In all probability chambers corresponding to
O and P were contemplated, and had they been erected a roof would have been built
continuously over the whole east end of the hall.
Roof of the On the wide central aisle the architraves ran east and west from the ends of the vestibule
central aisle
Plates xxxiv, walls to the central columns in the screen separating hypostyles M and N, and the sand-
xxxv, XL stone ceiling slabs, of which we found fragments on the floor, obviously rested on them at
right angles. None of the architraves has survived in place, but the proof of their arrange-
ment is twofold. First, the north-south architrave still rests upon columns 11 and 8 on the
north side of the hall, and its end upon column 8 is beveled to make a joint with the now
lost east-west architraves resting on columns 7, 8, and 9. Second, there is a square pier on
the south side of the central aisle, between columns 5 and 6, built to support a fractured
architrave resting upon those two columns. Such an arrangement of architraves along
the broad central aisle left the ceiling of the processional way unbroken from one end to
the other of this hypostyle. 12 The ceiling was not loftier than that of the side aisles, how-
ever, as is apparent from the fact that all the columns in this hall are of a uniform height,
as they would be if designed to support a level roof. In other words, the system of clerestory
lighting adopted for the central aisles of the hypostyle halls of Empire temples had already
been abandoned, when Hibis was planned, for the flat roofs universal in the Ptolemaic
period.
Drainage The only rainspout draining the hypostyle roof —which was practically level with the
Plates xxxiv,
XL, XLVIII
tops of the cornice blocks —was at about the middle of the north side, so high on the wall
that the lion's head grew out of the cornice itself. The waterway to it leads from the top
of the cornice, but curiously enough there is no trace existing of the method by which the
water was guided to it and prevented from pouring over the wall throughout the latter's
length. It is hard to escape the conclusion that, rain being rare in the Oasis, those respon-
sible for the design of this gargoyle did not entirely understand its function.
12
A reason why this processional aisle is not continuous through M from the entrance of N to the sanctuary
door at the back of B has been discussed on page 13.
24
The lighting was by skylight holes in the roof slabs, similar to that in chamber L. Two Lighting
FlJitps xvi
slabs with halves of such holes were found, one in the extreme north aisle and the other in XXXIV
the extreme south aisle, where they had fallen from their original positions in the ceiling.
Other light holes doubtless existed, and it is possible that originally there was one in each
bay of the outermost aisles and others at intervals along the central aisle. The light open-
ings appear to have measured 35 to 38 cm. square on the upper sides of the blocks and about
66 cm. square on the lower sides.
The fault in the architrave between columns 5 and 6 developed during the building of Structural
13
the hypostyle. Probably the roof had already been constructed; but the interior of the Plates x m
XXXIU XXXIV
hypostyle could only have been in the rough, for when the surfaces of the bases of the pier '
and of the two adjoining columns were dressed smooth they were merged one into the
other. Moreover, the stone of which the pier was built is identical in texture with that
used throughout the hall. The case is entirely different with the piers which supported the
architraves between the north wall and columns 11 and 12. For this repair the stone came
from different quarries, since it is of a rough texture and dark reddish-brown color, and
the workmanship is much cruder than that of the original masonry. Here the failure of
the two architraves appears not to have taken place until something like six centuries
after the hypostyle was erected, for painted in liquid plaster on the near-by north wall
and on the architrave connecting the wall and column 11 there are the names of those
who were responsible for this restoration, written in hands of the second or third century
A.D. —Herakleios; Herakleios, the son of Polydeukes; Hermas, the son of Hermogenos,
and Herakleios, his brother; and Victor.14
It is possible that some of the longer roofing slabs in the east end of hypostyle N cracked Collapse
and fell late in the pagan occupation. Parts of two such slabs were built into a wall of the roof
Plates
Christian period joining column 7 and the end of the north vestibule wall. Otherwise, how- XXXV, XL
ever, the ceiling of hypostyle N remained intact and served as the roof of the second story
of the structures built within the hall in the Christian period.15 The complete destruction
of the roof occurred only after the middle of the fifth century A.D., when irrigation water
was led near the temple structure. 16 The bedrock under hypostyle N slopes away markedly
to the north and east,17 and as the dampness crept in under the foundations, the north
wall leaned outwards and the northeast corner of the hall gradually sank. The extent of
this sinking is shown by the fact that while the doorsill between hypostyles M and N
appears still to be at its original level, the sill of the east entrance to hypostyle N is 9.5 cm.
lower, and the foundations of the northeast corner of the hall have sunk to a depth of 57
cm. As the northeast corner walls sank, columns 7 and 10 collapsed and were forced by the
falling roof into the vestibule. Later, columns 3, 6, and 9 in the back row failed and brought
13 14 15 16 17
See p. 24. Part II, nos. 35-39. See p. 47. See p. 49. See p. 16.
25
T H E TEMPLE OF HIBIS, I. THE EXCAVATIONS
down with them column 5. The Christian occupants of the buildings within the hall
obviously were perfectly well aware of their danger, for their structures had been com-
pletely vacated and even their wooden floors removed before the catastrophe.
2. THE PORTICO, Q
Portico, Q, The portico, Q, was not contemplated when hypostyle N and the facade of the temple
added to the
temple were erected. It is even possible that at least parts of the facade had been sculptured before
Plates iv-vn the portico was built, for when the remains of the latter were taken down by Baraize for
xxxm, xxxv,
XL, XLI restoration, sections of a dado were found masked behind the two western ends of the
screen walls, where they abutted against the temple front. The surface of the temple front
has been cut back everywhere else since the erection of the portico, leaving of the original
surface only these two hidden areas which now project slightly from all the rest of the
facade. Possibly of the same earlier date are the reliefs on the lintel of the great doorway,
which, in contrast to all the other wall surfaces now within the porch, is decorated in the
sunken relief characteristic of exterior walls. Other indications that the porch was an
addition can be seen in the inept way in which its architraves rest on the cornice of the
facade and in the total lack of bonding between the masonry of the two structures.
Between When Baraize removed the original foundations of the portico to renew them, a vertical
378 and
341 B.C.
line of inscription was brought to light on the east face of the western of the two foundation
Plate ix blocks under the southwest column. Two other blocks from the west end of the foundations
of the north side were found identically inscribed, and from the three versions the complete
inscriptions can be restored: ^ l -©'
^111 V * a a s ^D
- A H ? 3 , "Long live the Good
God, Lord of the Two Lands, Lord of Rites, Son of Ref, Lord of Diadems, Nekht-neb-ef,
Given Life like Ref eternally." These, obviously builders' inscriptions corresponding to
the more usual foundation deposits, date the foundations of the portico to Nektanebis I
(378-360 B.C). 1 8 How far the building was carried in his reign is not certain; at least the
decorations were not completed until the reign of Nektanebis II (359-341 B.C), whose
cartouches alone appear in all inscriptions both within it and without. The cartouches on
the cavetto cornice of the facade of the portico are blank, for there they were probably
regarded merely as decorative motives. As on the cornice of the original structure of
Darius, they appear only on the front and not on the sides.
Composite Four columns, rising from the screen walls and the frames of the gates, are visible in
papyrus
capitals each elevation of the portico. On the front, facing the east, the two end capitals were
Plates vm,
XLVI 18
The proper order of the two kings Nekht-neb-ef (Nektanebis I) and Nekht-Hor-ehbet (Nektanebis II)
had been known to the earliest Eg>ptologists. Mariette, however, reversed it as a result of wrong deductions
from his Serapeum discoveries, misleading Lepsius (Konigsbuch, p. 92), and for over half a century the error
was followed blindly. In 1914 Spiegelberg (p. 6) re-established the proper order, partly on the ground of this
discovery at Hibis, which had been communicated to him by Davies. In 1931 Meyer (p. 68) confirmed
Spiegelberg's conclusions. I also mentioned the Hibis discovery in Bulletin, XXIX (1934), p. 186.
26
composite papyrus clusters. The one from the south end, now in New York,19 is practically
complete even to its colors. The one from the north end is represented only by a fragment
still at the temple.
These two capitals are elaborations of the composite type, of which the earliest form is
to be seen in hypostyle B, where the campaniform structure still preserves its continuous
upper rim.20 The first elaboration of that simple type of composite papyrus capital appears
at Hibis in the example in chamber L, which has four major umbels beneath the four faces
of the abacus. 21 On the portico capitals the number of umbels has been doubled, with the
result that the top of the capital is divided into eight lobes.22 "The design is made up of two
species of papyrus alternating, the common Cyperus papyrus and Cyperus alopecuroides, in
all sixteen plants. The two species are distinguished by the length of the bracts surrounding
the umbel, those of the common papyrus being very short, and those of Cyperus alopecu-
roides exceeding in length the filaments of the umbel. The colors are arbitrary, the filaments
of the common papyrus as here represented being green, those of Cyperus alopecuroides
red, and the bracts of both species being in alternate plants red, in the others green. In
Egyptian reliefs and columns representing the papyrus the three-sided form of the stalks
is often suggested either by a vertical ridge or by a line painted their length, but a rounded
surface without even the painted line, as here, is not infrequent at a late period. In common
with all late capitals the stems are confined by bands, not immediately below the capital,
as in earlier columns, but lower down, the shaft being divided into stems above the bands
and being left undivided below them." 23
The two central capitals on top of the high jambs of the main eastern door of the portico Lotus capitals
Plul'f VI VII
were clusters of fully developed lotus flowers, closed as they are in the evening, with a row
of small buds below. The northern capital is preserved almost complete except that it is
now colorless. The southern one is represented only by a fragment. Both are still at the
temple. 24
The papyrus-bud capital was fairly common throughout Egyptian architecture. The
lotus in bud form —or in the form of the mature flower closed, as here at Hibis —is less
common but goes back to the Old Kingdom.25 Occasionally, Ptolemaic architects produced
19
M.M.A. ace. no. io. 177.2; Handbook, frontispiece. See Preface above, p. vi.
20
See p. 10.
21
See p. 13.
22
Jequier, Manuel, pp. 241 and 271. In the latter place he describes three types resembling that of
Hibis, and as two out of his three examples are Roman and as he did not know of the existence of these
eight-lobed capitals of the XXX Dynasty in Hibis, he assumes that the eight-lobed capital is a late Graeco-
Roman development.
23
From the label on the capital as exhibited in the Metropolitan Museum, written by Caroline Ransom
Williams when a member of the Museum staff.
24
See below, p. 32.
25
Examples of the V Dynasty, very similar in general form to papyrus-bud capitals, are in Petrie,
Memphis, pi. in, and Apries, pi. xvm, and in Spanton, p. 19. These are republished by Jequier, Manuel, pp.
27
composite capitals of open and partly closed lotus flowers more ornate in design than those
of Hibis.26 It is characteristic of the late examples of this type of capital, as of the com-
posite papyrus type, that the five bands which bind the plants together should be placed
a short distance below the base of the flowers, to display the tops of the clustered stems.
Below the lowest band, however, the shaft of the column is a simple cylinder, in the
examples from Hibis bearing only the lower ends of the stems of the row of buds.
Campaniform The three columns on the north side of the porch have as capitals the conventionalized
and palm
capitals campaniform papyrus cluster, which typified Lower Egypt; these are similar to the capitals
between hypostyles M and N except that the flowerets and buds on the umbel were not
carved but perhaps were painted. The columns on the south fagade have palm capitals
similar to those in hypostyle N and like them have the loops below the neck bands only
on the side facing the temple axis.27
Portico Screen walls between the columns and wooden doors effectually hid the interior of the
doors
Plates v-vn, porch from the outside. The screens were 2.70 m. high. The three doorways were of the
XXXIII,
same type as the one between hypostyles M and N, those to the north and south being
XXXV, XLI
1.80 m. wide with jambs 4.20 m. high. In them were hung wooden doors, exactly the height
of the screen walls, pivoted above in wooden lintel beams 10 cm. thick and 15 cm. wide,
and opening inward. The eastern doorway, on the temple axis, was 2.35 m. wide —the
width of the main door of the temple at the entrance to hypostyle N. We may assume that
it was higher than the side doors in proportion to its greater width, and this is confirmed
by the remains of the decorations on its south jamb where the figure of the king, standing
here above a dado of Nile gods, is at a much higher level than the corresponding figures of
the king on the side doorways.
Door pivots The pavement in the north doorway shows traces of an exterior raised sill, pivot holes
and bolts
Plate x for two valves, and the usual slots for slipping the valves into place —that on the right still
containing part of the stone patch with which it was masked. Originally, bolts dropped
vertically into sockets in the pavement inside each valve, as in the main temple doorway.
That these bolts were metal is shown by the fact that the one on the left valve had scraped
an arc in the sandstone pavement as the door was opened and shut. Later, a rectangular
plate was let into the center of the opening for some other bolting system substituted for
the original.
205-206, figs. 131 and 133, who, however, dates one example to Saite times, although Petrie states that it
was a re-used block in XIX Dynasty foundations. Middle Kingdom examples are in Newberry, II, pi. x, and
in Bulletin, XV (1920), Dec, part 11, figs. 8 and 17—the last in the models of the house of Meket-Ref. A
Ptolemaic example of the same general type is in Jequier, Manuel, p. 208, fig. 134.
26
At Philae, Jequier, Manuel, p. 208, fig. 117; at Edfu, Jequier, Manuel, p. 210, fig. 135, and Temples,
pis. 21 and 34.
27
For the types of capitals on the north and south sides of the portico cf. pis. xv, XLIV, and XLV.
The most interesting feature of the portico is the evidence that it was originally roofed. Portico roof
It is a general rule in this temple —a rule which goes back to a very early period in Egyptian x x x v XL x u
architecture —that reliefs should be sunken on exterior walls and raised on walls under
roofs. In this porch the decorations on the jambs of the doorway leading into hypostyle N
(but not on the lintel, which may have been decorated before the porch was built) and
those on the inner sides of the intercolumnar screens are in the raised relief of interiors,
while those on the three porch doorways and on the outer sides of the screens are in the
sunken relief of exteriors. More evidence for a roof is the fact that, while the inner faces
of the porch architraves are all smooth-dressed, flush with the abaci of the capitals, the
backs of the cornice blocks above are left rough, just as they came from the quarry. As one
stands today within the roofless porch these unfinished surfaces are disturbingly visible,
and one can hardly escape the conclusion that the back of this cornice was intended to be
hidden by a ceiling resting on the architraves. Such a ceiling must have been higher than
the temple facade, and to close the opening between it and the top of the temple cornice
at the back, thin slabs of stone were set along the top of the cornice of the temple between
the portico architraves, as is shown by still-existing masons' marks. So placed, these slabs
showed a face at the back of the portico corresponding to the inner face of the architraves
on the front and sides.
Sockets for transverse roof beams exist in the north and south architraves where the Roof beams
Plates xxxv,
latter join above the abaci of the columns. These sockets penetrated from 47 to 50 cm. XLI
horizontally from the architrave faces. They were from 38 to 40 cm. wide in front but only
16 cm. at their inner ends, in order that the architraves might be weakened as little as
possible where they bore upon the abaci. The sockets are open at the tops of the architraves
and vary in depth vertically from 35 to 45 cm. As it seems inconceivable that beams in so
prominent a place should have been as irregular in thickness as the sockets were in depth,
we may safely suppose that they were of uniform thickness —probably that of the archi-
traves themselves. If so, they had projecting tenons at their tops only, cut to rest in the
sockets, and so seated, they would have gained additional support from the pressure of
the ends below the tenons against the rigid architraves when they tended to bow downward.
We may also assume that these beams were wider than the sockets, measuring perhaps a
cubit, or 52.3 cm. Hence these beams were probably 75 by 52.3 cm. in section, they bridged
. a clear span of 7.40 m., and they were from 8.30 to 8.40 m. in total length.
Stone is out of the question for beams of such length and slenderness and with such Wooden roof
joinery, and we are forced to the conclusion that they were of wood and that the ceiling
above them was of planks. If stuccoed and painted, such a wooden roof would have been
indistinguishable to the eye from the stuccoed and painted masonry round about.
The use of wood in roofing parts of stone temples has been suggested before.28 It appears other wooden
28
portico roofs
Borchardt, p. 12, suggested a wooden roof for parts of the XVIII Dynasty buildings at Karnak.
29
to have been common for temple porches of the Saite, Ptolemaic, and Roman periods. In
front of the Eighteenth Dynasty temple at Medinet Habu a pylon was erected in the
Twenty-fifth Dynasty, and after the completion of its decorations a portico was built
against it. In design this portico was similar to that of Hibis,29 but its date is somewhat
earlier, for the cartouches of Nektanebis II appear upon it only as usurpations over those
of its actual builder. Here the architraves themselves and the cornice above them were of
wood, resting in sockets cut into the pylon face. In this instance four transverse wooden
beams (counting the facade architrave), each about 9 m. long, were required to support
the roof. A pylon with a porch of different design was built in the reign of Ptolemy X
still further east on the approach to the same temple.30 Here the porch originally consisted
of two columns in front of the pylon gateway, joined to each other and to the pylon by
three wooden architrave beams, each about 10.50 m. long. The porch cornice, continuing
the stone cornice of the pylon around the portico, must also have been of wood. Wooden
cross rafters masked by the cornice supported a slightly arched wooden ceiling nailed
below them. Again, Trajan's kiosk at Philae 31 has sockets above the stone architraves for
three transverse wooden roof beams, each about 13 m. long, 1 m. wide, and with a vertical
thickness probably somewhat greater than the width.
Other possible In the above four cases —one in Hibis, two in Medinet Habu, and one in Philae —clear
wooden roofs
evidences of wooden roofs survive. In other instances there is every possibility that wooden
roofs existed, but such tangible traces as beam sockets are no longer preserved. For example,
there were screened porches with peripheral columns as at Hibis in front of the following
edifices: the temple of Ptah at Karnak, built by Ptolemy III, which would have required
one transverse beam about 4 m. long to support a roof32; the temple of Eri-hems-nufer at
Philae, built by Ptolemy IV, requiring two beams 6 m. long 33 ; the temple of Hat-Hor at
Philae, built by Ptolemy VI, requiring five beams of about the same length 34 ; and the
Birth House at Edfu, built by Ptolemy IX, requiring five beams 9.50 m. long. 35 This last,
particularly, has been called a forecourt, but in the light of the demonstrable existence of
wooden-roofed porches of even greater width, there should be no doubt that this also was a
roofed portico.
The answer to the problem of the Taharka colonnade in front of the great temple at
Karnak is not so clear.36 In this case the transverse beams would have had to be 19 or
29
Holscher, Excavations, I, pis. 16 and 18; Communications, no. 10, p. 64, pi. 3; Vorbericht, pi. 26.
30
Holscher, Excavations, I, pi. 19; Communications, no. 10, p. 67, pi. 4; Vorbericht, pi. 27. Steindorff, p.
355, mentions the roof as being of wood.
31 32
Lyons, pis. XIII and xiv. Legrain, Annales, III (1902), plate facing p. 112.
33 34 35
Lyons, pi. 11. Lyons, plan vi. Chassinat, pi. 1.
36
It is discussed by Legrain, Karnak, p. 62. His conclusion was that each column was surmounted by a
statue, and he illustrates a relief in the temple of Montu showing columns with the hawks of Upper and
Lower Egypt atop their capitals.
30
20 m. long, a span which is not inconceivable, if it be allowed that several timbers of that
length were strapped together to make up each beam. That such a roof could have been
satisfactorily constructed by Egyptian carpenters or would have long endured may be
doubted, of course; but that is not proof that the attempt was not made.
If we disregard this last, uncertain Twenty-fifth Dynasty possibility, the next earliest Their origin
Egyptian
wooden-roofed porticoes listed above are one at Medinet Habu, which may be as early as
the Twenty-sixth Dynasty, and the one at Hibis, built in the Thirtieth Dynasty. The
existence of these two clear examples earlier than the Ptolemaic period is enough to prove
that the use of wooden-roofed porches was a native Egyptian idea. Perhaps they were
developed in the Delta, where wood from Syria was no more expensive than stone from
Upper Egypt, and during Saite times, when there was a tendency to break away from
the heavy exteriors of the late Theban period.
The foundations of the portico were white sandstone blocks, 2.00 to 2.50 m. long, 0.50 Foundations
of the
to 1.05 m. wide, and 0.58 to 0.65 m. thick, placed in a single layer at right angles to the portico
walls. The bedrock under the portico was probably nowhere less than 2 m. below pavement and its
collapse
level, and under the north side it was at least twice as deep. As the city of Hibis shrank in Plates xi,
xxxm
size and the cultivation encroached on the temple site, the subsoil outside the temple
became saturated with irrigation water. 37 The foundation blocks then tended to sink
into the saturated earth under their outer ends until the three sides of the portico inclined
at such angles that the drums of the columns above the screen walls and doorjambs
tumbled down. The north and south sides fell directly outward, with each stone lying
beside the next, tearing the east face apart as they came down. Thus the south column
on the front fell south by east, with its capital almost in line with the capitals of the south
side, in a dry place where its color was preserved under drifted sand. The next capital of
the front row fell east by south, and fragments of it were found north of the southern
capital. The capital above the north doorjamb, with its abacus and parts of the central
architrave and cornice, fell northeast beside the north Obelisk Base,38 where the ground
was then damp enough to destroy all trace of color on the surface of the capital. Fragments
of the doorjamb were found between the doorway and the Obelisk Base, and a piece of the
northeast capital was unearthed further afield.
Baraize dismantled all the parts of the portico which had not actually fallen and replaced Restoration
of the
the foundations with a deep concrete bed. The southwest column, being complete on its portico
inner face, and marks of the architrave still existing on the cornice above the temple front
gave him all the necessary data for the restoration of the missing parts of the portico on
the north and south fronts. To complete the south elevation he reconstructed the south-
east column to its full height with a roughly blocked-out substitute for the capital taken
37
See p. 49.
38
See below, p . 34.
31
to New York three years before. Of the east face very little remained; and therefore he
contented himself with rebuilding the northeast column for symmetry's sake, and upon
it he placed the one other surviving capital—that originally above the north doorjamb.
Hence the photographs in this volume show that capital on the northern end of the front
of the portico, while the drawings show all four capitals restored to their proper places.
3. THE GIRDLE WALL, R
Its plan The temple structure received one more addition after the completion of the portico
Plates xxm,
XXXIII, xxxv, about 350 B.C During the following century a girdle wall was built to enclose the main
XXXVI, XLII structure within a narrow corridor and the porch between two small courts. Judging from
the existence of the base of a torus molding at the northwest corner, we may assume that
the wall was topped with the usual cavetto cornice; but there is no definite evidence to
determine the wall's total height. The stones of which it was built were so easily adaptable
in later periods to the building of houses within and without the temple, and of a church
on the north side of the portico, that the wall was almost completely destroyed in Christian
times. Today the tallest remaining parts are, first, a section 3 m. high on the south where
the wall was protected until modern times by a sand dune which formed under the lee of
the temple 39 and, second, the western doorway, where the top of the cornice is 3.80 m.
above pavement level.
Such girdle walls eventually became common in Ptolemaic times, and Edfu has one
which is almost the full height of the temple proper.40 At Hibis, judging from the smallness
of the stones used and the fact that the wall's thickness is only 1 m., except on the west
where it measures 1.35 m., we must conclude that the girdle wall was lower than the
temple. Evidence confirming this was observed on the southeast portico column, where
mortar from the wall was noted on the existing drums but not on the capital, although the
latter still preserved its original coat of paint. A reasonable reconstruction, therefore,
would make the girdle wall the height of the jambs of the east doorway of the portico,
masking the corner columns almost to their capitals. Actually, however, such a girdle wall,
although over 2 m. lower than the temple proper, would have completely hidden it from
view from almost any point in the eastern part of the temenos.
Construction The sandstone blocks of which the wall was built usually measured about 60 by 25 by
20 cm. In the northwest corner the foundations were 1.65 m. deep, built of four courses of
large blocks presumably taken from the buttress against the west wall of the temple and
laid in a shallow, sand-filled trench cut in the bedrock. 41 Elsewhere the foundations con-
39
Baraize consolidated this section with blocks fallen from the wall, and used other such blocks to cap
the wall for its preservation.
40
Jequier, Temples, p. 4, pi. 22. Similar walls, now incomplete, are at Kom Ombo (ibid., p. 6, pi. 36) and
Dendereh (ibid., p. 7).
41
See pp. 17 and 18.
32
sisted of three or four courses of the same small stones as the wall itself and, being only
60 to 80 cm. deep, nowhere descended to the bedrock. Opposite the north and south sides
of hypostyle N no foundations were required, the first courses of the wall being built
directly on the wide foundation platform of the temple walls. On the east front the wall
was built against the corner columns of the portico, and as has been noted, mortar from
the joint still remained on the lowest drums of the southeast column. From the northeast
corner of the portico the column had entirely disappeared, but at the southeast corner the
segment of column base which projected from beneath the wall face was dressed away
after the wall was finished. The corridor around the temple was paved with small blocks
wherever no earlier pavement existed, but no paving was discovered in the two courts on
either side of the portico.
There were at least three entrances through this wall, and probably four. The best Doorways in
preserved, in the center of the west side, was connected by a paved way with Southern
Building II and with whatever other structures may have existed in the unexcavated back
part of the temenos. The outer face of the gateway had collapsed; but the cornice and outer
lintel were found where they had fallen, and the inner lintel block, still in place, indicated
the height to which the doorway should be restored. Only the lowest courses remained of a
larger doorway directly opposite the side doorway of hypostyle N, giving access to the
buildings in the northern part of the temenos. 42 There can be no doubt that on the east
face of the girdle wall there was at least one doorway just south of the porch and, in all
probability, a second, symmetrically located beside the now totally destroyed northeast
corner of the porch. The evidence for the doorway on the south was the discovery of about
half of its sandstone lintel, buried under the collapsed southeast corner of the portico.
On the existing part of this lintel there is a Greek inscription which states that the girdle Dedication
inscription,
wall (peribolos) and the gateways (pylomata) were constructed by some official (whose 283-245 B.C.
name originally occupied the fourth line) under Ptolemy II and his wife, Berenice, who Plate XLII
reigned from 283 to 245 B . C 4 3 The only possible restoration of the few missing letters of the
common dedication formula employed makes this inscription begin in the center of the
lintel, if it be assumed—as is highly probable—that the gateway was of the same dimen-
sions as that in the western side of the girdle wall. Obviously something must have existed
on the left-hand side of the lintel to balance this inscription on the right, and nothing
seems more probable for this purpose than a parallel inscription in Egyptian.
42
Some 12 m. west of this door, on the foundations of the north side of the girdle wall, there "is a Greek
graffito of the second or third century A.D. (Part II, no. 42) which may be translated: "The act of devotion
here of Ammonius from Ptolemais and of all those present (or of all those with him)."
43
Part II, no. 7.
33
CHAPTER IV
THE TEMENOS
1. THE AVENUE AND THE ENCLOSURE WALLS
Earliest The earliest enclosure wall built for the existing temple was 43 m. east of the facade of
enclosure
wall the Darius structure—the screen between hypostyles M and N—and the sill of its gateway
Plate xxx was about 0.75 m. lower than the temple pavement. It would seem highly probable that
this first enclosure wall was removed when the great enclosure wall was erected early in
the Ptolemaic period, for the thin stone wall discovered by us extending south of the Inner
Gateway can have had nothing to do with the original plan. The original wall, as can be
seen from the undressed sides of the stone masonry of its gateway, was of brick, 5.65 m.
thick, and doubtless at least the same height as the gateway, 6.50 m., if not even higher.
Inner The Inner Gateway was completely decorated, apparently by the same sculptors who
Gateway
Plates iv, xxxi decorated the temple, and as usual the only name upon it is the simple cartouche "Darius."
On the north reveal the decorations covered merely the half left exposed when the single
door valve was swung open, and the part then hidden by the door was not even coated
with the white wash given the rest of the gateway before the walls were painted. A wooden
socket was provided on the north side for the upper pivot of the wooden door. On the south
a square bolt hole, with a recess around it for a rectangular wooden or metal plate, 50 cm.
long, 45 cm. high, and 7 cm. thick, was cut after the decorations were carved and painted.
Also cutting the decorations were two sockets in the doorjambs about 1.80 m. above the
sill, probably for the insertion of wooden blocks to which was attached the pivot of a
wicket gate. 1
Masonry of As elsewhere in the temple the blocks of sandstone were laid in liquid-thin lime plaster.
the Inner
Gateway In the southeast jamb, for some reason which is not entirely obvious, the second course
above the pavement appears to have been laid on grass matting, which is visible now that
the mortar pointing in the joint has fallen out. More easily explained is the presence of
thin slips of wood in the course joint above. They were probably the last of the wedges
which were used to manoeuvre the blocks into place, perhaps left in the joint to prevent
the watery mortar from being squeezed out entirely.2
Obelisk In front of the temple, just within the gateway, there are the remains of two square
Bases (?)
Plates iv-vi, bases, measuring 2 m. on a side. The first course above the foundations, consisting of three
xxx massive sandstone blocks 70 cm. thick, is solid; the second course, about 50 cm. thick,
1
For those in the east doorway of the temple see p. 22.
2
Compare the iron wedges in the masonry of hypostyle N , p. 21.
34
THE TEMENOS
surrounds a hollow square just under i m. on each side. There is no evidence which clearly
indicates the purpose of these bases, but it is not impossible that each supported a sand-
stone obelisk, standing within the original enclosure in front of the temple. Judging from
the position of the two bases, nearly midway between the portico and the Inner Gateway,
it is safe to say that they could not have been earlier than the portico and were probably
contemporary with it. Had they been earlier, and contemporary with the structures of
Darius or Hakoris,they would probably have been further to the west. On the other hand,
they were probably erected before the removal of the original enclosure wall, which seems
to have taken place early in the Ptolemaic period. It would be reasonable to assume,
therefore, that they were erected by Nektanebis II.
Eventually the temenos was enlarged, to the east at least, by the erection of a new and Later
• • • enclosure
greater enclosure wall, the face of which was 50 m. in front of that of the wall of Darius. wall
The new wall was of brick, 7 m. thick, and probably at least the height of the Great Gate- P l a t e x x x
way which was its entrance. 3 In any event, it must have completely hidden the temple
within. A section of its lower courses still exists among the palms north of the gateway,
and it can be traced on the surface with a certain amount of confidence through the
modern gardens for some 13 m. further north. While we did not excavate in this neigh-
borhood, the ground about 50 m. north of the gateway slopes to the north and east, and
it is probable that near here was a corner of the temple enclosure. Within the wall the
surface of the palm grove is thickly strewn with broken pottery and chips of worked stone.
The southern half of the Great Gateway still stands in the palm grove; the northern half Great
had collapsed after the destruction of the adjoining part of the brick enclosure wall. This piateWay
gateway was a sandstone structure 11.40 m. high, with a cavetto cornice on both its outer In> x x x
and inner faces. Large as it is, it was provided with a single-valve, wooden door, pivoted
in the north and bolted in the south jamb. The bolt hole has a rabbet around it for a face-
plate of wood or metal. There was a slot 53 cm. wide across the roof of the gateway, above
the top of the door when closed; this allowed the door to be lifted on to its lower hinge
pivot when it was being set in place. The top pivot could have been seated in a wooden
beam laid in the slot.
Unfortunately, there is no inscription on the gateway contemporary with its erection. Date of
In fact, except for a winged disk flanked by uraei wearing the crowns of the North and
South on the cornice, it was left undecorated by its builders. However, my impression is
that the gateway and the enclosure wall were erected under Ptolemy II (285-247 B.C.) —
or one of his immediate successors—shortly after the girdle wall was built, for among other
visitors a certain Jason has left his name upon the jambs, and on epigraphic grounds the
3
A section of old brick wall exists on the top of the-cornice at the southeast corner of the Great Gateway
(pis. n and in). But since seemingly equally old brickwork exists where the original stone roof of the gateway
once rested, it is safest to assume that all the brickwork on top of the Great Gateway is later than the ruin
of the gateway itself.
35
lettering may be dated to the early part of the Ptolemaic period.4 A panel of bas-reliefs
was carved high up inside the south jamb, perhaps under one of the last of the Ptolemies,
but the cartouches accompanying the figure of the king are blank. In the first century A.D.
the jambs of this portal, like those of the Outer Gateway, were used as bulletin boards by
the Roman governors of the Oasis, since every visitor wending his way up the avenue to
the temple would see any decrees carved upon them. Hence, in 60 A.D. an edict of Lucius
Julius Vestinus was published on the northeast jamb, 5 and in 68 A.D. the first of two copies
of an edict of Tiberius Julius Alexander was begun just below the already existing panel of
reliefs inside the gateway. 6
Date of the The upper avenue from the temple to the Great Gateway follows the temple axis. The
lower avenue
Plate xxx lower avenue, from the Great Gateway eastward to the Quay on the lake shore, deviates
from the axis of the upper by about two degrees. Therefore we may safely assume that the
structures on this lower avenue are later than the early Ptolemaic Great Gateway. We
shall see that the latest of the works on the lower avenue was the Outer Gateway, and as
it was standing before 49 A.D. we may tentatively date the landing stage and the lower
avenue leading to it to the later years of the Ptolemaic period.
Quay The first structure as one approached the temple from the east was the Quay, or landing
Plates i, xxx
stage, which was similar to those that stood on the water's edge at Karnak and elsewhere
in the Nile Valley. Here at Hibis it was located on the lake shore at the highest level at
which the water could have stood without escaping into the desert to the northeast or
without submerging the foundations of the Great Gateway. 7 The Quay was a square
platform, measuring 9 m. on each side and projecting 1 m. above the level of the water.
The structure was a mere shell of large sandstone blocks held together with wooden
cramps, the inside filled with chips of shale. On top it was paved with sandstone slabs
about 30 cm. thick, and around the edge there are builders' marks showing that it had
had a parapet 48 cm. wide. The approach from the temple avenue was by a ramp rising to
the platform pavement. The revetment of the lake shore, of which a part still exists,
running north from the western side of the platform, was built of blocks of sandstone
similar to those employed in the girdle wall.
Avenue of From the landing stage to the Great Gateway there is an avenue about 34 m. long. We
Sphinxes
Plates m, xxx discovered the bases of five Sphinxes on its south and three on its north side—all of sand-
stone, none inscribed, the largest 2.40 m. long, and the shortest 1.80 m.8 Only two of the
4
Part II, no. 13. For other graffiti on the Great Gateway see nos. 10-29. Of these, no. 29 is written in a
hand which, Oliver notes, preserves characteristics that "would not be inappropriate for the fourth century
B.C.," and which is probably not later than the first half of the third.
5 6 7
Part II, no. 2. Part II, no. 3. See p. 3.
8
Hoskins (p. 97) writes of "pedestals" east of the Outer Gateway 1.90 m. long. Actually there is only one
pedestal there today, 1.80 m. long. He states that there were seven pedestals west of the Outer Gateway
2.30 m. long. These seven exist today. If there actually were in Hoskins' day a whole series of pedestals to
36
THE TEMENOS
actual Sphinxes have survived. The westernmost one on the north side of the avenue has a
human head on a lion's body and the one next to it a ram's head. The spacing of the
Sphinxes as they now stand is somewhat irregular, but it would appear that there were
originally nine on either side of the avenue between the Quay and the Great Gateway and
that, of these, three on each side of the avenue were removed at the time of the construc-
tion of the Outer Gateway. So arranged, they would have lined the avenue continuously,
in obvious imitation of the avenue of sphinxes at Karnak, which leads from the quay on
the Nile bank to the first pylon.
The Outer Gateway was a sandstone portal, 4.80 m. high. It was not roofed but was Outer
Gateway
left open to the sky above, with a small cavetto cornice on the front and back faces and Plates 1,
along the top of each side within the passage between the jambs. The two wooden doors 11, xxx
with which it was probably provided were pivoted above in a wooden lintel resting in
sockets in either side.
The rough, unfinished flanks of the gateway obviously were to have been masked by
pylons which we must assume were to have been of brick, since no provision was made for
bonding the jambs into stone. There are, however, no traces of such brickwork now visible,
and the cleanness of the mortar in the gateway may be evidence that the pylons never
were constructed. 9
We have seen that the Outer Gateway—and its pylon, if one existed—was probably Date of
the Outer
later than the Sphinxes, of which six appear to have been removed to make way for it. In Gateway
workmanship it would appear to be either late Ptolemaic or Roman, but if the latter it
can be no later than 49 A.D., for by that time it had been used as a city bulletin board,
with the edict of Gnaeus Vergilius Capito recorded upon its south jamb. 10 In 68 or early
in 69 A.D. the north jamb was used for the second of the two copies of the edict of Tiberius
Julius Alexander,11 and the first copy on the Great Gateway was left unfinished.
Upon each of the eastern jambs of the Great Gateway there is carved a quatrain in Hermeias
pavement
hexameters, 12 lauding the benefaction of one Hermeias, the son of Hermophilus of Hermu- Plate xxx
polis, who while an official in the Oasis, apparently in the third century A.D., laid out a stone
pavement 100 cubits in length and wide enough for seven men to walk abreast or, what
comes to about the same thing, 7 cubits broad. This was doubtless the last important
addition made to the temple in pagan times. Obviously the verses were inscribed where
the reader would see them as he stood on, or was about to step upon, the pavement which
they mention, and it is an interesting fact that the distance from the east face of the Great
the east, all of them varying so widely in size from those to the west, we probably should have to conclude
that there were two independent sets of sphinxes erected after the building of the Outer Gateway. However,
Hoskins' account is not very circumstantial; but it should be noted as an alternative to the idea given above.
9
In plate xxx the dotted outlines indicate pylons- 10 cubits wide (the corresponding dimension of the
gateway) and 60 cubits long.
10 n 12
Part II, no. I. Part II, no. 4. Part II, nos. 5 and 6.
37
T H E TEMPLE OF HIBIS, I. THE EXCAVATIONS
Gateway to the east face of the Inner Gateway is practically the ioo cubits specified. If we
are to take the quatrains literally, we may suppose that the Pavement of Hermeias was
laid from a point 2 m. east of the Great Gateway to the doorsill of the Inner Gateway,
which is a distance of 52.25 m., or exactly 100 cubits. As we did not excavate the area in
the modern palm grove, we cannot say whether or not such a pavement has survived there
under the present surface.
2. BUILDINGS AND OBJECTS IN THE TEMENOS
Because privately owned land hedged the temple in so closely, we could only excavate
what was probably but a small part of the temenos, and most of the part which we did
clear, to the south of the temple, was largely an open court devoid of constructions.
Southern Mention has already been made of Southern Building II and the adjoining brick walls
Building II
Plates xxv, which, as a group, appear to preserve the orientation of the earlier temple, if in fact they
xxx, XLIX are not actually contemporary with it. 13 The building itself was a square brick structure,
measuring approximately 20 m. on each side. Only the foundations exist, but they show
that it had a central hall surrounded by smaller chambers. The floor level of the structure
was 1.60 m. above the general level of the temple court, the spaces between the foundation
walls being filled with clean shale chip, which was also banked in front of the building
to give it the appearance of being on a slight mound. The one doorway, on the north side,
was built of sandstone on the brick foundations of the wall.14 In front of the doorway
on a massive stone platform level with the floor inside the building, there was added a
columned porch with a sloping, paved ramp descending the artificial mound to the court
level. The axis of this porch, and of the ramp, inclined a little more to the west than the
axis of the brick building, in such fashion that the foot of the ramp ended at the southwest
corner of the girdle wall of the temple and there joined the pavement leading to the west
doorway in the wall. Since the girdle wall was erected by Ptolemy II, this porch oriented
on the corner of it can be no earlier, even though the foundations of the building itself
may have been in existence long before.15
South of this building privately owned property prevented an extension of the excava-
tions except in one place, where we cleared and then re-covered an area a few meters
square occupied by Roman houses.16 West of the temple our excavations were still more
closely confined.
13
See p. 5.
14
With such insecure underpinning, once the abutting brick wall was destroyed the door tilted perilously
toward the west and was therefore dismantled and built on good foundations by Baraize. The western side
of the porch was better preserved in 1818 than in our day (Cailliaud, pi. xxn, 1).
15
See p. 5.
16
See p. 44.
38
THE TEMENOS
About 25 m. north of the temple there show above the modern surface the ruins of two Northern
Building
uninscribed sandstone gateways which had been the entrances to a brick structure, but Plate xxx
we were prevented again from excavating seriously and could only clear the gateways
themselves.
Scattered along the north side of the temple, especially in the northeast corner of the Ptolemaic
area which we did clear, there were well over a hundred sandstone blocks of an average reliefs
Plate L
length of 46.5 cm., width of 28 cm., and thickness of 22.5 cm., decorated with both sunken
and raised relief. All remain at the temple, awaiting further investigation of the northeast
part of the temenos. It was our original intention to continue our clearing into this area,
but circumstances prevented us, and we felt that it was hardly worth while attempting to
make other than a record of a few typical blocks, among what were obviously widely
scattered details of decoration, until more were retrieved or until the foundations of the
building whence they came were unearthed. 17
Near the western limits of the excavations a block was discovered which bore the Their date
upper halves of two vertically written cartouches of Ptolemy III, %& nd
^ ( j g f g ^ P ^ H - Further east another block bore the upper part of a cartouche of a
Berenice, in all likelihood the second of that name and the wife of the same Ptolemy,
1 O GU . Still another block bore the upper parts of cartouches of a Ptolemy and
of a Cleopatra, ^ f t g H I J i and ( d f E E l l s h o w i n § t h a t t h e building or buildings
from which these blocks came were also decorated by Ptolemy V or one of his successors.
Numerous other blocks from an exterior cavetto cornice were discovered, with parts of
the name Ptolemy written in vertical cartouches and sunken relief, variously spelled:
• f l
^*i ).£*/
T^FX C ^ ^ T M ^ ^ j j Q ' etc. Parts were found of another cornice,
in raised relief and probably from an interior, with cartouches crowned with 22 and
standing on the F ^ .
We found but few remains of the monuments and furniture which must have adorned Inscriptions
the temple between Saite and Roman times, and of these few there was only rarely definite of the early
garrison
evidence of date. Two inscriptions were discovered, apparently from the doorways of Plate LI
buildings erected in the temenos by officers of the garrison of Hibis, perhaps before the
existing temple and almost certainly before the Ptolemaic period.18 Both supply evidence
that an army post was maintained in the Oasis in late dynastic times to protect the frontier
and the caravan routes from marauding desert tribes.19 Part of a doorjamb and half of a
17
In 1938 there were brought from el Khargeh village a number of apparently similar blocks found in the
walls of a recently demolished mosque, I am informed by Davies. They had probably been taken there by
Ayme for his alum factory about 1832. See pp. 9, note 9, 18, and 57.
18
The house of a priest who lived within the temenos of the temple of Deir el Hagar in ed Dakhleh Oasis
in the first century A.D. was marked by a tablet (Winlock, p. 33, note 35). These doorjambs from Hibis may
have come from such houses.
19
The Notitia dignitatum of the early fifth century A.D. states that the garrison then consisted of the Ala i
Abasgorum (Milne, p. 172). We do not know whether the danger threatening the oases in late dynastic times
39
lintel which seems to belong with it name a Scribe of Soldiers, Nakht-ef. The other in-
scription, found and copied by Evelyn White at the southern limit of our excavations
where it had been re-used in a house of the fourth century A.D., does not preserve the name
of the dedicator but does preserve some of his titles. He was Chief Priest of Amun of
Karnak, General ("Great Chief of Soldiers"), Count of the Oasis, £5^2, and Favorite
of a king whose name is lost.20
Fragments of the two jambs of a third doorway, noted by Davies, commemorate m pA,
a Scribe of the Treasury and Overseer of Serfs whose name and other titles are Hf^
i i i
unknown.
Temple- Among the stones used in the Christian period to fill up the north doorway of the girdle
shaped
shrine wall there was a pylon-shaped block of sandstone; its counterpart lay in the northwest
Plate LI corner of the corridor formed around the temple by the wall. The original position of the
blocks is uncertain, but it is quite possible that they came from within either hypostyle
M or hypostyle N, whence they could have been brought by way of one or the other of
the two north doorways of the temple. They were from 95 to 100 cm. long and 66 to 67.5
cm. high. The outer ends and the front of each sloped inward like a temple pylon; on the
face of each was a pair of slots like those for the masts which stood on either side of a
temple door; and the corners had a torus molding which indicated that on top of each there
was originally a cavetto cornice. With an opening of appropriate width between them,
they probably formed the front of a temple-shaped shrine about 2.25 m. wide, which, to
judge from the taper of the pylon ends, was half as high as it was wide when complete.
The chamber within would have measured, if square, about 130 by 130 cm. and perhaps a
little less than 90 cm. high. Probably the shrine stood upon a pedestal, and this pedestal
may have been inscribed, for there were no inscriptions on the pylon blocks to indicate
either the purpose of the shrine of which they were the front, or its date, or the name of
its dedicator.
Remains of Of statuary there was a disappointing scarcity among our finds, probably because there
statues
was little stone in the Oasis good for carving except limestone, and that would have dis-
integrated in the damp after the temple area had been brought under cultivation. The
following fragments were noted, all from the area outside the temple :
1. Fragment of a basalt naophorous statue. Originally about half life-size. Much battered.
2. Section, from the neck to the knees, of a limestone standing statue of a king with arms
was from the Libyans of the north and west, or from the southern Nubians, as was the case from the third
century A.D. onward. Before Diocletian subsidized the Ethiopian Nobatae to guard the southern border of
Egypt on the Nile, they appear to have invaded el Khargeh, and about 450 A.D. they, with the Blemmyes,
ravaged the Oasis and among their prisoners took the exiled Patriarch Nestorius.
20
Davies also copied this inscription. The dedicator may have been the "Great Chief of Soldiers" Ahmose
of the reign of Darius I, known from stelae nos. 6 and 7 in Posener, pp. 41 and 177.
40
THE TEMENOS
at sides and a pilaster up the back. Originally perhaps 60 cm. high. Badly destroyed by
humidity. Found outside the northeast corner of the temple.
3. Torso of a limestone statuette of an individual named "Nakht . . . . , " probably seated,
and if so, originally about 20 cm. high. The linen skirt and the broad band over the
left shoulder were painted white and the flesh red. The pilaster at the back was in-
scribed. (M.M.A. ace. no. 25.10.6; pi. xxvi, E.)
4. Fragment of the feet of an indurated limestone statuette of a seated goddess. Originally
perhaps 15 cm. high.
5. Fragment of the paw of a basalt sphinx. Originally perhaps 30 cm. long.
6. Fragment of indurated limestone with a f in front and a flat member above, inclined
to it at an angle of 45 degrees. Perhaps part of a statue. (M.M.A. ace. no. 25.10.5;
pi. xxvi, F.)
7. Sandstone block with the very fragmentary remains of an inscription mentioning a cult
statue (aya)v[xa). It would appear to date from the third century A.D. Found in the
neighborhood of Southern Building II. (Part II, no. 40.)
8. Parts of two sandstone blocks from the top of a statue (?) pedestal, 50 cm. square, each
side of which had recessed panels. Roman. On the front there were the first letters of an
inscription in Greek. Found just east of the north end of trench 5; see pi. xxx. (Part
II, no. 8.)
Of limestone sculptors' models two fragments were found. One, with a protective ridge Sculptors'
models
at the bottom, showed a foot and the bottom of the scepter of a deity. The other (M.M.A.
ace. no. 25.10.4; pi. xxvi, G) had, in high relief upon the front, a figure of the child Harpok-
rates, with forefinger to mouth, and a protective ridge in the upper right-hand corner.
The back is inscribed.
Mention has already been made of the fragment of a Twenty-sixth Dynasty dish found Temple
vessels
in Southern Building I (M.M.A. ace. no. 25.10.1; pi. xxvi, B). 21 Its diameter was originally
about 31 cm., the height of its vertical, or nearly vertical, rim 3.7 cm., and its thickness 0.9
cm. The material was a very smooth, homogeneous, and fine-grained artificial paste,
apparently dark blue in color. Deeply incised in the rim was an inscription of which the
existing fragment preserves part of the name of King Hophra, (©j tf K' ®J<y3-
A fragment was also found of a heavy basalt mortar (M.M.A. ace. no. 25.10.2; pi.
xxvi, A) with sides 4.5 cm. thick, from which projected solid ears. Around the outside of
the rim it preserves a trace of a dedicatory inscription.
Small fragments of large \J bowls of alabaster were noted, none of them inscribed.
Among fragments of pottery dumped east of Southern Building II there was a limestone
jar lid 8 cm. in diameter, with an open lotus rosette painted on its upper surface (M.M.A.
ace. no. 25.10.3 ; pi. xxvi, c).
21
See p. 5.
41
A stamp (M.M.A. ace. no. 25.10.7; pi. xxvi, D) for sealing jars, of limestone with a
uraeus crowned by the sun disk as a device, was picked up in the fill of the railway em-
bankment on the site of the lake. It may well have been thrown out from the temple in
antiquity with other rubbish.
Late pagan South of the temple, to the east of Southern Building II and across the early wall which
rubbish
south of extended from that structure toward the front of the temenos, rubbish was thrown out
the temple from a comparatively early period. Near Southern Building II and under house B we
Plates
XXX, XLIX found not only Ptolemaic coins,22 badly corroded, but fragments of Greek pottery. Some
of the latter had traces of black painted decoration; one piece was from a black-and-white
lekythos, and one fragment was from a fluted bowl in a black highly-polished ware. Ap-
parently associated with them were fragments of native globular cookpots and bottles
with pointed bottoms, as well as flat basalt mortars, usually worn through the bottom
from the prolonged use of round grinding stones. This part of the temenos remained un-
occupied and was a rubbish dump long after the Ptolemaic period. Under house A there
was a heap of broken and discarded pottery associated with objects which may be attrib-
uted to the second or perhaps the third century A.D., including a fragment of a Roman
pottery mortarium, stamped "Julianus," 23 and five Greek and two demotic ostraca, so
waterlogged as to be impossible to read but having the appearance of Roman tax receipts. 24
The most compact part of this lot of rubbish was a heap of pots, all thrown out together
from the temple. Among them were parts of two lenticular bottles, 25 cm. in the greater
and 15 cm. in the lesser diameter, with handles on either side of the necks; a small jar
with a spout; small red saucers; and a great number of bowls averaging 15 cm. in diameter
and 10 cm. in height.
Deposit of About 15 m. east of Southern Building II a number of bronze figures, mostly of Osiris,
bronze figures
Plates xxvn, had been thrown out in the court, with a few isolated figures, including one of Harpokrates,
xxx scattered near by. Since some of these figures preserved in the corrosion of their surfaces
clear traces of their wooden bases and of the linen with which they had been wrapped, it
is obvious that they were brought to this spot directly from the temple where, doubtless,
they had been deposited as votives not very long before. Unfortunately, it is difficult to
decide whether they should be related to the Ptolemaic or to the Roman rubbish which
was found near by. However, the fact that they were not widely scattered but lay practi-
cally undisturbed under the fourth-century houses suggests that they were discarded
22
Appendix I, A, nos. 1-10, B, nos. 1-3.
23
Miss Marjorie Milne, of the Greek and Roman Department of the Metropolitan Museum, informs me
that potters named Julianus were working in Gaul and Germany in the first and second centuries A.D. (Oswald,
pp. 149 and 393). However, it would seem surprising if an object of so coarse a ware as a mortarium should
have been imported into the Oasis from such a distance.
24
This was the opinion of Jean Maspero, who saw them as they were being dug up.
42
THE TEMENOS
shortly before this last date. If so, they were probably manufactured and placed as votives
in the Osiris chapel, H1-3, during the Roman occupation of Hibis.25
All together there were eighty-five small figures of Osiris, and plumes and beards from
eight large ones. All but four of the small figures represented the god as standing and
ranged in height from 3.5 to 18 or 19 cm. One of the plumes comes from a figure which
must have been between 130 and 135 cm. tall. Ten of the figures were cast over gray
earthen cores, probably by the cire-perdue process. All but one of the rest were cast solid
in molds open at the back—a few of them being modeled on the unmolded side either
before or after the metal had solidified. The last figure (16.5 cm. high) was apparently
wrought out on an anvil by a provincial blacksmith. Some fourteen, varying in height
from 3.5 to 12 cm., were provided with suspension rings on the back, and all had tenons
for the attachment of wooden bases.
One Harpokrates, crowned, was 14.5 cm. high; another, wearing only the side lock and
uraeus, was only 3.5 cm. tall and was provided with a suspension ring on the back. A
pair of bronze plumes, apparently from an Amun, were 9 cm. high.
25
Similar fragments of bronze objects, of which the greater number were figures of Osiris, were discovered
by the French Institute at Medamud (Bisson de la Roque, pp. 102-103, 119). There the deposition of such
ancient objects can be dated as late as the tenth century A.D., but a careful reading of the notes of the expedi-
tion to Hibis makes the earlier date seem more plausible in this case.
43
CHAPTER V
BUILDINGS OF THE CHRISTIAN PERIOD
Late houses Because of the limits of the government-owned land, we were able to clear only a few meters
in the
temenos south of Southern Building II, and then only after a crop had been harvested and we had
Plate XLIX agreed to refill our excavations. On the west we were even more narrowly restricted, and
we were not encouraged to go to the expense of renting or buying land for the purpose of
digging out of the hard, tenacious clay the waterlogged, late mud-brick walls with which
we found ourselves involved. We stopped at the end of our season, convinced that the
houses of the poor and late quarter which we had cleared were but a sample of others that
extended indefinitely south and west of the temple.
At fAin et Turbeh we had found the ruins of late third-century houses, usually more
than one story high, with walls excellently built of unbaked brick, lime-plastered, and
with vaulted ceilings, and we had seen other equally well-built groups of buildings else-
where in the oases.1 The extraordinarily small and cheaply built houses south of the
temple obviously belonged to a later and less prosperous epoch. Their foundations were
in many cases from 75 to 175 cm. above the footings of the early walls which they crossed,
and under their floors there was rubbish of the Ptolemaic and Roman periods down to as
late a date as the third or fourth century A.D.2 Blocks of stone from the girdle wall and
rubble laid in clay were the materials invariably used up to floor level, and above, the walls
were usually of mud bricks, measuring 35 by 17 by 9 cm. The mortar and the wall plaster
were always of clay.
House A There was not enough left of house A to make an intelligible plan. The rooms marked A
were built on one level, over the remains of the early wall. AA may have belonged to
another structure, since it was on a lower level, built directly on the rubbish of the end
of the pagan period. At * was found a bronze lamp measuring 12.5 cm. in length and 12
cm. in height, made to be suspended by a pillar in its top (M.M.A. ace. no. 25.10.15; pi.
xxvn).
House B The largest and best-preserved in plan was house B. Its entrance was from the east
through a courtyard, B', partly paved with stone—perhaps because it was here at the
front door that visitors washed their feet before entering. One passed thence into a very
small central chamber, B", with four minute cubicles opening off it. Lying outside the
1
For fAin et Turbeh see p. 2. For first-century houses at Sioffi in ed Dakhleh see Winlock, pp. 33-35,
pis. xm, xxvn, and xxvm.
2
Appendix I, A, nos. 1-26, B, nos. 1-3, C, nos. 1-6.
44
southern wall was an open drain, 83 cm. long and 31 cm. wide, cut out of two blocks of
stone. The whole layout is identical with dynastic house plans in the Nile Valley.3
Houses C and D, extraordinarily narrow structures not quite 2 m. wide and 10 m. long Houses C
inside, followed a plan suggestive of Byzantine houses at Medinet Habu. 4 Each was at
least two and perhaps more stories high, and to judge from the remains of the stairway in
C, the height from floor to floor was about 2.60 m. Both houses were entered from the
south ( C , D'). Next came a stairway with a closet underneath in house C, and probably
also in house D. In D " a pottery bowl, perhaps for a hearth, was let into the floor. In C"
fragments of a bronze grapevine and a crude little bronze winged putto, carrying a palm
and a wreath, were found lying on the brick floor (M.M.A. ace. no. 25. 10.17, J 8 ; pi. xxvn).
The plan of the structure E is now unintelligible. Its chief interest lies in the fact that it House E
was built on rubbish which included the necks of pots similar to others found at fAin et
Turbeh, suggesting that this house was later than the latter site.
Doubtless soon after the abandonment of the temple by the pagan priests and probably Church beside
at the time the houses encroached on the temenos to the south, a Christian church was piate°x 'C°
erected against the north side of the portico. 5 When the church was built the girdle wall
had already been partly demolished at its northeast corner, but its lower courses, at least,
remained to serve as the foundations of the north and east sides of the new structure.
The south side of the church was the still intact portico, and its west, the high front of
the temple. Where new walls were required, they were built of stones from the girdle wall
or decorated stones from the Ptolemaic building to the north, laid in clay mortar. On the
south side the projecting edges of the screen-wall cornices were cut away, brick walls were
built above to fill in the openings between the columns, and the bas-reliefs were masked in
clay, faced with a coating of lime plaster, and painted red at least to a height of 75 cm.
above the floor. The latter was of stone, eked out with burnt bricks measuring 23 by 13 by
6.5 cm. and laid about 10 cm. above the original level of the temple.
Inside, the structure measured 10.75 m. from east to west and 8.40 m. from north to Plan of
south. There was one entrance doorway near the northwest corner, and there may have piatesxL LII
been a second entrance through the portico doorway. In the middle of the east side of the
church was the sanctuary, 2.20 m. wide and 3.20 m. long, opening on the south into a side
chamber and probably flanked by another chamber on the north. Three steps led up to the
sanctuary. Set in the ends of the topmost step were two stones about 40 cm. square and
3
Closely similar were the plans of the smallest houses around the palace of Amen-hotpe 111 at Thebes,
excavated by the Metropolitan Museum.
4
There several houses of the fifth century and later measured only 7 by 2.3 m. inside, a large part of the
first floor being taken up by the stairway. See Holscher, Excavations, I, pi. 32.
5
Near the church were found coins of Constantine (Appendix I, E, nos. 2 and 3), but they could not be
related definitely to the structure, and in any case they may have been in circulation for some time before
they were dropped where we found them.
45
15 cm. thick, with sockets in them 10 cm. square for the upright end posts of the wooden
screen which veiled the altar within. A wooden girder, resting on piers c and d on either
side of the sanctuary and in a socket just below the cornice of the east jamb of the portico
doorway, carried the east-west rafters of the roof of the sanctuary and the chamber south
of it. The roof of the body of the church was supported by two main girders, resting in
sockets in the temple wall at a and b and on the piers c and d. Midway in this span there
must have been two columns, dividing the body of the church longitudinally into a narrow
central nave and two side aisles, all three of nearly equal width. The rafters resting on the
main girders lay north and south, and sockets for some of them can still be seen in the
cornice over the west doorjamb and in the westernmost column of the portico.
Rebuilding Perhaps the nave as originally built was considered too narrow. In any event, the entire
of the roof
body of the church was eventually reroofed and the two columns reset over 1 m. farther
apart than they had been originally. Because the south main girder could no longer rest
on the pier d, nor the north girder on the temple wall at a, a single main girder was now
laid across the church from north to south on the two reset columns, and the rafters, now
laid east and west, were supported in sockets cut in the facade of the temple. The new
roof was some 15 cm. higher than the old, and a new floor, apparently entirely of burnt
brick, was laid over the original pavement and the lowest of the sanctuary steps. At the
same time there was added to the west end of the church, at the right as one entered the
north door, a little chamber 2.70 m. long and 2.40 m. wide, built against the north side
of the temple, with a roof slightly lower than that of the adjoining aisle. Along the east
wall of the chamber there was a stone bench 65 cm. high. Without much doubt this was
the baptistery, and the font was probably let into the masonry bench.
Nave columns The two columns between the nave and aisles were re-erected on solid blocks of stone
Plates xxvm,
LII
masonry about 90 cm. square and 60 cm. high. The columns themselves were sandstone
34 cm. in diameter, stuccoed and whitewashed, and their bases had a series of convex and
concave moldings. Fragments of both a shaft and a base were found and remain at the
temple. Parts of a limestone capital were found, with a tenon hole in the bottom, 4.5 to
5 cm. square and 4 cm. deep, for its attachment to the shaft. Like the fragments of columns,
those of the capital had been thickly covered with whitewash. Restored, the capital is
49 cm. high, 34 cm. in diameter where it joined the shaft, and 58 cm. wide on top. 6 On the
top is scratched KJDÂNNHC f€pATTAN (for erpAuVeN), "John wrote (it)." After the destruction
of the church, the capital was hollowed out for a mortar and broken in two, probably
during its use as such.
6
M.M.A. ace. nos. 10.177.1 (the lower fragment) and 12.180.259 (the upper fragment). The former was
found in the church and the latter outside and to the north of it. A somewhat similar capital from Upper
Egypt in the Louvre is described in Gayet, p. 106.
46
We also noted the greater part of another column base, likewise thickly whitewashed. Sanctuary
columns
It was made for a column about 30 cm. in diameter, it was octagonal on top, and it had Plate LII
one flat side to be set against a wall. The other sides were decorated with palmettes similar
to those around the bottom of the nave capital, and its lower circular member was a series
of convex and concave moldings similar to those of the base found in the nave. On top
there was a circular socket 12 cm. in diameter and 1 cm. deep to receive a corresponding
projection on the bottom of the shaft. On such a base, engaged at the back, the column
would stand independently of, but almost touching, the wall behind it. We may assume
tentatively that there were two such columns in the church, one on either side of the
entrance to the sanctuary.
Another fragment of decoration that probably came from the church was a slab of relief Fragment of
sculpture
with a female figure carrying a basket, of which Evelyn White made a sketch. Plate LII
We found only two inscriptions connected with the church, besides that on the lime- Inscriptions
stone capital. On the front of the temple, at a height where someone standing on the
church roof might easily have written it, was painted "The God of Abraham and Isaac
and Jacob" in well-formed Greek letters with yellow ocher on whitewash.7 On a stone
found near the church there are the beginnings of two lines of a Coptic inscription, probably
of the early fifth century, starting "The Holy Psaflmist David . . ." and "Mary
the Vi[rgin . . . ."«
Structures contemporary with the church were built along the north side of the temple Buildings
around the
between its north wall and the girdle wall, parts of which probably existed here to a con- temple
siderable height in the fourth and fifth centuries A.D. Beam sockets can still be seen in the Plates iv, v, x,
xxm, xxxv
north wall of the temple, continuing the level of the roof of the west chamber of the church
to within 5 m. of the north door of hypostyle M. At this door begins an elaborate pattern
of beam and rafter sockets, showing the existence of a building two stories high and about
10 m. long, with a one-storied room extending 3 m. further west, just beyond which a
crude door was cut into chamber K. The doorways in the girdle wall and from hypostyles
M and N were blocked during the existence of these structures. In the corresponding
corridor between the girdle wall and the south wall of the temple the late buildings were
less elaborate. Rafter holes show that there was a chamber about 5 m. long against the
southeast corner of the temple, and further west, another about 9 m. long. Just beyond, a
crude door was cut into the southwest corner of hypostyle M.
Rafter sockets in the tops of the cornice blocks of the portico roof—higher than, and Buildings in
the temple
unconnected with, its original wooden ceiling—show that there were late structures at Plates iv-vi,
least two stories high within this part of the temple. On the floor of hypostyle N there xxxv, xxxix
was an accumulation, between 50 and 175 cm. thick, of dirt, ashes, and burnt and mud
7
Part II, no. 34.
8
Part II, no. 9.
47
bricks from intrusive structures crushed by the fallen temple roof and columns. Beam
sockets, especially along the north side, show that the hall had been divided into two
floors. All the original doors of hypostyle M were blocked, and a corridor 7 m. long and
2 m. wide, leading to the newly cut door in the southwest corner, was separated from a
rough chamber in the southeast part of the hall by a crude partition built against the
columns. In the corridor there was a wooden stair, to judge from beam holes in the temple
walls. At the back of the temple the rooms were used just as they stood, with little or no
alteration. Here and there in hypostyles M and N were scratched upon the walls such
Coptic names as (J)'I'BAMCON, &NOK TTaoTNoyt/, Tt&N&pe ncyiNâHA — "Phibamon," "I am
Papnouti," and "Panare, the son of Michael." On the interior of the Inner Gateway other
Christian scribblings were noted, as well as one on the exterior wall of the temple near its
northwest angle.9
Date of Since some of the rooms of the houses at fAin et Turbeh, built at the end of the third
intrusive
buildings century A.D., were frescoed with pagan subjects, it is fair to assume that the pagan popula-
tion of Hibis was still influential after 300 A.D. and that the temple was still kept up.10
On the other hand, some of the Christian graves and tomb chapels of el Bakawat date from
the reign of Constantine (324-337 A.D.), 11 and with a Christian population growing in
numbers and rich enough to build such prominent tombs in the first third of the fourth
century, the pagan cult was doomed and its property liable to encroachment. Hence the
dwelling houses and church which we found crowding into the temple and its temenos may
have been built some time in the first half of the fourth century, at least two score years
before 390 A.D. when Theodosius promulgated the decree that finally outlawed the ancient
religion.
Date of their It was apparent that all the houses around Southern Building II belonged to one period,
destruction
and while we cleared but few, those few did not show obvious evidences of the alterations
which they would have undergone had they been occupied for a very long time. Further-
more, the Christian structures in and immediately around the temple—except for the
church with its remodeled roof—did not show any marked signs of prolonged occupation.
The houses to the south were destroyed by a great conflagration which left the most
9
Part II, nos. 30-32 and 41.
10
Repairs to the roof of hypostyle N were made as late as the second or third century A.D. See p. 25. ...
11
In Bulletin, XXVI I (1932), March, sect. 11, p. 50, Walter Hauser suggests that el Bakawat began in the
mid-third century A.D. as pagan and gradually became Christian. This may possibly have been the case, but
most of the coins which he found (ibid., p. 40) were of the fourth century, and in one of the graves among the
chapels I found a body with coins of Constantine sewed in a leather belt. Furthermore, it is to the late fourth
and the early fifth century that the painted tomb chapels are assigned by Charles K. Wilkinson in Bulletin,
XXIII (1Q28), Dec, sect 11, p. 36. It is interesting that deBock, p. 15, states that the interval between the
earliest and the latest tombs in the cemetery was about a century. My impression is that the cemetery was
in active Christian use for very little longer than the period from about 325 A.D. to the invasion of the
Blemmyes in 450 A.D.
48
unmistakable traces in spite of periodic soaking with irrigation water throughout centuries.
Mud-brick walls were burnt red, stones were cracked and split, and the rooms were full of
the red dust of burnt bricks and clay mortar. We have suggested that these houses were
built about 350 A.D., and the fire by which they were consumed probably took place not
very many generations after their erection. They may well have been burnt during the
invasion of the Blemmyes in 450 A.D., when Hibis was sacked and numerous prisoners,
including the exiled Nestorius, were taken away by the barbarians as they proceeded
toward the Nile. Probably the church and the intrusive structures in the temple were
destroyed at this time. All Hibis doubtless suffered irreparable damage from the bar-
barians, and as its mud-brick houses fell into decay, gardens took their place, and irrigation
water was led close to the temple walls. The saturation of the ground from this caused the
collapse of the portico and the roof of hypostyle N, with the consequent burying of the
already deserted buildings in and around the front part of the temple.12
12
The invasion of the Blemmyes may not have caused the immediate and total abandonment of the city
of Hibis. In the Gebel et Teir there is a Coptic graffito which begins:
ATTO [Aio]KA[eiTiANOc] §• •
&NOK ceyepoc TtcyHpe NrrAAujANe N^HB
"In the year of Diocletian 500+, I Severus, the son of the Pagarch of Hibis," etc. From this it may be argued
that some part of the city was still in existence between 784 and 883 A.D., unless it be supposed that the title
"Pagarch of Hibis" was retained for the chief administrative officer of the district after the town itself had
moved south to the present el Khargeh village.
49
APPENDIX
THE COINS FOUND IN THE EXCAVATION OF THE TEMPLE
BY EDWARD T. NEWELL
REFERENCES 8. Ptolemy IV.

Ptolemaic coins: J. N. Svoronos, Td No[xta(xara TOU Head of Zeus Ammon to r.
Kpdiou? TWV nToA£u,aio)v. Athens, 1904. Rev. Eagle, head reverted, wings open,
Alexandrian coins: G. Dattari, Numi Augg. Alex- standing to 1. on thunderbolt. Between
andria. Cairo, 1901. legs: SE. in 1. field:countermark—cornu-
Roman Imperial coins: Henry Cohen, Description copiae in oblong.
historique des monnaies frappees sous I'empire Svoronos 1149.
romain. 2d edition. Paris, 1880-1892. 9. Ptolemy V.
Byzantine coins: J. Sabatier, Monnaies byântines. Head of Isis to r.
Leipzig, 1930. Rev. Entirely obliterated.
Probably Svoronos 1238.
A. From houses south of temple. Lower levels. 10. Ptolemy VI.
1. Ptolemy II. Head of Zeus Ammon to r.
Laureate head of Zeus to r. Rev. riTOAEMAIOY BA2IAEQ2. Two eagles
Rev. riTOAEMAIOY BASIAEQ2. Eagle
with closed wings standing to 1. on thun-
with closed wings standing to 1. on thun-
derbolt. In field: cornucopiae.
derbolt. Between legs: TY.
Svoronos 1424.
Svoronos 506 (252 B.C).
11-13. Imitations of preceding. Barbarized types
2. Similar to preceding.
and inscriptions.
Rev. Eagle with open wings. In 1. field:
Head of Zeus Ammon to r.
SQ above shield. Between legs: I.
Rev. Two eagles standing to 1. on thunder-
Svoronos 576 (277 B.C).
bolt.
3. Similar to preceding.
Svoronos 1917.
Rev. Between legs: A.
Svoronos 580 (275 B.C.). 14. Crude casting of a Ptolemaic coin. Types
4. Similar to preceding. obliterated.
Rev. Between legs: P. 15. Alexandria. Hadrian, 117-138 A.D. Base
Svoronos 593 (269 B.C). silver tetradrachm.
5, 6. Ptolemy III. AVT. KAI. AAPIANOC. 2EB. Laureate,
Head of Zeus Ammon to r. draped bust to r.
Rev. riTOAEMAIOY BA2IAEQ2. Eagle, Rev. Mars standing to r., with parazonium
head reverted, wings closed, cornucopiae in r. hand and resting 1. on spear. Date
on shoulder, standing to 1. on thunder- obliterated, but probably L0.
bolt. Between legs: E. Variety of Dattari 1286.
Svoronos 974. 16. Alexandria. Hadrian, 117-138 A.D. Large
7. Similar to preceding. bronze.
Rev. Eagle with closed wings standing to Laureate head tor. Inscription obliterated.
1. on thunderbolt. In 1. field: cornucopiae. Rev. Serapis standing to 1. in distyle temple.
Between legs: 2E. Globe in pediment. Date obliterated.
Svoronos 993. Dattari 1957-1961.
51
17. Diocletian. Follis. 24. Maximian II (Galerius Valerius). Follis.
IMP. C. DIOCLETIANVS P.F. AVG. Mint: Antioch.
Laureate head to r. GAL. VAL. MAXIMIANVS. NOB. CAES.
Rev. GENIO. POPVLI. ROMANI. Genius Laureate head to r.
standing. In exergue:. . . S. Rev. GENIO. POPVLI. ROMANI. Genius
Cohen, VI, p. 426, no. 101. standing. In r. field: r. In exergue: ANT-.
18. Maximian I, Herculeus. Follis. Mint: Cohen, VII, p. 109, no. 78.
Rome. 25. Licinius senior. Mint: Alexandria.
IMP. C. MAXIMIANVS. P.F. AVG. Lau- IMP. C. VAL. LICIN. LICINIVS. P.F.
reate head to r. AVG. Laureate head to r.
Rev. SAC. MON. VRB. AVGG. ET. CAESS Rev. IOVI CONSERVATORI. AVGG.
NN. Moneta standing to 1. In exergue: Jupiter Nicephorus standing facing. In r.
RB. field: wreath above r above N. In exergue:
Cohen, VI, p. 545, no. 502. ALE.
19. Maximian I, Herculeus. Follis. Mint: Cohen, VII, p. 200, no. 111.
Antioch. 26. Constantine the Great. Mint: Thessa-
IMP. C. MA. MAXIMIANVS. P.F. AVG. lonica.
Laureate head to r. CONSTANTINVS. P.F. AVG. Laureate
Rev. GENIO POPVLI ROMANI. Genius head to r.
standing. In r. field: Z. In exergue: ANT-. Rev. PROVIDENTIAE. AVGG. Gate. In
Cohen, VI, p. 511, no. 184. exergue: SMTSB.
20. Constantius I, Chlorus. Follis. Mint: Cohen, VII, p. 281, no. 454.
Rome? 27. Theodosius I, 379-395 A.D. Mint: ?
CONST Laureate head to r. SIVS. P.F. AVG. Diademed head
Rev AESS. N. Moneta standing. to r.
Mostly obliterated. Rev. (SPES. REIPVBLICAE). Victory
21. Constantius I, Chlorus. Follis. Mint: advancing to 1., dragging captive. Exergue
Alexandria. off flan.
FL. VAL. CONSTANTIVS. NOB. CAES. Cohen, VIII, p. 158, no. 30.
Laureate head to r. 28. ? Mint: ?
Rev. GENIO. POPVLI. ROMANI. Genius Similar types, but illegible.
standing. In 1. field: palm. In r. field: P. Rev BLICA . . Otherwise illegible.
In exergue: ALE. 29-31. Late fourth-century Roman. Completely
Cohen, VII, p. 66, no. 89. illegible.
22. Maximian II (Galerius Valerius). Follis.
Mint: Heraclea Thraciae. B. From house B, south of temple.
GAL. VAL. MAXIMIANVS. NOB. CAES. 1. Ptolemy VI.
Laureate head to r. Head of Zeus Ammon to r.
Rev. GENIO. POPVLI. ROMANI. Genius Rev. nTOAEM(AIOY BA2IAEQS). Two
standing. In exergue: HTA. eagles standing to 1. on thunderbolt. In
Cohen, VII, p. 109, no. 78. field: cornucopiae.
23. Maximian II (Galerius Valerius). Follis. Svoronos 1426.
Mint: Cyzicus. 2. Probably like preceding, but very worn.
GAL. VAL. MAXIMIANVS. NOB. CAES. 3. Probably a crude cast from a coin like no. 1.
Laureate head to r.
Rev. GENIO. POPVLI. ROMANI. Genius C. From house C, south of temple.
standing. In exergue: KA. 1, 2. Illegible. Probably casts of late Ptolemaic
Cohen, VII, p. 109, no. 78. coins.
52
APPENDIX
3. Alexandria. Numerianus. Rev. Tyche to 1. on couch. Above, LA.
A.K.M.A. NOYMEPIANOC. CEB. Lau- Dattari 5766.
reate, draped bust to r. 4. Alexandria. Maximian I, Herculeus. Year
Rev. Rome seated to 1. on shield, holding date obliterated.
Victory and spear. L-B. Laureate, draped bust to r IANOC.
Dattari 5607. CEB.
4, 5. Alexandria. Period of the First Tetrarchy Rev. Nike advancing to r., holding wreath
(Diocletian or Maximian 1). in outstretched r. hand. L-?
Laureate, draped bust to r. Inscription 5. Constantius II. Mint: Alexandria.
illegible. Inscription obliterated. Diademed, draped
Rev. Homonoia standing to I. Date illegi- bust to r.
ble. Rev NOR Emperor standing
6. Licinius senior. Mint: Siscia. facing, holding globe in r. hand, scepter
IMP. LIC. LICINIVS P.F. AVG. Laure- in 1. In exergue: ALE] E.
ate head to r. Cohen, VII, p. 461, no. 139.
Rev. IOVI. CONSERVATORI. Zeus stand- 6. ValensorValentinian I. Mint: Alexandria.
ing to 1., holding Victory and scepter. At D. N. VALEN Diademed, draped
feet: eagle. In exergue: SIS. bust to r.
Cohen, VII, p. 195, no. 66. Rev. SECVRITAS (REIPVBLICAE).
7. Sons of Constantine the Great (Constan- Victory advancing to 1., holding wreath in
tine junior, Constantius II, or Constans). r. hand. In exergue: ALEA.
Diademed head to r. Inscription illegible. Cohen, VIII, p.92, no. 37,or p. 110, no.47.
Rev. Standard between two soldiers. In- 7,8. Similar to preceding, but inscriptions
scription off flan. largely off flan. Mint off flan, but style
8,9. Constantius II, 337-361 A.D. and fabric are Alexandrian.
D. N. CONSTANTIVS. P.F. AVG. Dia- 9. Theodosius I. Mint: Alexandria.
demed head to r. D. N. THEODOSIVS. P. F. AVG. Dia-
Rev. VOT. XX. MVLT. XXX in wreath. demed, draped bust to r.
Cohen, VII, p. 492, no. 335. Rev. VOT| X | MVLT| XX in wreath. In
10. Illegible fragments. Late Roman. exergue: ALEA.
Cohen, VIII, p. 163, no. 68.
D. From houses south of temple. Preliminary clear- 10. Arcadius. Mint: Alexandria.
ing; upper levels. D. N. ARCADIVS. P.F. AVG. Diademed,
1. Imitation of bronze issue of Ptolemy VI. draped bust to r.
Head of Zeus Ammon to r. Rev. SALVS REIPVBLICAE. Victory
Rev. I1TOA. . Two eagles standing to 1. on advancing to 1., holding trophy over r.
thunderbolt. In field: cornucopiae. shoulder and dragging captive with 1.
Type of Svoronos 1426. hand. Infield: -f1 . In exergue: ALEA.
2. Alexandria. Nero. Basetetradrachm. Four- Sabatier, I, p. 10, no. 48.
teenth year of reign. 11, 12. Similar to preceding.
. . . . Q. KAAY. KAI2.2EBA.. Radiate head
of Nero to 1. LIA. E. From temenos north of temple.
Rev. riOSEIA . . . Bust of Poseidon to r. In 1. Ptolemy IV.
field: star. Head of Zeus Ammon to r. Circle of dots.
Dattari 244. Rev. riTOAEMAIOY BA2IAEQ2. Eagle to
3. Alexandria. Diocletian. First year of reign. 1. In 1. field: cornucopiae. Between legs:
A.K.r. OYAA. AIOKAHT . . . Laureate head A.
to r. Svoronos 1169.
53
2. Constantine the Great. Rev. Poseidon, standing to r., 1. foot on
IMP. CONSTANTINVS. P.F. AVG. Lau- prow, holds dolphin in outstretched r.
reate, draped bust to v., side view. hand, rests 1. on trident. Date LE.
Rev. SOLI. INVICTO. COMITI. Sol stand- Dattari 2320.
ing, facing 1., weight on r. foot. In 1. field: 7. Alexandria. Time of the Antonines, pos-
S. In r. field: F. In exergue: RP. sibly M. Aurelius as Caesar. Base tetra-
Cohen, VI1, p. 290, no. 519. drachm.
3. Constantine the Great. Obliterated. Large hole pierced in an-
Inscription obliterated. Laureate head to r. tiquity.
Rev. PROVIDENTIAE. AVG. Gateway. Rev. Bust of Zeus Ammon to r. Date ob-
Mint obliterated, but either Alexandria or literated.
Antioch. Cf. Dattari 3187.
Cohen, VII, p. 281, no. 454. 8. Alexandria. Diocletian. Basetetradrachm.
4. Arcadius. Inscription obliterated. Laureate head
DN. . . . DIVS. P.F. AVG. Diademed, to r.
draped bust to r. Rev. Eagle standing to 1., head reverted.
Rev. VOT| X | MVLT| XX in wreath. Date obliterated.
Mint obliterated, but probably Alex- 9. Alexandria. Maximian I, Herculeus.
andria: ALEA. Inscription obliterated. Laureate head
Sabatier, I, p. 10, no. 48. to r.
Rev. Eirene standing. L—A.
F. From excavations of 1912. Coins found on avenue Dattari 5859.
and northeast of temple. 10. Diocletian. Follis. Mint: Alexandria.
1. Ptolemy II. IMP. C. DIOCLETIANVS. P.F. AVG.
Head of Alexander the Great to r., in Laureate head to r.
elephant's skin. Rev. GENIO. POPVLI. ROMANI. Genius
Rev. ITTOAEMAIOY BA2IAEQS. Eagle standing. In 1. field: XX. In r. field: B
standing to 1. on thunderbolt. Between above I. In exergue: ALE.
legs: A. Cohen, VI, p. 426, no. 101.
Svoronos 439. 11. Maximian I, Herculeus. Follis. Mint:
2. Ptolemy VI. probably Cyzicus.
Head of Zeus Ammon to r. IMP. MA] MAXIMIANVS. P.F. AVG.
Rev. [itTOAEMAIOY BA2IAEQS]. Two Laureate head to r.
eagles standing to 1. on thunderbolt. In Rev. GENIO. POPVLI. ROMANI. Genius
field: cornucopiae. standing. In exergue: KA (?).
Svoronos 1426. Cohen, VI, p. 511, no. 184.
3. Probably like preceding, but types and 12. Maximinus Daza. Small follis. Mint:
inscriptions largely obliterated. Antioch.
4. Probably a local casting of type of no. 2. IMP. C. GAL. VAL. MAXIMINVS. P.F.
5. Alexandria. Trajan, 98-117 A.D. Large AVG. Laureate head to r.
bronze. Rev. GENIO. EXERCITVS. Genius
Laureate head to r. standing. In 1. field: crescent. In r. field:
Rev. Emperor in quadriga of elephants to B. In exergue: ANT.
r. Date obliterated. Cohen, VII, p. 146, no. 47.
Type of Dattari 1597 ff. 13. Constantine the Great. Mint: Rome.
6. Alexandria. Antoninus Pius, 138-161 A.D. IMP. C. CONSTANTINVS. P.F. AVG.
Basetetradrachm. Laureate, draped bust to r.
Laureate, draped bust to r. Rev. SOLI. INVICTO. COMITI. Sol
54
APPENDIX
standing, facing 1. In exergue: RS. Rev. SALVS. REIPVBLICAE. Victory
Cohen, VII, p. 290, no. 519. advancing to 1., dragging captive. One
14. Crispus Caesar. specimen has SMAL in exergue.
. . . .PVS. NOB. . . Bust to 1., with spear Cohen, VIII, p. 158, no. 30, or Sabatier, I,
and shield. p. 10, no. 48.
Rev. VIRTVS. EXERCIT. Standard with 19, Mameluke sultans of Egypt.
VOT| XX, flanked by two seated pris- Illegible, only traces of inscription remain-
oners. ing.
Exergue illegible. 20-23, Illegible. No. 20 may be Ptolemaic.
Cohen, VII, p. 357, no. 165. 24,25, Illegible. May be Imperial Alexandrian
15. Constantius II, Caesar. Mint: Thessa- issues of first or second century B.C
lonica. 26, 27 Illegible. May be of time of Valens or
FL. IVL. CONSTANTIVS. NOB. C. Lau- Valentinian I.
reate, cuirassed bust to r. Traces of head on obverse.
Rev. PROVIDENTIAE. CAESS. Turreted 28, Illegible. May be of time of Valens or
gate. In exergue: SMTSB. Valentinian I.
Cohen, VII, p. 465, no. 168. Traces of Victory on reverse.
16. Probably Constantius II. Mint: Antioch. 29 -34 Illegible. Almost certainly late fourth-
Obverse obliterated. century Imperial.
Rev. VOT XX MVLT XXX in wreath. In 35, 36 Illegible. Probably Constantius II.
exergue: SMANE. Faint traces of bust.
Cohen, VII, p. 492, no. 335. 37-40, Quite illegible.
17, 18. Theodosius I or Arcadius. Mint: Alex- 41-43. Illegible. Probably late Imperial, end of
andria. fourth century.
Obverse illegible.
55
APPENDIX II
CHRONOLOGICAL TABLE
B.C. PAGE
593-588 ? Possible building under Psametik II 6
588-569 Dish of Hophra . . . . . . 5. 4i
? Doorways dedicated by officers of the garrison 39
510-490 First building period of the temple, under Darius I 7
? Repairs to the structure of Darius I 17
391-378 ? Hypostyle hall N, under Hakoris . 20
378-360 Foundations of the portico, under Nektanebis I 26
359-341 Completion of the portico, under Nektanebis II 26
? Obelisk Bases (?) 35
283-245 Girdle wall, under Ptolemy II 33
? Great Gateway and enclosure wall . 35
Early Ptolemaic Jason graffito on the Great Gateway 35
246-222 Buildings in the northern part of the temenos, under Ptolemy III 39
After 203 Continuation of the northern buildings, under Ptolemy V or later 39
? Porch of Southern Building II . . . . . . 38
? Quay and Avenue of Sphinxes . . . . . . 36
? Reliefs on the Great Gateway . . . . . . 36
, ? Outer Gateway . . . . . . . . . 37
A.D.
49 Edict of Gnaeus Vergilius Capito on the Outer Gateway . . . . . 37
60 Edict of Lucius Julius Vestinus on the Great Gateway . . . . . 36
68 Edict of Tiberius Julius Alexander, Text A, on the Great Gateway . . . 36
68-69 Edict of Tiberius Julius Alexander, Text B, on the Outer Gateway . . . 37
11—111 Cent. Graffito on girdle wall . . . . . . . . . 33 (note 42)
Ill Cent. Hermeias pavement . . . . . . . . . . . 37
Ill Cent. Statue base . . . . . . . . . . 41, no. 7

? Bronzes thrown out in the temenos . . . . . . . . 42
286-305 Pagan houses in fAin et Turbeh occupied under Diocletian, Maximian, and Con-
stantius . . . . . . . . . . . . 2, 44, 48
57
A.D. PAGE
324-337 Christian burials in el Bakawat, under Constantine I 3- 48

Mid IV Cent. Abandonment of the pagan cult and encroachment of houses on the temenos 44, 48
Mid IV Cent. Church beside the portico . . . . 45, 48
395-408 Latest occupation of fAin et Turbeh, under Arcadius . . . . 2
Early V Cent. Roman garrison mentioned in Notitia dignitatum . . . . 39 (note 19)

450 Invasion of the Blemmyes and probable burning of the Christian town 49
784-883 Graffito mentioning a pagarch of Hibis . . . . . . 49 (note 12)
58
APPENDIX III
NINETEENTH-CENTURY GRAFFITI
The following graffiti of the nineteenth-century explorers of the oases are to be seen in hypostyle N:
i. CAILLIAUD FUT LE PREMIER EUROPEEN QUI PRIT CONNOISSANCE DE CE TEM-

PLE. AN 18181
2. DROVETTI, ROSINGANA. 18192

3. HOGHTON. 18198
4. I. HYDE. DEC. 19 1819.4 Inside the Great Gateway: HYDE. 1819
5. LE TORZEC, ABOUCHANAPE. 1820^
6. MULLER. 18246
7. AYME?
8. F. CATHERWOOD. OCTR. 1832. Elsewhere: F.C. 18328
1
For the drawings he made in Hibis on this trip see Cailliaud, pis. xv-xxiv. For his copies of Greek inscrip-
tions see Part II, pp. 1,25, 45, and 51.
2
This was written in the middle of February, 1819. See mention of Drovetti's arrival in ed Dakhleh from
el Khargeh with his mameluke francais, Rosingana, on February 21, in Winlock, p. 3.
3
Hoghton was one of Edmonstone's party, which was leaving ed Dakhleh for el Khargeh on February 21
when they met Drovetti (foe. cit.). For their copies of Greek inscriptions at Hibis see Part II, pp. 1 and 25.
4
Little is known about Hyde. I had supposed (loc. cit.) that he had traveled from some point in Upper
Egypt to el Khargeh and then proceeded northward through the other oases. However, it would appear that
he entered ed Dakhleh from the north, arriving at Deir el Hagar on December 11, 1819, at fAin Amur on
December 17, and at Hibis on December 19. He then must have retraced his steps, for he was in el Bahrlyeh
on February 4, 1820, on his way to Cairo. After his return to England, he communicated his copies of Greek
inscriptions at Hibis to Henry Salt, who published them in the Classical Journal, 1821. See Part II, pp. 1 and
25-
5
Members of Cailliaud's second party, which arrived in the first days of March. Letorzec was the engineer,
and Abu Sheneb the mameluke francais. See Winlock, p. 5.
6
Loc. cit.
7
"Ayme. 1831" occurs in a tomb chapel in el Bakawat which is decorated with biblical scenes. Mohammed
Ali Pasha is said to have farmed the oases out to Ayme and a certain Hassan ErTendi of Mut in ed Dakhleh
(Rohlfs, pp. 248 and 308). They erected an alum factory in el Khargeh Oasis, and for millstones and probably
for building stones they tore down a large part of the back of the Temple of Hibis. A block from a temple
architrave roughed out for a millstone appears in Rohlfs, pi. 15. There were uncomplimentary traditions of
Ayme's career in the Oasis still known to the older natives at the time of our excavations, and apparently his
concession was revoked by Mohammed Ali on the complaints of the then inhabitants of el Khargeh. See pp.
9, note 9, 18, and 39, note 17.
8
Catherwood accompanied Hay and Hoskins, leaving er Rizeikat on October 15 and arriving in the Oasis
four days later. They were camped at the temple from October 20 to November 3. They later visited other
sites in the Oasis and made the return journey between November 15 and 19. See footnote 12.
59
9. J. CARRERA. 1833, on the portico. In the hypostyle: J. C. 1833
10. MATHIEU. 1835
n . P. W. GUY. 1843
12. R. H. BORROWES. 1851, on the underside of the fallen capital of column 10.
13. SCHWEINFURTH. 18748
14. G. ROHLFSCHE EXPEDITION. 24/3 1874, with the names of the ten members, exactly as in Deir
el Hagar in ed Dakhleh Oasis.10 Elsewhere: P. ASCHERSON 1874.
We found no trace of Wilkinson, who was there in January, 1825,11 of Hoskins —other than the name of
Catherwood (8) —who was at the temple from October 20 to November 3, 1832,12 or of Brugsch, who arrived
at Hibis on January 28, 1875.13
The fullest descriptions of the temple heretofore published are those of Hoskins and Brugsch, both of
which have been indexed by Porter and Moss for the seventh volume of their Topographical Bibliograpy of
Ancient Egyptian Hieroglyphic Texts, Reliefs, and Paintings, which is to appear in the near future. References
to the earlier copyists of the Greek inscriptions will be found in Part II of this publication.
9
He was in Hibis in the spring (Schweinfurth, p. 384) when Rohlfs arrived (see next note).
10
Rohlfs, p. 308; Winlock, p. 5. The expedition left ed Dakhleh on March 21 and arrived at Hibis on
March 23.
11
Wilkinson, II, p. 373; Winlock, p. 5.
12
Hoskins, p. 71. For his copies of Greek inscriptions see Part II, pp. 1 and 25.
13
Brugsch, Reise, p. 15.
60
PLATES
PLATE I
~"*--_- ' -V-
A. VIEW LOOKING NORTHWEST ACROSS THE VESTIGES OF THE LAKE TOWARD THE TEMPLE, THE
GATEWAYS, AND THE QUAY ON THE EDGE OF THE PALMS
B. THE LAKESIDE QUAY, LOOKING NORTHEAST

PLATE II
A. THE OUTER GATEWAY, LOOKING NORTHEAST
B. THE GREAT GATEWAY, LOOKING NORTHWEST

PLATE III
'*r*r'
TWO OF THE SPHINXES RE-ERECTED ON THE AVENUE IN FRONT OF THE GREAT GATEWAY
PLATE IV
A. THE INNER GATEWAY AND THE TEMPLE AFTER RESTORATION
B. VIEW FROM THE TOP OF THE TEMPLE, LOOKING EASTWARD DOWN THE AVENUE
- - W W " •'•»• • '—•»--.'." "— •!•«
THE RESTORED TEMPLE FROM THE NORTHEAST, WITH AN OBELISK BASE (?) ON THE LEFT
"0
r
>
<
*<m%g - 7." '^5*r-
!$fl" " V .. •" -
• ' « -
THE RESTORED TEMPLE FROM THE SOUTHEAST, WITH AN OBELISK BASE (?) ON THE RIGHT r
>
m
THE SOUTH ELEVATION OF THE PORTICO, LOOKING ACROSS THE REMAINS OF THE GIRDLE WALL
r
>
H
<
PLATE VIII
>V
CAPITAL FROM THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE PORTICO. (THE COLUMN DRUM IS RESTORED)
PLATE IX
-jjm.
fit*--
i K
^
?*-*
£J mi
;!i =
i,
"^' ^ f WW-M^-'/^ J^-'^^ y*&: '*&''<
A. ORIGINAL FACE OF RE-USED BLOCK IN THE SCREEN WALL OF HYPOSTYLE M
B. FOUNDATION INSCRIPTIONS OF NEKTANEBIS 1 FOUND UNDER THE PORTICO, SCALE 1:4

PLATE X
A.THE NORTH SIDE OF THE PORTICO WITH THE REMAINS OF THE CHURCH, DURING EXCAVATION
B. SILL OF THE NORTH DOORWAY OF THE PORTICO

PLATE XI
A. THE PORTICO, WHEN FIRST CLEARED OF DRIFT SAND
B. COLUMNS, ARCHITRAVES, AND CORNICE OF THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE PORTICO, WHEN FIRST
CLEARED
PLATE XII
{ .•••:•• • !•'
.^ 4 / ,-r
. • •. LJT#
THE CENTRAL AISLE OF HYPOSTYLE N RESTORED

r
THE NORTH SIDE OF HYPOSTYLE N RESTORED >
m
-*
-*
VIEW FROM THE FRONT OF THE TEMPLE, LOOKING TOWARD THE BACK, AFTER RESTORATION r
>
H
tn
X
<
A. CAPITAL OF COLUMN 4. HYPOSTYLE N
B. CAPITAL OF COLUMN 2, HYPOSTYLE N
"0
>
H
tn
X
<
A. BASE OF COLUMN 10, HYPOSTYLE N C. ROOFING SLAB WITH SKYLIGHT HOLE, LYING UPSIDE DOWN
HYPOSTYLE N
"0
r
B. FOUNDATIONS OF COLUMN 10, HYPOSTYLE N D. ROOFING SLAB WITH FUNNEL HOLE FOR POURING MORTAR
>
H
HYPOSTYLE N m
X
<
A. FALLEN ROOFING SLABS IN CHAMBER L. (THE BRICKWORK B. JOINT BETWEEN MASONRY OF THE FIRST AND SECOND BUILDING
BEYOND IS RESTORATION) PERIODS, IN THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF HYPOSTYLE N >
H
m
x
<
• H M h M B A f n M t ^ K * ' 7-^>- ^
"0
A. THE EAST FACE OF THE SCREEN WALL BETWEEN HYPOSTYLES B. DOORWAY FROM HYPOSTYLE M TO HYPOSTYLE B RESTORED r
M AND N, LOOKING SOUTH
>
H
m
x
<
A. DETAIL OF A CAPITAL IN THE SCREEN WALL OF HYPOSTYLE M B. CAPITAL OF THE COLUMN IN CHAMBER L
-0
r
>
H
m
x
x
. kf
COLUMNS ON THE NORTH SIDE OF HYPOSTYLE B r

>
H
m
x
x
VIEW FROM THE BACK OF THE TEMPLE, LOOKING TOWARD THE FRONT r
>
H
m
x
x
PLATE XXII
A. LOOKING NORTHEAST FROM E ACROSS E 2
B. LOOKING EAST FROM H 3 INTO H 1 AND H 2

13
THE WEST END OF THE TEMPLE AND THE WEST DOORWAY IN THE GIRDLE WALL RESTORED
r
>
H
m
x
X
r
A. SECTION OF THE WEST EXTERIOR WALL, LOOKING NORTH B. SECTION OF THE WEST EXTERIOR WALL, LOOKING SOUTH >
H
m
x
x
<
PLATE XXV
<t*
i. •''••**
A. DOORWAY, RESTORED, AND PORCH OF SOUTHERN BUILDING II, LOOKING NORTHWEST
B. SOUTHERN BUILDING II, LOOKING SOUTHWEST, DURING THE EXCAVATIONS

PLATE XXVI
. jj
-' .. i
!
;
-'s#* -?' H^
~* i
. • . . . .
v>
'-ijMir— c D
SMALL OBJECTS FOUND IN THE TEMENOS (A - G), AND WEDGES AND DOOR SOCKET FROM
HYPOSTYLE N (H AND J). SCALE 1: 2
PLATE XXVII
£5
ROMAN BRONZES FOUND IN THE SOUTHERN PART OF THE TEMENOS. SCALE 1:2
PLATE XXVIII
LIMESTONE CAPITAL FROM THE CHURCH, RESTORED. SCALE 1:4

PLATE XXIX
&«"
.<? 1 ?;i^"/i:te^v*k
!
f p,6J *
I
Ir '. V . . '
B.R. - •T-v
'•ny .
1 i^ i ^.
si l l
._,.±i#
—r
:$im&$S
I RubWhft
/£M6lih'd63
C I T Y
7 M
\ .V
\ TEMPLE OF AMUN
A V
0 F
\ fl—
/*
i
A:
{ H I B I
-' -JL-
Cultivable Land
Desert
J B.R. Brick Ruins
' rm I Ifl * Nadureh/ J
• Temple / * j
I':-" 7..1'". • 7;. 7;;/;s-s?

l^#:^v£l^
MAP OF THE CITY OF HIBIS AND ITS SURROUNDINGS

PLATE XXX
Northern Building
fl 0 0 D -I j:
nii
Sphinxes Quay
=d
V
SCALE
Brick
Section of the Great Gateway, looking South

o I 8 3 4 s 6H
? r
fcaBeffiiiiK(fi
S.dhoch in Trenchts on th. North : 7 H^Max.W«t«r Ijsvel

BvlRoch near Axil of Vmpk-.
GENERAL PLAN OF THE TEMPLE OF HIBIS, ITS AVENUE, AND THE BUILDINGS EXCAVATED IN THE TEMENOS
PLATE XXX
PLATE XXXI
r?
mr-fTI
Section East Elevation
West ( ) a \ Bast
___V_ 1-— r~*-\

-TJ*
\ -
Plan
THE INNER GATEWAY BUILT BY DARIUS I. SCALE 1:100

PLATE XXXII
d m p q t u
c n o r s
Ground Plan of Temple
Scale
0 12 3 4 5 io 15 20 25 30 35 4 0 M.
BUILDING PERIODS
5 I O - 4 9 0 B.C. 3 9 1 - ^ 7 8 B.C. 3 7 8 - 5 4 2 B.C. 2 8 ^ - 2 4 7 B.C. Zi-yi CENT A.D.
d m
E3
• i JB_._ • Crypt at 5.W Corner
of Temple
* J 1
m h
EH
ri e
i /"f -^-lei-
C2
2
£| -
JLL I
•llllllltj
g
g i o
Upper Floor at West End Upper Room S.E. Comer
KEY PLANS OF THE TEMPLE

PLATE XXXIII
i—TTT-nrTTnnrTTTTTnrn rTT-rT-rTTTi I r
ILJUJLJLJJLJ-JULJJJ_JLJ_LL
GROUND PLAN OF THE TEMPLE. SCALE 1:100

PLATE XXXIV
r T
i
t
i 1 1
. 1
1
~ T ~ "VI
ii I
P |22 25 124
_1 i 1
—1_ j 1
Jl
1
II L_
<
20 i
19
1
i I
13 I . - J
j-y
r'm
L
' * \
7J »l 15 W 13 12
1 1
J 1
C= =
""hi
li
A /rotable Locations of Skylights actually discovered
PLAN OF THE UPPER FLOORS OF THE TEMPLE. SCALE 1:100

PLATE XXXV
Joint between First and Second Building Periods
QJULLLn]a_Q
LXU i I Girdle K-a/z
r 7: i\ ;r
i I 'Ii :i X C
^^^X~X^X^ti~rn Ê
|v'-;-'^';;l Ancient Filling Blocks Cut away in line with Girdle Wally
South Elevation
Original
Back of |
Sanctuary
-Fissure
Section a-b
SOUTH ELEVATION AND LONGITUDINAL SECTION OF THE TEMPLE. SCALE 1:100

West Elevation
TI Wooden&>cf_
yWc°den&
Rain
Spout
r
>
H
tn
r
Section c-d ' \ x
X
WEST ELEVATION OF THE TEMPLE, AND SECTION THROUGH HYPOSTYLE B, LOOKING WEST. SCALE 1:100 X
<
S
- J
-J
«< JT
1n !~<J
i i
bnrf- W
3
i'!rJ
II
'16"
^v.
L
*-/ g-h
LXX
d >
H
in
k-l x
x
wv=R f-rm^^m^/jaiK?-
x
<
SECTIONS THROUGH CHAMBERS IN THE WEST END OF THE TEMPLE. SCALE 1:100
«*L
f7
i •
i i i •
L 1
Lkv
L
S
/
^L
m-n
A
sn.
-T
A O-jO
* ~ \
"0
r
>
H
tn
SECTIONS THROUGH HYPOSTYLE B, LOOKING EAST, AND HYPOSTYLE M, LOOKING WEST. SCALE 1:100 X
X
X
<
q-r
S
~ \
c-t before. Hypostyle N was built r
>
WEST AND EAST ELEVATIONS OF THE SCREEN WALL BETWEEN HYPOSTYLES M AND N, WITH TEMPORARY CORNICE RESTORED. SCALE 1:100
H
tn
X
X
X
X
Rain Spout
U-V
ISsl Shallow Depressions Mortises for Wood

y - £ a,b Girder Sockets for 1- Roof cf Church; above,Rafter Sockets fori- Roof
w-x -a
r
SECTIONS THROUGH HYPOSTYLE N AND CHAMBERS O AND P, AND EAST ELEVATION OF THE TEMPLE. SCALE 1:100 >
H
tn
X
r
PLATE XLI
Flan of the Wooden Beam Sockets

SCALE 1.20
_JZ
Section y'-z!
Front Elevation of Portico
SECTION AND FRONT ELEVATION OF THE PORTICO. SCALE 1:100

'mum iiiiiiif
Front Elevation of the Temple in its Final Form
TFPBASAEnSrTOAEMAloY T o y
Parallel Inscription in Egyptian ? TOA^lAloYKAlBEPENIKH^SnTHpAN
} E nbToNP EPIBcW5NKAi"lAr^\nnATA
"0
r
Inscription on the Lintel of the left Doorway above >
H
tn
A. RESTORATION OF THE FRONT OF THE TEMPLE IN ITS FINAL FORM UNDER PTOLEMY II. SCALE 1: 100 X
B. RESTORATION OF THE INSCRIBED LINTEL OF THE SOUTHERN POSTERN. SCALE 1:10 r
PLATE XLIII
SCALE
CM.504030 2010 0 M Vl 54 IM.
m~~
,:
fin;. " ' ' „ i II si
HI HI
•;'i7i77 "iBlilii
SCALE
CM. 25 20 15 10 5 0 M 54 54 1 M.
Floor Level
COLUMNS IN HYPOSTYLE B, AND LOWER PART OF THE ORIGINAL WEST WALL OF THE
SANCTUARY
PLATE XLIV
TI -—W~ -yr -n> rar
CAMPANIFORM CAPITAL IN THE SCREEN WALL OF HYPOSTYLE M. SCALE 1:15

PLATE XLV
PALM CAPITAL IN HYPOSTYLE N. SCALE 1:15

PLATE XLVI
COMPOSITE CAPITAL FROM THE SOUTH END OF THE PORTICO FACADE. SCALE 1:15
PLATE XLVII
LOTUS CAPITAL FROM THE CENTER OF THE PORTICO FACADE. SCALE 1:15
s Lever Sockets
tfu West Wall North End

Scale 1:50
r=r
Looking North
ia
D:::::
D
Rain Spout Hypostyle N 1:40
b a
A
J 1,7 K7
1 Lever Sockets
nf • .( West Wall South End
:•••.'•• .7i -
$ : '''o
0": i
<„• Scale 1: 50
• •.'•^'////MY//////M
. 4 . 0
a:; '.-«./r
• 0 .'. *•* '
a a
i i i
. °•• • .' a '• <?. • i • "'a • a- I? rr.
"••'."' •.'.. ••• • ; - j •lo'i'. •••••.«•"••;
k
. « • . • * <» - • fl' "o <, « ° *. * „ " ° . «'
.7,..'7„'7.".7?; •«•> Looking
BVl
-:"••' o•..•«• n • • '..< • fl Looking
South lv':"."./ .••'•:
East
•'^» >•'• - •* A / . °° * 3 C ; j."'
1
a ;
^ = =
Ax \ \> - r
lf/y>* , >
H
f i "• • - •b A
1 b tn
1 1 t^WT^'A •xi :1 X
Column Base in Hypostyle N 1:40 r
<
DETAILS OF MASONRY CONSTRUCTION
PLATE XLIX
East Elevation
Brick
Stone
•••'•' ' ' '«' i "•" »Bii"iiii>»'i»w»
A. PORCH OF SOUTHERN BUILDING II

B. CHRISTIAN HOUSES BUILT OVER SOUTHERN BUILDING II
r
PTOLEMAIC SCULPTURES FOUND NORTH OF THE TEMPLE. SCALE 1:6 >
H
tn
PLATE LI
l e C•. —* *-»• •—• /—• **-1

SCALE
0 2 4 6' 8 IO 15 20 25 30CM.
/fcrf of a Sandstone Door Lintel
/finer a«ar G^ter /Zzcas

of a Sandstone Doorjamb
(after a Copy by Evelyn White)
IF U s~s
£
Part of a Sandstone
Ml©
Door Jamb
(perhaps belonging
to the Lintel above)
Parts of a Temple-shaped Shrine of Sandstone
3 L
SCALE
0 5 10 20 30 40 50CM.
FRAGMENTS OF DOORWAYS ERECTED BY OFFICERS OF THE GARRISON OF HIBIS

AND BLOCKS FROM A TEMPLE-SHAPED SHRINE
PLATE LII
_\^
Base of Column in the Nave Scale I: io Sculptured Slab from the Church 1:10 Engaged Column Base 1:10
(after a Sketch by Evelyn White)
Early Floor
SCALE
CM.100 50 0 H I 2 3
CHURCH BUILT AGAINST THE PORTICO IN THE FOURTH CENTURY A.D.

OF THIS BOOK 25O COPIES WERE PRINTED
BY THE PLANTIN PRESS IN JULY, I94I

EGYPTIAN PUBLICATIONS
For prices of the publications listed below, write to The Metropolitan Museum of Art
Fifth Avenue and 82d Street, New York, N. Y.
PUBLICATIONS OF THE EGYPTIAN ROBB DE PEYSTER T Y T U S MEMORIAL SERIES
EXPEDITION . THE TOMB OF NAKHT AT THEBES, by Norman de
Garis Davies (plates in color by L. Crane, Norman de
I. THE TOMB OF SENEBTISI AT LISHT, by Arthur C. Garis Davies, F. S. Unwin, and Nina de Garis Davies).
Mace and Herbert E. Winlock. xxii -f- 136 pp., 85 ills., 36 xxvi + 84 pp., 12 ills., 31 pis. (11 in color), folio. 1917.
pis. (4 in color). 4to. 1916. Bound in paper and in boards. Bound in paper and in boards.
II T H E TOMB OF PUYEMRE AT THEBES, by Norman de
II. THE MONASTERIES OF THE WADI 'N NATRON, and
PART I: NEW COPTIC TEXTS FROM THE MONAS- Garis Davies (plates in color by N. de Garis Davies and
TERY OF SAINT MACARIUS, by Hugh G. Evelyn H. R. Hopgood). 2 vols. Vol. I, xxii + 114 pp., 1 ill., 43 pis.
White, xlviii + 304 pp., 28 pis. 4to. 1926. Bound in paper (9 in color); vol. II, xii + 104 pp., 1 ill., 36 pis. (2 in color),
and in boards. folio. 1922-1923. Bound in paper and in boards.
IV. THE TOMB OF TWO SCULPTORS AT THEBES, by
Ill THE MONASTERY OF EPIPHANIUS AT THEBES, Norman de Garis Davies (plates in color by Norman de
and by W. E. Crum, H. G. Evelyn White, and H. E. Winlock. Garis Davies, Nina de G. Davies, H. R. Hopgood, and
IV. 2 vols. Vol. I, xxvi + 280 pp., 51 ills., 35 pis.; vol. II, Charles K. Wilkinson), xii + 80 pp., 31 pis. (12 in color),
xvi + 390 pp., 17 pis. 4to. 1926. Bound in paper and in folio. 1925. Bound in paper and in boards.
boards.
V. TWO RAMESSIDE TOMBS AT THEBES, by Norman
V. THE TOMB OF KEN-AMUN AT THEBES, by Norman de Garis Davies (plates in color by N. de Garis Davies,
de Garis Davies (plates in color by Norman de Garis H. R. Hopgood, C. K. Wilkinson, Norman Hardy, and
Davies, H. R. Hopgood, and Nina de Garis Davies). 2 Nina de G. Davies). xx + 90 pp., 42 pis. (12 in color),
vols. Vol. I, x + 74 pp., 71 pis. (8 in color), 4to; vol. II, folio. 1927. Bound in paper and in boards.
viii pp., 7 pis. (6 in color), folio. 1930. Bound in paper and
in boards. PUBLICATIONS OF THE DEPARTMENT OF
VI. THE TOMB OF QUEEN MERYET-AMON AT THEBES, EGYPTIAN ART AND MUSEUM "PAPERS"
by H. E. Winlock (photographs by Harry Burton, plans by BAS-RELIEFS FROM THE TEMPLE OF RAMESES I AT
Walter Hauser, and catalogue by Charlotte R. Clark), ABYDOS (PAPERS, vol. I, part I, and DEPARTMENT OF
xii + 100 pp., 26 ills., 47 pis. 4to. 1932. Bound in paper. EGYPTIAN ART, vol. I), by Herbert E. Winlock. 56 pp., 9
VII THE MONASTERIES OF THE WADI 'N NATRUN, ills., 11 pis. 4to. 1921. Paper wrapper.
PART II: THE HISTORY OF THE MONASTERIES TEN COPTIC LEGAL TEXTS (DEPARTMENT OF EGYP-
OF N1TRIA AND OF SCETIS, by Hugh G. Evelyn TIAN ART, vol. II), by A. Arthur Schiller, xiv + 104 pp., 7
White (edited by Walter Hauser). xliv + 500 pp., 8 pis. pis. 4to. 1932. Bound in paper.
4to. 1932. Bound in paper.
THE DECORATION OF THE TOMB OF PER-NEB: THE
VIII. THE MONASTERIES OF THE WADI *N NATRUN, TECHNIQUE AND THE COLOR CONVENTIONS (DE-
PART 111: THE ARCHITECTURE AND ARCHAE- PARTMENT OF EGYPTIAN ART, vol. Ill), by Caroline
OLOGY, by Hugh G. Evelyn White (edited by Walter Ransom Williams, x + 104 pp., 20 pis. (5 in color). 4to. 1932.
Hauser). xxxiv + 274 pp., 18 ills., 93 pis. 4to. 1933. Bound Bound in paper.
in paper. THE TREASURE OF EL LAHUN (DEPARTMENT OF
IX. THE TOMB OF NEFER-HOTEP AT THEBES, by Nor- EGYPTIAN ART, vol. IV), by H. E. Winlock. xvi + 84 pp.,
man de Garis Davies. 2 vols. Vol. I, xx + 86 pp., 10 ills., 5 ills., 16 pis. 4to. 1934. Bound in paper.
62 pis., 4to; vol. II, viii pp., 7 pis. (4 in color), folio. 1933. ED DAKHLEH OASIS (DEPARTMENT OF EGYPTIAN
Bound in paper and in boards. ART, vol. V), by H. E. Winlock (appendix by Ludlow Bull),
xii + 82 pp., 37 pis. 4to. 1936. Bound in paper.
X. PAINTINGS FROM THE TOMB OF REKH-MI-REf AT
THEBES, by Norman de Garis Davies. xii pp., 26 pis. (20 GLAZED TILES FROM A PALACE OF RAMESSES II AT
in color), folio. 1935. Bound in boards. KANTlR (PAPERS, no. 3, and DEPARTMENT OF EGYP-
TIAN ART, vol. VI), by William C. Hayes. 50 pp., 11 ills.,
XI. THE TOMB OF REKH-MI-REf AT THEBES, by Nor- 13 pis. 4to. 1937. Bound in paper.
man de Garis Davies. 2 vols. 4to. (In preparation.)
THE TEMPLE OF RAMESSES I AT ABYDOS (PAPERS, no.
XII. THE TEXTS IN THE MASTABEH OF SE'N-WOSRET- 5, and DEPARTMENT OF EGYPTIAN ART, vol. VII), by
fANKH AT LISHT, by William C. Hayes (plates by H. E. Winlock. 24 pp., 5 ills., 5 pis. 4to. 1937. Bound in paper.
Lindsley F. Hall from photographs by Harry Burton), x -j- THE BIJR1AL CHAMBER OF THE TREASURER SOBK-
32 pp., 1 ill., 12 pis. folio. 1937. Bound in boards. MOSE FROM ER RIZEIKAT (PAPERS, no. 9, and DE-
PARTMENT OF EGYPTIAN ART, vol. VIII), by William
X I I I . THE TEMPLE OF HIBIS IN EL KHARGEH OASIS, C. Hayes. 40 pp., 6 pis., frontis. 4to. 1939. Bound in paper.
PART I: T H E EXCAVATIONS, by H. E. Winlock
(plans and drawings by Lindsley F. Hall, Walter Hauser, NOTE: The Papers series was discontinued in 1923 with vol. I, part II; when it
William J. Palmer-Jones, and Gouverneur M. Peek). was resumed in 1937 the parts were given the serial numbers 3, 4, 5, and
the designation "volume" was abandoned. Vol. I, part I, became retro-
xvi+64 pp., 62 pis. 1941. Bound in paper. actively vol. 1 of Publications of the Department of Egyptian Art, when
the latter series was begun in [932. From 1937 monographs on Egyptian
XIV. THE TEMPLE OF HIBIS IN EL KHARGEH OASIS, subjects which appear in the Papers series will also be numbered in the
PART II: GREEK INSCRIPTIONS, by H. G. Evelyn departmental series.
White and James H. Oliver, xvi + 74 pp., 13 pis. 4to. 1938. MISCELLANEOUS EGYPTIAN
Bound in paper.
PUBLICATIONS
XV. OSTRAKA AND NAME STONES FROM THE TOMB
OF SEN-MUT (NO. 71) AT THEBES, by William C. THE STELA OF MENTHU-WESER, by Caroline L. Ransom
Hayes. (In preparation.) [Williams]. 40 pp., 2 pis. 8vo. 1913. (Out of print.)
A HANDBOOK OF THE EGYPTIAN ROOMS [by Albert M.
NOTE: Preliminary reports on the Expedition's excavations for the seasons Lythgoe, Arthur C. Mace, Herbert E. Winlock, and Caroline
of 1915-1916 to 1935-1936 have been published as supplements to the
Bulletin of The Metropolitan Museum of Art and may be ordered Ransom Williams], xxiv + 178 pp., 71 ills. 8vo. 1916. (Out of
separately. Price for the 7 reports for 1916-1917, 1916-1919, 1918-1920, print.)
1925-1926, 1931-1932, 1933-1934, 1935-1936, 25 cents each; for the 12
reports for 1920-1921 to 1924-1925, 1925-1927 to 1930-1931, and 1932- THE TOMB OF PERNEB [by Albert M. Lythgoe and Caroline
'933. 1934-1935, 50 cents each. (Preliminary reports of the work from
1907 to 1914-1915 appeared in regular issues of the Bulletin. Price 20 Ransom Williams], xii + 80 pp., 39 ills. 8vo. 1916. Bound in
cents each.) paper.
MISCELLANEOUS EGYPTIAN STATUES OF THE GODDESS SAKHMET, by Albert M.
Lythgoe. 24 pp., 21 ills. 8vo. 1930. Reprint of supplement to
PUBLICATIONS {Cont'd) the Bulletin, 1919. Bound in paper.
THE MURCH COLLECTION OF EGYPTIAN ANTIQ- AN EARLY CUT-PILE RUG FROM EGYPT, by M. S. Di-
UITI ES, by Arthur C. Mace. 32 pp., 22 ills. 8vo. 1916. Reprint mand. 12 pp., 14 ills., 1 pi. in color. 4to. Separate reprinted from
of supplement to the Bulletin, 1911. Bound in paper, Metropolitan Museum Studies, 1933. Bound in paper.
THE TREASURE OF LAHUN, by Albert M. Lythgoe. 28 pp., ANCIENT EGYPTIAN ANTIMONY PLATING ON COP-
26 ills. 8vo. 1921. Reprint of supplement to the Bulletin, 1919. PER OBJECTS, by Colin G. Fink and Arthur H. Kopp. 6 pp.,
(Out of print.) 6 ills. 4to. Separate reprinted from Metropolitan Museum
Studies, 1933. Bound in paper.
HARMHAB, COMMANDER-IN-CHIEF OF THE ARMIES
OF TUTENKHAMON, by Herbert E. Winlock. 16 pp., 5 ills. THE PRIVATE LIFE OF THE ANCIENT EGYPTIANS:
8vo. Supplement to the Bulletin, 1923. Bound in paper. TWENTY PLATES WITH AN INTRODUCTION [by H. E.
THE CARNARVON EGYPTIAN COLLECTION, by Albert M. Winlock]. i2mo. 1935. Bound in paper.
Lythgoe. 12 pp., 17 ills. 8vo. Reprinted from the Bulletin, 1927.
(Out of print.) AN EGYPTIAN FLOWER BOWL, by H. E. Winlock. 10 pp.,
10 ills. 4to. Separate reprinted from Metropolitan Museum
EGYPTIAN LITERATURE: A LECTURE, by Arthur Crutten- Studies, 1936. Bound in paper.
den Mace, vi + 32 pp. 8vo. Typography by D. B. Updike. 1928.
Bound in boards. EGYPTIAN STATUES AND STATUETTES: TWENTY
PLATES WITH AN INTRODUCTION [by H. E. Winlock].
AN EXHIBITION OF COPIES OF EGYPTIAN WALL i2mo. 1937. Bound in paper.
PAINTINGS FROM TOMBS AND PALACES OF THE
XVIII AND XIX DYNASTIES, 1600-1200 B.C. [by Ambrose ANCIENT EGYPTIAN JEWELRY: A PICTURE BOOK [intro-
Lansing], viii + 54 pp. 8vo. 1930. Bound in paper. duction by Ambrose Lansing], 12 mo. 1940. Bound in paper.

Hibis Temple

Încărcat de

Informații document

Titlu original

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Hibis Temple

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

PUBLICATIONS OF

THE METROPOLITAN MUSEUM OF ART

THE TEMPLE OF HIBIS

WITH PLANS AND DRAWINGS BY

New York, January, 1940.

KEY TO REFERENCES CITED . . . . . . . xv

Location of Hibis—junction of desert roads—town site—cemeteries—ancient

CHAPTER II. T H E EARLIEST PART OF THE TEMPLE, A-M . . . . .

CHAPTER III. ADDITIONS TO THE TEMPLE, N-R . . . . . . 20

1. HYPOSTYLE HALL N. Added to the temple—probably in 391-378 B.C. Founda-

CHAPTER V. BUILDINGS OF THE C H R I S T I A N P E R I O D . . . . . . 44

APPENDIX II. CHRONOLOGICAL T A B L E . . . . . . . . 57

APPENDIX III. NINETEENTH-CENTURY GRAFFITI . . . . . . 59

2. THE PLAN OF THE EARLIEST PART OF THE TEMPLE

3. THE GIRDLE WALL, R

2. BUILDINGS AND OBJECTS IN THE TEMENOS

THE COINS FOUND IN THE EXCAVATION OF THE TEMPLE

REFERENCES 8. Ptolemy IV.

49 Edict of Gnaeus Vergilius Capito on the Outer Gateway . . . . . 37

60 Edict of Lucius Julius Vestinus on the Great Gateway . . . . . 36

68 Edict of Tiberius Julius Alexander, Text A, on the Great Gateway . . . 36

68-69 Edict of Tiberius Julius Alexander, Text B, on the Outer Gateway . . . 37

11—111 Cent. Graffito on girdle wall . . . . . . . . . 33 (note 42)

Ill Cent. Hermeias pavement . . . . . . . . . . . 37

Ill Cent. Statue base . . . . . . . . . . 41, no. 7

324-337 Christian burials in el Bakawat, under Constantine I 3- 48

Early V Cent. Roman garrison mentioned in Notitia dignitatum . . . . 39 (note 19)

i. CAILLIAUD FUT LE PREMIER EUROPEEN QUI PRIT CONNOISSANCE DE CE TEM-

2. DROVETTI, ROSINGANA. 18192

~"*--_- ' -V-

B. THE LAKESIDE QUAY, LOOKING NORTHEAST

A. THE OUTER GATEWAY, LOOKING NORTHEAST

B. THE GREAT GATEWAY, LOOKING NORTHWEST

A. THE INNER GATEWAY AND THE TEMPLE AFTER RESTORATION

A. ORIGINAL FACE OF RE-USED BLOCK IN THE SCREEN WALL OF HYPOSTYLE M

B. FOUNDATION INSCRIPTIONS OF NEKTANEBIS 1 FOUND UNDER THE PORTICO, SCALE 1:4

B. SILL OF THE NORTH DOORWAY OF THE PORTICO

A. THE PORTICO, WHEN FIRST CLEARED OF DRIFT SAND

THE CENTRAL AISLE OF HYPOSTYLE N RESTORED

COLUMNS ON THE NORTH SIDE OF HYPOSTYLE B r

A. LOOKING NORTHEAST FROM E ACROSS E 2

B. LOOKING EAST FROM H 3 INTO H 1 AND H 2

A. DOORWAY, RESTORED, AND PORCH OF SOUTHERN BUILDING II, LOOKING NORTHWEST

B. SOUTHERN BUILDING II, LOOKING SOUTHWEST, DURING THE EXCAVATIONS

LIMESTONE CAPITAL FROM THE CHURCH, RESTORED. SCALE 1:4

I':-" 7..1'". • 7;. 7;;/;s-s?

MAP OF THE CITY OF HIBIS AND ITS SURROUNDINGS

Section of the Great Gateway, looking South

S.dhoch in Trenchts on th. North : 7 H^Max.W«t«r Ijsvel

Section East Elevation

___V_ 1-— r~*-\

THE INNER GATEWAY BUILT BY DARIUS I. SCALE 1:100

5 I O - 4 9 0 B.C. 3 9 1 - ^ 7 8 B.C. 3 7 8 - 5 4 2 B.C. 2 8 ^ - 2 4 7 B.C. Zi-yi CENT A.D.

KEY PLANS OF THE TEMPLE

GROUND PLAN OF THE TEMPLE. SCALE 1:100

PLAN OF THE UPPER FLOORS OF THE TEMPLE. SCALE 1:100

Joint between First and Second Building Periods

SOUTH ELEVATION AND LONGITUDINAL SECTION OF THE TEMPLE. SCALE 1:100

ISsl Shallow Depressions Mortises for Wood

Flan of the Wooden Beam Sockets

Front Elevation of Portico

SECTION AND FRONT ELEVATION OF THE PORTICO. SCALE 1:100

Front Elevation of the Temple in its Final Form