Notes by Griffith on the archaeology of Nabêsha (Tell Far’ûn) [TopBib 401-150] & the ‘Griffith Chronology’ (historical notes)

Nabêsha (Tell Far’ûn) [TopBib 401-150]
-pFront Cover: Contents page of notebook. “Ushabti inscriptions Nebesheh 2-7”, “stone inscription 84-87”, “demotic on pot 95” & “stone inscriptions 97”.
-Notes and accompanying transcriptions for “Ushabti bought in Cairo 1885” and “scarab Cairo 1885” (with measurements).
-p1: Draft of presumably what was to be an introduction to the publication article on the Ushabtis.
-Notes on Ushabtis numbered one to five with erasures of notes of original numberings 5, 6 & 5 again discovered to be from the same, and not a different, tomb.
-1) “unpainted” of “Pa vā Harmachis” 1spec. 2) “Pamakau Tomb 35. 2 spec.”. 3) “NeXtamen” 6 spec. tomb (presumably) 31. 4) “ramesnaXb. Tomb 3”. 5) “PateXn. tomb 41”.
-p2: Notes with descriptions of and transcriptions from Ushabtis from various tombs.
-“Ushabti tomb 5, red clay.” Inscription “on back, two lines” (in hieratic), pl ii Ushabti 5 in publication, with inscription unpublished.
-“tomb 5” inscription “on front” (in hieratic).
-“tomb 8 sandstone” inscription “horizontal round side & back”, pl ii Ushabti 8 (sandstone) in publication.
-“tomb 12 saite” inscription unpublished.
-“tomb 11, saite horizontal” inscription unpublished. “Four specimens with several Hundred(?)”.
-“tomb 20(a)”partial(?) under glaze, large, 2 horizontal & vertical”, inscription unpublished. “(b) small, one line down front”, inscription unpublished.
-p3: Numbered list of Ushabtis marked “general”, potentially the unprovenanced Ushabtis featuring on p33 of the publication. Notes include a description, some are transliterated, and all feature a transcription.
-“(1) small Saite style inscription”.
-“(2) small Saite on front”.
-“(3) from hosh(?) in town on S side of mound, fine impressed”.
-“(4) in one line down front”
-“(5) from small surface of rubbish of a destroyed tomb No. 56 on N slope of S high mound”
-“7. large incised, horizontal lines”
-“8. very rough” “a. down back” & “b. down back” and “on side”.
-p4: Notes, some transliteration, and transcriptions of texts from provenanced Ushabtis.
-“tomb3 stumpy porcelain inscriptions inlaid in colour under glaze down front” (featured in pl.ii Ushabti 3 in publication).
-“tomb 4 limestone insc. incised horizontal, begin apparently on middle of breast” (not in publication).
-“tomb31, 6 shabti yellow, painted inscription under glaze, round finishing in a limestone back” (inscription features in transliteration on page 32 of publication).
-“on surface outside destroyed mudbrick chamber 35 – 2 limestone painted inscriptions apparently in two vertical lines down side and front”. Features two cursive inscriptions “of one” and “on back and side of other”.
-“41.” “earthenware painted” (not in publication).
-p5: Page labelled “general”, presumably continued from page 3.
-“9. small (?)work inscription on line across head”.
-“10. On back of small figure” “terracotta impressed from cooler mould”.
-p6: Transliteration and transcription of inscriptions from provenanced Ushabtis; two from tomb 39. one from tomb 50. and four from tomb 49.

‘Griffith Chronology’
-p9: Page titled “Sketch of History”. Beginning a long collection of notes on the chronology of Egyptian history from Dynasty I to XXV.
-‘Griffith Chronology’ - crossed through notes on “Lower Egypt” and its nomes and beginning of notes on the “Prehistoric period” and from “the accession of Menes”.
-p10: ‘Griffith Chronology’ - side note to content on page 11; concerning the “double title” and “double crown” with reference to “the two lands”.
-p11: ‘Griffith Chronology’ – end of description of Upper Egyptian nomes and further comments on division of Egypt and its relationship to the double title and double crown of the king.
-p12: ‘Griffith Chronology’ – side note to content on page 13; “Sem em Ptah is rightly used in suggestion of Memphis”.
-p13: ‘Griffith Chronology’ – description of the designation of Upper Egypt and beginning of notes by Dynasty.
-Dynasty I; discussion of Mantheo’s writing that Menes’ capital was based at Memphis (with footnotes).
-p15: ‘Griffith Chronology’ – Dynasty II & III; names of kings and localities attested in. Conclusion on the importance of Memphis Dynasty I-III (with footnotes).
-p17: ‘Griffith Chronology’ – Dynasty IV; discussion of this “brilliant dynasty” with specific reference to the achievements of Snefru (with footnotes).
-p19: ‘Griffith Chronology’ – Dynasty V; notes on attestations of Dynasty V monuments solely in Memphite necropolises and names of kings. Dynasty VI; discussion of Pepi I & II attested in monuments outside the Memphite region.
-p21: ‘Griffith Chronology’ – notes concerning location of the capital. List of brief notes on; Dynasty VII; “Memphite” “of utmost obscurity”, VIII; “Memphite” “little evidence of the state of the Delta”, IX; “Heracleopolitan” “This kingdom has left monuments”, X; “Heracleopolitan” “titles simplifying this rule over the two”. XI; “Theban” is followed by a table with lists of its kings, their muonuments in Upper and Lower Egypt and their achievements noted.
-p23: ‘Griffith Chronology’ – accompanying notes to the table of Dynasty XI rulers, first half being crossed through. Discussion of the god Montu with relation to the Montuhoteps and Dynasty XI and likewise of Hershefe with relation to the Heracleopolitan dynasties.
-p25: ‘Griffith Chronology’ – continuation of page 23; reference to a basalt scribal statue from “Nebesheh” of “Amunhotep who was priest of Montu, lord of An”. Significance is explained as “evidence of city in the E of the Delta important in the time of the Ramesside, to which period the monument may be attributed.”
-Discussion of whether “this Northern Hermonthis” being “Northern Heracleopolis” and that the war god Montu was the equivalent of Heracles, with the explanation of a parallel.
-p27: ‘Griffith Chronology’ – continuation of discussion from page 25 of family from Northern Heracleopolis intermarrying with the Antefs who ruled at Thebes.
-Discussion of the Abydos kinglist and chronology therein of Dynasty XI-XII; “the antefs being omitted” (with footnote). Dynasty XI; “Theban legitimacy doubtful Antefs fraud line through marriage with princes”. Dynasty XI; “put down by XII”.
-p28: ‘Griffith Chronology’ – side note to content on page 29; “the tribute brought by the Asiatic Abša & received by Xnumhetep is worth noting as an importance of dealings with the peoples on the Eastern border of the Delta.”
-p29: ‘Griffith Chronology’ – conclusion on previous pages of the ‘Chronology’ summarising the most powerful dynasties and their attestations in the monumental record.
-Dynasty XII; “Theban”, reference to the monuments of Amenemhat I, “Useretsen III” (especially those at Tanis and Nebesheh) and also Amenemhat III & IV.
-Dynasty XIII; “Theban”, reference to statue of Sebekhotep III.
-Dynasty XIV; “Xoite” “scarcely any monuments remain”.
-p31: ‘Griffith Chronology’ – continuation of notes from page 29 of monuments of Dynasty XIV, “The remainder of the 150 kings or more cannot be traced in Lower Egypt” while the first 50 kings monuments are attested at Coptos, Thebes and Abydos, “The remainder have left no monuments”.
-Closing remark as to whether they ruled at Xois or were “driven from the Delta by the Hyksos” “one cannot yet determine”.
-Dynasty XV, XVI; “Hyksos” Josephus quoting Manetho represents the Hyksos invasion as a sudden interruption of pastoral people into Lower Egypt”, “pillaging & burning” and choosing a king to “who took up residence in Memphis”. Reference to fortification of eastern border “against expected invasion by the Assyrians(?)”.
-p33: ‘Griffith Chronology’ – continuation of discussion of Dynasties XV & XVI; “The first 6 kings were constantly at war endeavouring to crush the native power throughout Egypt.” “500 years” after the invasion the Theban kings eventually drove them into Avaris. Reference to “Thummosis” making terms and being “allowed to quit Egypt safely”.
-Final note regarding the two accounts of Josephus with regard to the founding of Avaris, either as a fort of the Hyksos against the Assyrians or as their last refuge in Egypt.
-p35: ‘Griffith Chronology’ – crossed through note regarding the first dynasty of Hyksos kings. Discussion of little evidence to first kings due to destruction by the “barbarous warfare”.
-Notes on localities of monuments that have been discovered, the last of which is crossed through.
-Dynasty XVII; “Theban, the Sekenenra family of Theban kingship perhaps paying tribute to the Hyksos” and “contemporary with them” (crossed through note that the Sekenenra family had been subject to the Hyksos).
-p37: ‘Griffith Chronology’ – continuation of notes from page 35 that Sallier Papyrus I evidencing that the last one or two kings of this line began the war “which ended in the Hyksos being shut up in their capital and eventually driven out of Egypt”, with further reference to monuments at Abu Roaš.
-Dynasty XVIII; “Theban”, list of monuments of this dynasty in Lower Egypt of “Aahmes I”, “Thothmes I”, “Thothmes III”, “Thothmes IV”, “Amen III”, “Amenophis IV”. End of discussion about expulsion of the Hyksos not until 5th year of “Aahmes”.
-p39: ‘Griffith Chronology’ – continuation of discussion on page 37; Aahmes’ supposed campaigns to Nubia and “numerous wars were carried out in Syria by all the successors of Aahmes”. Discussion that the kings were “too much engaged in warfare and in decorating Thebes” to pay attention to the rest of the country. Reference to the “revolt at Buto under Thothmes I”.
-Notes concerning the importance placed upon Memphis and Heliopolis by the kings of the Dynasty.
-p41: ‘Griffith Chronology’ – continuation of notes on page 39; closing comments about “Thothmes III” and “Amehophis II”.
-Dynasty XIX; “Theban”, discussion of the absence of monuments of Ramses I and how Set I “spread them farther than any of his predecessors”, with sites referenced. Beginning of comments about Ramses II; “Ramses II placed his name & his monuments in every place which his predecessors had decorated” (with footnote).
-p43: ‘Griffith Chronology’ – continuation of list of sites containing monuments of Ramses II from page 41, including; “Nebeše”, “Qantara” and “Kom el Hisn”. Further discussion of location of monuments of the king, the “most remarkable” being; “1) the spread of monuments into the W delta for the first time”, “2) the restoration of Tanis on a splendid scale” & “3) the reoccurrence of monuments” along the canal “said to have been begun by Sesotris”.
-p45: ‘Griffith Chronology’ – discussion of the ‘invasion’ of Egypt in the 5th year of Merenptah from the west “by a formidable horse of Libyan peoples” “apparently settling permanently in the land”. Notes as to the geography of the west Delta and why it was attractive for settlement.
-p47: ‘Griffith Chronology’ – closing remarks on the lack of monuments in the west Delta and reference to sites where monuments of Merenptah are attested. Brief reference to Seti II who “fortified the E. frontier”, though “his monuments are known only at Heliopolis in Lower Egypt” with “Those of Siptah V ... are not found in Lower Egypt.”
-Dynasty XX; “Theban”, discussion of incursions of “Syrians ... into the Delta and into Upper Egypt during the end of the last dynasty”. Discussion of “Setnecht” and his relation to his partial namesake in Dynasty XIX, who “may well have been a Theban, freed the land from the Syrian yoke.” References made to his name attested on various monuments, including “a sphinx at Nebešeh” which “has been usurped by him”.
-p49: ‘Griffith Chronology’ – “Rameses III”, discussion of his title “Heq An”, given to him by his father when he was coregent, and his “conflict with the Libyans tribes” in his 5th year, 8th year “land and water fight” against “Asiatic tribes” and attack of the Libyans again in the 11th year.
-Discussion of Rameses III’s donations to temples and reference to his attestations at “Tanis” and “Nebeše” among other sites.
-Brief notes on the monumental attestations of Rameses IV, V, VI, IX, XIII & XIV.
-p51: ‘Griffith Chronology’ – XXI; note concerning the discussion as to whether there were two dynasties reigning contemporaneously “or whether the Priests of Amun ruled the two lands.” Equation of Manetho’s kinglist with monuments at Tanis and discrepancies with monuments in Upper Egypt. Conclusion that “The Theban names undoubtedly belong to a family of Theban high priests of whom cannot be of Tanite origin.”
-Table of names of “Theban” and “Tanite” rulers laid out side-by-side with one another.
-Further conclusion; “Thus the two(?) Families are intimately mingled”.
-p53: ‘Griffith Chronology’ – conclusion of discussion on Dynasty XXI; “thus we conclude that there was only on dynasty reining at the time.” As “if these had been contemporary dynasties there probably would not have been such considerable monuments as remain at Thebes & Tanis of this period.”
-Dynasty XXII; “Bubastite”, brief not that other than Manetho there “is not much reason to believe in its Bubastite origin” with “The names of the king and of their ancestors point to an original Libyan derivation”, with reference to monumental attestations.
-Discussion of “Sh.I”(Sheshonq) campaign in Palestine and “Usurped sphinx from Tanis?”. Notes crossed through and brief note about “Usorkon I” statues.
-p55: ‘Griffith Chronology’ – continuation of notes on Dynasty XXII; sites that “Usorkon II” and “Sheshonke II” built in. Brief note on “Takelt II” fighting against invasion and that he built at Serapeum. Further list of king’s names and where they are attested; “Sheshonke III”, “Pimai”, “Sh. IV.” all at Serapeum described as “a series of long & principally inactive reigns.”
-Dynasty XXIII; “Tanite”, reference to how “the names Pe du Bast & Ta tu Bast (the mother of Osorkon III) show that these kings continued their close connection with Bubastis”. Note that “the last king is probably the same as the Osorkon King of Bubastis” who divided Egypt at the time of PianXi’s invasion. Discussion of family ties of the kings with “Heracleopolis & Hermopolis magna”.
-p57: ‘Griffith Chronology’ – close to discussion of “PianXi’s” influence on Egypt, from page 55, and how he extracted tribute. List of names of “the petty kings” and where they were kings of (some in transliteration, others in Anglicized form – presumably taken from ‘Piye’s Victory Stela)’.
-p59: ‘Griffith Chronology’ – continuation of discussion of Dynasty XXIII concerning; “TefnaXt of Sais” who “put himself at the head of revolt & made himself master of the whole of the Delta ... as far as Heracleopolis”. Discussion of the response of “PianXi” and his campaign, the capture of Memphis and how “TefnaXt who had fled to the marshes was easily brought to obedience.”
-Notes concerning the admission of “chiefs” to the “king’s tent to do homage to him” and reflection that “PianXi’s account of this invasion is very remarkable”, treating rebels with “utmost consideration”, “to avoid bloodshed whenever possible.” As well as that “PiankXi was no doubt of Egyptian origin &worshipped Egyptian gods & the account of this treatment of the country is very different from those by which the Pharaoh’s loved to describe their warlike deeds in foreign lands” (continues on page 61).
-p60: ‘Griffith Chronology’ – side note to content on page 61; “with him [Shabaka] ally king of Gaza. This is the first certain notice we have of an alliance of the Egyptians with a foreign although numerous had been common.”
-p61: ‘Griffith Chronology’ – continuation of commentary of the rule of “PianXi” with conclusion that; “How far this treatment secured the alliances of the people is difficult to ascertain.” Note that after “PianXi” returned to “Ethiopia he left no further monument of importance.”
-Dynasty XXIV; “Saite”, brief note that “Bak en ranf” “Probably of the same family as TefnaXt”, “known only by his interment in his 6th-year”
-Dynasty XXV; “Ethiopian”, discussion of the invasion and settling of “Shabaka”, building at Memphis, conflict with Sargon “on the borders of Philistia”, his defeat and how afterwards he sought the friendship of the Assyrian king. Discussion of “Shabatok” and his “unsuccessful warfare with Sennacherib” and his attestations in monuments at Memphis.
-p[82]: ‘Griffith Chronology’ – brief note; “This list & that of PianXi shows the importance that the Delta was gradually acquiring”. Followed by a list of place names which correspond to transliterated names on the facing page (83).
-p83: ‘Griffith Chronology’ – commentary on how “Taharka put down Šabatok in his 12th-year” and made an alliance with the Phoenicians, how “Assarhaddon ... assisted by the Arabs reached Egypt” and Taharqa’s flight to the south with the capture of Memphis and Thebes.
-Note followed by list of transliterated names, “The land was then divided under 20 governors the following is the list” (corresponding to place names on the facing page [82]).

Nabêsha (Tell Far’ûn) [TopBib 401-150]
-p84: List of copied hieroglyphic inscriptions and notes on the material of monument’s fragment “from temple”:
-“a. grey granite” fragment of nswt-bity.
-“b. Limestone” fragment of wAst.
-“c. syenite (rose)” fragment of mr-n-ptH.
-“d. limestone” fragment of cobra with uraeus.
-“e. Basalt fragment of left side of back inscription on statue” several signs.
-“f. Limestone left leg advanced” “2 lines on side illegible” with inscription “on back” (1:2,12 of publication’s pl x).
-p85: “g. grey granite” “portion of altar?” a few signs and suggested reconstruction.
-“h. grey granite front of top”, later crossed-through and redrawn on pages 86-87.
-“i. Back of basalt statue Nectanebo’s style” (1:2,11 of publication’s pl x).
-p86-87: “h. grey granite” drawing of the “altar” reproduced in publication’s pl ix (1:9,1.a) with notes for reproducing relief at a later stage.
-p91: Crossed-through notes concerning the attribution of a stela, and the shrine contemporary with it, to Amasis rather than the 12th Dynasty (presumably “the small temple” of Nabêsha).
-p94-95: Copy of an inscription “demotic a pot from surface of SE hôshes. one written over another which is partly erased” (presumably from one of the pot fragments noted in publication).
-p94: Inventory of “Boston 6 boxes” noting contents of:
-“the small one 10 contains frags of complete amphora”.
-“L1 Defeneh pottery, 600-550BC”.
-“The Case 20. contains Gemayemi & Nebesheh shards”.
-“The pottery in all type specimens from Nebesheh”
-“There is also \besides of cases/ a crate contains limestone head of Ramses & a specimen of (?) and wrappings”.
-Copies of four cartouches and epithets (not featured in publication).
-p95: Copies of three lines and one column of hieroglyphic inscription (presumably from shabtis as with other texts in pl xiii).
-p96: List of copied hieroglyphic inscriptions and notes on the material:
-“inscription general. Nebesheh”.
-“a. limestone slab, line down centre” (publication’s pl x[14]) “N.B. if Saite, important as hinting at local worship of Amen after Ramesside period.”.
-“b. (not purchased) limestone fragment” several ḥm signs.
-“c. basalt fragment from town S.W.” various signs.
-“d. sandstone” various signs.
-“e. base & feet of statue left foot advanced (so male). Nectanebo(?)” (corresponding to publication’s pl x 13.a & 13.b).
-p97: “f. basalt crouching figurine hands crossed over ? sloped knees” (corresponding to publication’s pl x 15a, black granite statue of Amenhotep) inscription “on skirt in front” with further drawing of inscription “on base” (corresponding to publication’s pl x 15b).
-“g. sandstone fragments from town”, fragment of nswt-bity ḫꜥ -[kꜣw]-rꜥ.
-“h. basalt fragment from surface large tomb in mound E of cemetery with foundation mortar”, four signs.

-pBack Cover: “evidence of local mayor”
-“(1) local workshop”
-“(2) king of upper and lower Egypt”
-“(3) monuments spot”
-“(4) passages through lands”
-“(5) classical votives”
-“(6) names occurring”