Chapter VIII: Bibliography

(48) I have endeavoured to confine this bibliography to references which, directly or indirectly, concern the quarrying, transport and erection of obelisks in Egyptian times, omitting certain mediæval accounts such as those of Peter Gyllius, and such stories of marvellous Egyptian engines as are put forward by certain irresponsible writers. I have, however, given a very brief précis of the removals of the Vatican, Paris and the London and New York obelisks, as these have a general interest.

ANTIQUITIES DEPARTMENT, _Annales du Service_.—Several references to obelisks are given in the index of parts I–X, chiefly dealing with those of Karnak. In volume V, pp. 11 and 12, there is a discussion by Legrain on those before Pylon VII (section 11).

(49) BARBER (Commander F. M., U. S. N.), _The Mechanical Triumphs of the Ancient Egyptians_, published by Kegan Paul, 1900.—This is a popular description, in a portable size, of the best-known works undertaken by the Egyptians. In many ways it may be considered as a précis of Gorringe’s _Egyptian Obelisks_. It gives the details of removals of obelisks in modern times, shorn of elaborate technical details. He assumes that the large obelisks were raised in much the same manner as the Seringapatam obelisk (section 36).

BREASTED (Dr. J. H.), _Ancient Records_.—Translations of the inscriptions on most of the obelisks can be obtained from the general index under ‘obelisks’. Many of these translations are accompanied by interesting footnotes.

References to some large transportations are given in section 28 of this volume, to transport boats in section 34.

(50) CHOISY (Auguste), _L’Art de bâtir chez les Égyptiens_, published at 76 Rue de la Seine, Paris, 1904.—The author, in this work, gives what he considers to have been the ancient methods of building, together with his ideas as to those of the transportation and erection of monoliths. The chapters on construction do not come within the province of this volume. Obelisks are dealt with on pages 121 to 127. Under the heading of ‘extraction’, he gives some suggestions, or rather assertions, as to the manner in which the obelisk was given a curved surface, but none as to the quarry work. In his notes on transport by water, he favours the method described by Pliny (section 34 of this volume), which we know is not confirmed by an examination of the Aswân quarries. As to the method he proposes for the transport of obelisks, it is extremely laborious; the obelisk was heaved up by a series of levers acting on both sides simultaneously, {50} being packed from below after each heave. Figure 11, taken from his book, makes this clear. When the obelisk was sufficiently high, an embankment was constructed so as to make a ramp leading _down_ in the direction in which it was desired to travel, and the obelisk was pulled, butt foremost, along the ramp until it reached ground-level again, the process being repeated for the whole journey. His method for erecting an obelisk is, to me, mechanically unsound. Figure 12 is taken from his book; referring to it, he says: “Soulevons le bloc (fig. 11), en ayant soin de maintenir le remblai d’appui par les bajoyers. Arrivés à une hauteur telle que _a′_, passons, par-dessous, des traverses _c_ et un tourillon _n_. A ce moment rien n’empêche de déblayer les terres et d’établir en sous-œuvre une glissière _g_. La glissière faite, remplaçons par du sable les terres enlevées; retirons les traverses _c_ et affouillons le sable. L’obélisque, pivotant autour du tourillon _n_, va s’incliner suivant _a″_ et arriver à l’aplomb de sa base _b_. Il suffira pour empêcher d’aller trop long, de réserver en _d_ un arrêt qui le contre-bute du pied, et de retenir le sommet par des haubans.”

He does not tell us of what material the ‘tourillon’ _n_ is to be made in order to stand the enormous strain, neither does he give any details as to the material of the ‘glissière’ which would allow the point of the sled to slide along it without burying itself.

Choisy imagines the procedure after the obelisk had attained a vertical position to have been to fill in the space between the obelisk and the pedestal with filled sand-bags, a long sausage-shaped bag having been placed in the slot in the pedestal. The bags were then to be perforated {51} one by one until the obelisk rested on its edge and the long bag only. The empty bags were to be withdrawn from under the obelisk and finally the long bag opened and the material removed through the slot. This may possibly have been the method used with medium-sized blocks, such as sarcophagus-lids, but I very much doubt whether any bag would stand half the weight of the Aswân obelisk without bursting, besides, the crushing of the inner edge of the slots in the pedestals of all the obelisks at Karnak, except that of the standing obelisk of Ḥatshepsôwet (cf. section 40), is not explainable by Choisy’s ‘long-bag’ theory.

The book would have been infinitely improved if it has contained a few references.

J. COUYAT et P. MONTET, _Les inscriptions hiéroglyphiques et hiératiques du Ouâdi Hammâmât_, in _Mémoires publiés par les membres de l’Institut français du Caire_, vol. XXXIV, p. 54 (Imprimerie de l’Institut français).—References to iron-workers from inscriptions on the rocks at Wady Hammâmât (section 25).

(51) DECOURDEMANCHE (J. A.), in _Annales du Service_, vol. XII, p. 215, gives details of various systems of lineal measures which he suggests are derived from an original talent, taken from measures on the Abydos monuments excavated by Amélineau in 1899 (see section 18).

DECOURDEMANCHE, _Poids et Mesures_, published at Paris by Gautier-Villars, 1909.—This gives a large number of systems of the divisions of the cubit and foot and shews clearly how cautious one must be in deducing anything from a single unit of measurement unless it is subdivided as in the case, for example, of a cubit rod. It is possible, in this book, to find an ancient example of almost any unit of length which could be imagined.

(52) FONTANA (Domenico), _Della transportatione dell’obelisco Vaticano et delle fabriche di nostro signore papa Sisto V fatte dal cavaliere Domenico Fontana, architecto di sua Santità_.—This is a rare book published in 1590, but a good précis is given by Lebas in his _L’Obélisque de Louxor_ and in GORRINGE, _Egyptian Obelisks_. The obelisk was moved from the Circus of Nero at Rome to the Piazza di San Pietro in 1585, the method being the ‘heroic’ one of lifting it bodily by blocks and tackles. A gigantic tower of wood, known as ‘Fontana’s Castle’, was erected over the obelisk, being made of compound wooden struts of a metre square in section. From the cross-beams of the tower pairs of blocks and tackles were attached at four points along the obelisk, which was protected by matting and planks. The obelisk was first raised sufficiently high, being wedged as well from below, to enable a ‘cradle’, or platform on rollers, to be introduced underneath it. The obelisk was then lowered on to the cradle and pulled to its new site, first down an inclined plane and thence on level ground. The blocks and tackles were worked by a large number of capstans. The erection was done in exactly the reverse way to the lowering. The whole story as translated by Lebas, makes curious reading, and I cannot resist giving a few extracts. He says (_L’Obélisque de Louxor_, pp. 178 et seq.): “Public curiosity . . . . . attracted a large number of strangers to Rome. All roads leading to the square were barricaded, and a _bando_ of the pope, published two days before, _punished by death_ anybody who did not respect the barrier . . . . . On the 30^{th} April, two hours before daylight, two masses were celebrated to {52} implore the light of the Holy Spirit. Fontana, with all his staff, communicated. On the eve of the lowering he had been blessed by the Holy Father. . . . . ” Before the work began, Fontana told his workmen: “The work we are about to undertake is consecrated to religion, the exaltation of the Holy Cross”; thereon everyone recited with Fontana a _pater_ and an _ave_. Gorringe comments on this (_Egyptian Obelisks_, pp. 114 to 117) saying: “A striking scene it must have been and _typical of that curious age_”. If, however, one compares Fontana’s account with that of the erection of the New York obelisk, one is struck, not with the difference, but with the resemblance between the two ceremonies, the later one being undoubtedly more tedious to the spectators, as there were no inquisitors and familiars waiting in a corner, to mete out summary punishment to anyone misbehaving.

GARDINER (Dr. Alan), _Egyptian Hieratic Texts_, Part I.—On paragraphs XII, XIII and XIV, some details are given as to the removal of an obelisk from a quarry, the removal of sand from under a colossus during erection and the construction of an embankment of brickwork, set as problems by one scribe to another. The relevant passages are quoted _in extenso_ in sections 28 and 35.

GARLAND (H.), in _The Journal of the Institute of Metals_, no. 2, 1913; article on _Metallographical Researches on Egyptian Metal Antiquities_.—The author gives a very technical account of his examination of Egyptian copper and bronze tools and weapons by means of micro-photographs. He proves that the shaping of the tools by hammering was done either cold or far below the annealing temperature; by this means a better cutting edge could be obtained. He does not speculate on how far hammer-tempering could be carried, confining himself to the actual results of his examination of the tools as they were found and after annealing.

GOLÉNISCHEFF (W.), _Hammâmât_, II, no. 3.—References to iron workers (section 25).

(53) GORRINGE (Lieut.-Commander H. H., U. S. N.), _Egyptian Obelisks_, published in 1885 by Nimmo, 14, King William St., Strand.—The obelisk, which originally formed a pair with the London Obelisk, had already been once removed in Roman times from Heliopolis to Alexandria, where it was still standing. It was lowered by fitting it at its centre of gravity, with a pair of enormous steel trunnions supported by a steel tower on each side of the obelisk. The point was lowered (or rather it crashed) on to a tower made of wooden baulks laid alternately. A similar wooden tower was then built near the butt end of the obelisk and after raising the obelisk from each end with hydraulic rams, the trunnions were removed. The mass was then lowered from each side in turn by supporting the obelisk by the rams while a course of baulks were removed from the tower, and continuing the process until the obelisk lay on the ground. It was floated in a wooden caisson from the shore to the dock and introduced into a steamship called the _Dessouk_ by opening a port in her bows. At the American end, it was placed on a railway line and pulled to Central Park, where the trunnion and towers were again used in the opposite order to the lowering. For the short moves, such as moving it into the hold of the ship, it was rolled on cannon-balls running in channel irons. {53}

In the publication there is a very good account of the history of the obelisk and an excellent collection of classical and mediæval records relating to the subject. In his ‘record of all Obelisks’ he gives poor photographs of one face of each, accompanied by ‘best translations’ of the inscriptions, where the roughest hand-copies of the text would have been infinitely more valuable. Nowhere in the book can I find a complete series of measurements of the New York obelisk; in a table on page 145 he gives the heights, width at the base and the estimated weight only. To make up for this, the analysis of the granite and of the copper ‘crabs’ is given with extraordinary detail, and we are given a complete list of the objects placed under the obelisk on re-erection, which range from sets of coinage and standard works (p. 33), to _a small box, the contents of which were known only to himself_ (that is to a certain Mr. Henry Hurlbert). Cleopatra’s Needle, now rotting on the Thames Embankment, we are told, has beneath it among other things, a Mappin’s Shilling Razor, an Alexandra Feeding-bottle, a case of cigars and photographs of a dozen pretty English women for the benefit of posterity!

In Gorringe’s work, verbatim reports of pompous speeches, of which each stage of the proceedings seemed to provoke cataracts, total 18 pages of small type, while long dissertations are indulged in on the presence of ‘masonic emblems’ discovered in the base of the obelisk at Alexandria, and on their esoteric meaning; this in spite of the fact that their ‘most expert archæologist’ points out the obvious explanation that the signs commented on form part of an Egyptian word determined by the _house_-sign, and the ‘mysterious lines’, etc., are merely fragments of ordinary decoration from a re-used building.

HERODOTUS, H. Cary’s translation, 1861, Bohn edition. II, 125, iron tools used in the Great Pyramid; II, 155, transport of a monolithic chapel from Aswân to Buto. Mention of levers; II, 175, transport of an enormous monument under Amasis (section 29 of this volume).

LAYARD, _Discoveries_, p. 104; transport of a winged bull at Nineveh by means of a sled on rollers (section 29).

(54) LEBAS, _L’Obélisque de Louxor_, Paris, 1839.—A very interesting account of a gross act of vandalism, since the Luxor obelisks were the only pair still standing in their original position. The lowering and raising was performed by a huge compound derrick, consisting of five supporting members on each side of the obelisk, the power being supplied by capstans and blocks and tackles. The obelisk was lowered on to a wooden cradle on which it was dragged over a greased way, without rollers, to the water, and from the water to its present position in the Place de la Concorde. The water transport was effected by a pontoon-raft of peculiar design, the prow of which was removed for getting the obelisk in and out. Gorringe gives a good résumé of Lebas’ book, which is now very rare.

(55) PETRIE (Professor W. M. Flinders), _Arts and Crafts of Ancient Egypt_, published by T. M. Foulis, London, 1909.—Stone working is discussed in chapter vii. As regards granite, Prof. Petrie favours the suggestion that wetted wooden wedges were used (cf. section 4 of this volume). He gives valuable details as to the sawing and drilling of granite, the polishing of its surface and {54} the cutting of hieroglyphs. On the erection of obelisks he says (page 77), referring to the setting up of colossi under Ramesses IV: “A causeway of earth was made sloping up for the length of a quarter of a mile; it was 93 feet wide and 103 feet high on the slope, probably about 60 or 70 feet vertically, as the slopes were held up steeply with facings of timber and brushwood. The purpose of this evidently was to raise the great block by sliding it on its side up the slope and then to tilt it upright by gravity over the head of the slope. How the mass would be turned we have nothing to show, but probably the simplest way, by gradually removing earth, would be followed. By next ramming earth behind the obelisk as it lay on the slope, it would be quite practicable to force it forward into an upright position.”

PETRIE, _A History of Egypt, XVII–XVIII^{th} dynasties_, published by Methuen, 1904.—On pages 131 and 132 Prof. Petrie discusses the probable original height of the Constantinople obelisk, and speculates on the possibility that it is one mentioned by Ḥatshepsôwet as having been 108 cubits high (see sections 3 and 43 of this volume).

PETRIE, _Tools and Weapons_, published by Bernard Quaritch, 1917.—This gives photographs and drawings of each kind of Egyptian tool and weapon, compared with similar examples from other countries.

PLINY, _Natural History_, book XVI, chap. 76, and book XXXVI, chap. 14 and 15, transport of an obelisk to the Vaticanian Circus in Roman times, with details of an immense ship; book XXXVI, chap. 14, water transport of an obelisk under Augustus and the transport of an obelisk by canal under Ptolemy Philadelphus (see section 54); erection of an obelisk under king ‘Rhamsesis’ (section 35).

(56) WILKINSON (Sir G.), _Manners and Customs of the Ancient Egyptians_.—Although somewhat out of date, this is still the standard work on the subject, especially as regards arts and crafts. The portions directly concerning the subjects under discussion are as follows:

Vol. I, p. 276; boats.

Vol. II, pp. 211, 212; boats.

Vol. II, pp. 254, 255; probability of tempering copper.

Vol. II, pp. 300–312; quarrying, stone working and the transport of large blocks.

WILSON (Erasmus), _Cleopatra’s Needle and Egyptian Obelisks_.—The method of lowering and raising the London Obelisk was almost exactly the same as that of the New York Obelisk. The water transport, however, was effected by enclosing the obelisk in an iron shell in which it was towed to England.

{55}

INDEX.

Abandoning obelisk, reason of, 6, 10.

Alaqi, Wady, 12, 27.

Amasis II, transport under, 30.

Amenemḥêt III, expedition, 29.

Anastasi papyrus, 30, 35.

Balls of dolerite (see ‘pounders’).

Basic nuclei at Aswân, 12.

Bed of removed obelisk, 17, 20.

Bending stress, 42, 43.

Block and tackle, 38.

Boat, loading obelisk on, 33.

Boats, 32, 33.

Boning rods, 7.

Burning, to break up granite, 4, 5.

Calculations, ancient, 30, 35, 43.

Canal, suggestion by Pliny, 33, 49.

Capstan, 38.

Centre lines, 8.

Centre of gravity, 42.

Chisel marks, 5, 11.

Chisels,

— copper, 24–27.

— stone, 26.

Cleopatra’s needle (see London obelisk).

Colossi, 23, 35.

Compartments in brick ramp, 35.

Constantinople obelisk, 3, 43.

Copper chisels, 24–27.

— micro-examination of, 52.

— tempering of, 27.

Cost of excavation, 2.

Cracks,

— ancient examination of, 6.

— in obelisk, 6–8, 10.

Crowbars, 4 (note 2).

Cubit,

— alleged lapidary, 19.

— common, 19.

— obelisk, 20.

— royal Egyptian, 19, 20.

Cutting granite, 25–27.

Date of obelisk, 3.

Derricks, 38, 53.

Detaching obelisk from bed, 23–25.

Dḥutḥotpe, statue of, 30, 38.

Dimensions of obelisks, 9.

Dolerite, 12, 13, 26.

Double-foot, 11, 7.

Embankment for erecting obelisks, 35, 37.

Emery, 5, 27.

Entasis, absence of, 7.

Erection of obelisks, 35–42, 50, 51, 52.

— by direct raising, 36, 51.

— by embankment, 37.

— by embankment and funnel, 38–42.

— New York, 52.

— Paris, 53.

— Seringapatam, 36.

— under “Rhamsesis”, 36.

— Vatican, 51.

Expeditions for stone, 29, 30.

— Amenemḥêt III, 29.

— Menthuḥotpe IV, 29.

— Ramesses IV, 29.

Extraction of obelisk from quarry, 23–27.

Finger, division of cubit, 19.

Fissures, ancient examination of, 6.

— in obelisk, 6, 7, 10.

Foot, as measure, 11, 14, 17, 19, 20.

Friction of sled, 30, 31, 38.

Funnel for erecting obelisks, 38–42.

Geology of Aswân, 12.

Glaze, natural, on pot, 44.

Graffiti, 46.

Guide-lines for masons, 6, 8, 11, 17.

Gum, acacia, 44.

Gyn, 38.

Hammâmât, quarries, 26.

Hammer-dressing, 7, 8.

Hammer, granite from Saqqârah, 5.

Ḥatshepsôwet,

— obelisk of, 9, 14, 32, 41.

— obelisk on sled, 32.

Hieratic inscriptions, 20, 44.

Ḥori, the scribe, 30, 35.

Inscription

— on bed of small obelisk, 21.

— on rocks, 46.

— on ostrakon, 46.

— on quarry-face, 20.

Iron,

— halberd of, 26.

— preservation of, 26.

— wedges, 5, 26.

Karnak, obelisk of pylon VII, 9, 10.

Lateran obelisk, 9, 10.

Later project, dimensions of, 9.

Length of Aswân obelisk, 3, 9.

Levers, for tilting obelisks, 23–25.

— note on, 37.

Lines,

— guide, 6, 8, 11, 17.

— measuring, 11.

London obelisk, 9, 53, 54.

Luxor-Paris obelisk, 9, 31, 38, 53.

Maṭarieh obelisk, 9.

Menthuḥotpe, expedition of, 29.

_Mindâlah_, 13.

Modern erections of obelisks, 31, 33, 52–54.

Modulus of rupture for granite, 43.

New York obelisk, 9, 33, 52.

Nineveh, transport at, 30.

Obelisks,

— alleged 108‐cubit, 3, 43.

— ancient problem on, 30.

— dimensions of, 9.

— erection of, 35–43.

— extraction from quarry, 23–27.

— Ḥatshepsôwet’s, 9, 14, 32, 41.

— Lateran, 9, 10.

— limit to length of, 43.

— London, 9, 53, 54.

— Luxor-Paris, 9, 31, 38, 53.

— Maṭarieh, 9.

— modern removals of, 31–33, 52, 54.

— New York, 9, 33, 52.

— Seringapatam, 36.

— stresses in, 42, 43.

— transport of, 29–33.

— Tuthmôsis I, 9.

— Tuthmôsis III, 9, 10.

— undercutting in quarry, 23, 24.

Ochre, 11, 44.

Ostrakon, 44, 45.

Palm (measure), 19.

Palm-rope, 25.

Paris obelisk, 9, 31, 38, 53.

Platform above obelisk, 17.

Plug and feather, 4.

‘Pounders’,

— attachment of, 13.

— broken by blows, 12.

— material of, 12.

— provenance of, 12.

— rate of work with, 14.

— specific gravity, 12.

— used by hand, 13, 20.

— use with rammers, 13.

— wear on, 12.

Pounding, ancient word for, 46.

Pot found in clearing, 44.

Ptolemy Philadelphus, transport under, 33.

Quarries at Aswân, 12.

Ramesses IV, expedition of, 29.

Rammers, 13.

Rate of work in pounding granite, 14.

Records of ancient workmen, 18–20.

Reed cushion, 41.

Rollers,

— obelisk placed on, 31, 38.

— ancient, 38.

Rolling obelisk from quarry, 23–25.

Ropes, sizes of, 25.

Rusting of iron, 26.

Sand,

— cohesion of particles in, 39.

— packing with, 24, 25.

— used in erections, 35, 39.

Sarcophagi, unfinished, 12.

Scale models, 40, 43.

Seringapatam obelisk, 36.

Sheers, 38.

Sleds, 32, 41.

Slot in obelisk pedestals, 40, 41.

Softening (!) granite, 26.

Soldiers in transport work, 29, 30.

Specific gravity of ‘pounders’, 12.

Stains on dolerite ‘pounders’, 12.

Steel, 25, 26.

Stresses due to weight of obelisk, 42, 43.

Survey Department, 1.

Tempering of copper, 27.

Test-shafts, 6.

Ṭḥutḥotpe (see Dḥutḥotpe), 30, 38.

Ṭḥutiy, record of 108 cubit obelisk, 43.

Time taken in pounding out trench, 14.

Transport of obelisks, 29–33.

Trench on upper quarry-face, 17.

Trench round obelisk, 11–15.

Tuthmôsis I, obelisk of, 9.

Tuthmôsis III, obelisk of, 9, 10.

Undercutting obelisks in quarry, 23, 24.

Units used in this volume, 2.

Wedges, 4, 5, 26.

Weight of Aswân obelisk, 3, 9.

Weight of obelisks compared, 9.

Work, ancient arrangement of, 14.

(1) View from East.

(2) View from West.]

(1) Bottom of trench.

(2) Wedge & chisel marks.

(3) Lines for pyramidion of a smaller obelisk.

(4) Rough-dressing: “El-Hammâmât”, Shellâl.]

(1) Hammer-dressing on pyramidion.

(2) Black granite hammer from Saqqârah.

(3) Construction of sarcophagus lid by pounding.

(4) Embankment near obelisk.

IMP. CATALA FRÈRES, PARIS]

Fig. 1—Obelisk, platform and quarry-face from north.

Fig. 2—The upper quarry face.

Fig. 3—Bed of a small obelisk.

Fig. 4—Inscription on bed of small obelisk.

IMP. CATALA FRÈRES, PARIS]

_LINES ON UPPER QUARRY-FACE_]

SKETCH PLAN TO SHEW EMPLACEMENT

SCALE 1 : 1000]

SUGGESTED METHOD OF ERECTING OBELISKS_]

PUBLICATIONS

DU SERVICE DES ANTIQUITÉS DE L’ÉGYPTE (_Suite_).

LES TEMPLES IMMERGÉS DE LA NUBIE:

In-4^o avec planches. — Tome I, 1^{re} livraison, _Rapports_, par G. MASPERO et A. BARSANTI, Caire, 1909. — Prix: P. T. 193. — 2^e livraison, Caire, 1909. — Prix: P. T. 185. — 3^e livraison, Caire, 1910. — Prix: P. T. 250. — 4^e livraison, Caire, 1911. — Prix: P. T. 97.

DOCUMENTS SUR L’ÉTAT ANCIEN DES MONUMENTS. — Tome I, 1^{re} livraison, Caire, 1912. — Prix: P. T. 73. — 2^e livraison, Caire, 1920. — Prix: P. T. 125.

LE TEMPLE DE KALABCHAH, par H. GAUTHIER. — 1^{er} fascicule, Caire, 1911. — Prix: P. T. 385. — 2^e fascicule, Caire, 1911. — Prix: P. T. 300. — 3^e fascicule, Caire, 1914. — Prix: P. T. 145.

LE TEMPLE DE OUADI ES-SEBOUÂ, par H. GAUTHIER. — Tomes I (texte) et II (planches), Caire, 1912. — Prix: P. T. 434 les deux volumes.

LE TEMPLE D’AMADA, par H. GAUTHIER. — 1^{er} fascicule. Caire, 1913. — Prix: P. T. 314.

DEBOD BIS BAB KALABSCHE, par G. RŒDER. — Tomes I (texte) et II (planches), Caire, 1911. — Prix: P. T. 500 les deux volumes. — Tome III, par F. ZUCKER, Caire, 1912. — Prix: P. T 193.

DER TEMPEL VON DAKKE, par G. RŒDER. — Tome II (planches), Caire, 1913. — Prix: P. T. 290.

THE TEMPLE OF DENDÛR, par Aylward M. BLACKMAN, Caire, 1911. — Prix: P. T. 434.

THE TEMPLE OF DERR, par Aylward M. BLACKMAN, Caire, 1913. — Prix: P. T. 290.

THE TEMPLE OF BÎGEH, par Aylward M. BLACKMAN, Caire, 1915. — Prix: P. T. 238.

CATALOGUE GÉNÉRAL DU MUSÉE DU CAIRE (in-4^o avec planches et figures dans le texte):

AHMED BEY KAMAL. STÈLES HIÉROGLYPHIQUES D’ÉPOQUE PTOLÉMAÏQUE ET ROMAINE. — Tome I (texte), Caire, 1905. — Prix: P. T. 314. — Tome II (planches), Caire, 1904. — Prix: P. T. 265.

— TABLES D’OFFRANDES. — Tome I (texte), Caire, 1909. — Prix: P. T. 250. — Tome II (planches), Caire, 1906. — Prix: P. T. 193.

BÉNÉDITE (G.). MIROIRS, Caire, 1907. — Prix: P. T. 150.

— OBJETS DE TOILETTE. — 1^{re} partie: _Peignes, épingles de tête, étuis et pots à kohol, stylets à kohol_, Caire, 1911. — Prix: P. T. 138.

BISSING (W. VON). METALLGEFÄSSE, Vienne, 1901. — Prix: P. T. 100.

— FAYENCEGEFÄSSE, Vienne, 1902. — Prix: P. T. 122.

— STEINGEFÄSSE, Vienne, 1904. — Prix: P. T. 125. — _Introduction et Index_, Vienne, 1907. — Prix: P. T. 49.

— TONGEFÄSSE, Vienne, 1913. — 1^{re} partie. — Prix: P. T. 122.

BORCHARDT (L.). STATUEN UND STATUETTEN VON KÖNIGEN UND PRIVATLEUTEN (1^{re} partie), Berlin, 1911. — Prix: P. T. 344.

BRECCIA (E.). ISCRIZIONI GRECHE E LATINE (Musée d’Alexandrie), Caire, 1911. — Prix: P. T. 315.

— LA NECROPOLI DI SCIATBI (Musée d’Alexandrie). — Tomes I (texte) et II (planches), Caire, 1912. — Prix: P. T. 550 les deux volumes.

CARTER (H.) et NEWBERRY (P.). THE TOMB OF THOUTMÔSIS IV, Londres, 1904. — Prix: P. T. 250.

CHASSINAT (É.). LA SECONDE TROUVAILLE DE DEIR EL-BAHARI (1^{re} partie). — Tome I, 1^{er} fascicule, Caire, 1909. — Prix: P. T. 122.

CRUM (W. E.). COPTIC MONUMENTS, Caire, 1902. — Prix: P. T. 338.

CURRELLY (Charles T.). STONE IMPLEMENTS, Caire, 1913. — Prix: P. T. 343.

DARESSY (G.). OSTRACA, Caire, 1901. — Prix: P. T. 275.

— FOUILLES DE LA VALLÉE DES ROIS. — 1^{re} partie: _Tombes de Maherpra, Aménophis II_, Caire, 1901. — Prix: P. T. 250. — 2^e partie: _Tombes d’Aménophis II et de Thoutmôsis III_, Caire, 1902. — Prix: P. T. 97.

— TEXTES ET DESSINS MAGIQUES, Caire, 1902. — Prix: P. T. 88.

— STATUES DE DIVINITÉS. — Tome I (texte), Caire, 1906. — Prix: P. T. 313. — Tome II (planches), Caire, 1905. — Prix: P. T. 265.

— CERCUEILS DES CACHETTES ROYALES, Caire, 1909. — Prix: P. T. 410.

CATALOGUE GÉNÉRAL DU MUSÉE DU CAIRE (in-4^o avec planches et figures dans le texte) [_suite_]:

EDGAR (C. G.). GREEK MOULDS, Caire, 1902. — Prix: P. T. 119. — GREEK SCULPTURE, Caire, 1903. — Prix: P. T. 194.

— GREEK BRONZES, Caire, 1904. — Prix: P. T. 125.

— GRÆCO-EGYPTIAN GLASS, Caire, 1905. — Prix: P. T. 100.

— GRÆCO-EGYPTIAN COFFINS, Caire, 1905. — Prix: P. T. 290.

— SCULPTORS’ STUDIES AND UNFINISHED WORKS, Caire, 1906. — Prix: P. T. 218.

— GREEK VASES, Caire, 1911. — Prix: P. T. 290.

GAILLARD et DARESSY. LA FAUNE MOMIFIÉE DE L’ANTIQUE ÉGYPTE, Caire, 1905. — Prix: P. T. 193.

GAUTHIER (H.). CERCUEILS ANTHROPOÏDES DES PRÊTRES DE MONTOU. — 1^{er} fascicule, Caire, 1912. — Prix: P. T. 290. — 2^e fascicule, Caire, 1913. — Prix: P. T. 387.

GRENFELL et HUNT. GREEK PAPYRI, Oxford, 1903. — Prix: P. T. 88.

LACAU (P.). SARCOPHAGES ANTÉRIEURS AU NOUVEL EMPIRE. — Tome I, 1^{er} fascicule, Caire, 1903. — Prix: P. T. 265. — 2^e fascicule, Caire, 1904. — Prix: P. T. 175. — Tome II, 1^{er} fascicule, Caire, 1905. — Prix: P. T. 97. — 2^e fascicule, Caire, 1907. — Prix: P. T. 125.

— STÈLES DU NOUVEL EMPIRE. — Tome I, 1^{er} fascicule, Caire, 1909. — Prix: P. T. 375.

LANGE et SCHÄFER. GRAB- UND DENKSTEINE DES MITTLEREN REICHS. — 1^{re} partie: _N^{os} 20001–20399_ (Texte), Berlin, 1902. — Prix: P. T. 275. — 2^e partie: _N^{os} 20400–20780_ (Texte), Berlin, 1908. — Prix: P. T. 375. — 4^e partie (Planches), Berlin, 1903. — Prix: P. T. 375.

LEFEBVRE (G.). PAPYRUS DE MÉNANDRE, Caire, 1911. — Prix: P. T. 387.

LEGRAIN (G.). STATUES ET STATUETTES DE ROIS ET DE PARTICULIERS. — Tome I, Caire, 1906. — Prix: P. T. 338. — Tome II, Caire, 1909. — Prix: P. T. 250. — Tome III, Caire, 1914. — Prix: P. T. 250.

MASPERO (G.). SARCOPHAGES DES ÉPOQUES PERSANE ET PTOLÉMAÏQUE. — Tome I, 1^{er} fascicule, Caire, 1908. — Prix: P. T. 1 70. — 2^e fascicule, Caire, 1914. — Prix: P. T. 250.

MASPERO (Jean). PAPYRUS GRECS D’ÉPOQUE BYZANTINE. — Tome I, 1^{er} fascicule, Caire, 1910. — Prix: P. T. 275. — 2^e fascicule, Caire, 1911. — Prix: P. T. 193. — Tome II, 1^{er} fascicule, Caire, 1911. — Prix: P. T. 193. — 2^e fascicule, Caire, 1912. — Prix: P. T. 125. — 3^e fascicule, Caire, 1913. — Prix: P. T. 183. — Tome III, Caire, 1916. — Prix: P. T. 387.

MILNE (J. G.). GREEK INSCRIPTIONS, Londres, 1905. — Prix: P. T. 240.

MORET (A.). SARCOPHAGES DE L’ÉPOQUE BUBASTITE À L’ÉPOQUE SAÏTE. — 1^{er} fascicule, Caire, 1912. — Prix: P. T. 290. — 2^e fascicule, Caire, 1913. — Prix: P. T. 250.

MUNIER (H.). MANUSCRITS COPTES, Caire, 1916. — Prix: P. T. 385.

NEWBERRY (P. E.). SCARAB-SHAPED SEALS, Londres, 1907. — Prix: P. T. 250.

QUIBELL (J. E.). ARCHAÏC OBJECTS. — Tome I. (texte), Caire, 1905. — Prix: P. T. 250. — Tome II (planches), Caire, 1904. — Prix: P. T. 174.

— TOMB OF YUAA AND THUIU, Caire, 1908. — Prix: P. T. 265.

REISNER (G. A.). AMULETS, Caire, 1907. — Prix: P. T. 193.

— MODELS OF SHIPS AND BOATS, Caire, 1913. — Prix: P. T. 315.

RŒDER (G.). NAOS, Leipzig, 1916. — Prix: P. T. 375.

SMITH (G. Elliot). THE ROYAL MUMMIES, Caire, 1912. — Prix: P. T. 375.

SPIEGELBERG (W.). DIE DEMOTISCHEN DENKMÄLER. — 1^{re} partie: _Die demotischen Inschriften_, Leipzig, 1904. — Prix: P. T. 150. — 2^e partie: _Die demotischen Papyrus_, Strasbourg, 1908. — Prix: P. T. 193. — Tome II (planches), Strasbourg, 1906. — Prix: P. T. 385.

STRZYGOWSKI. KOPTISCHE KUNST, Vienne, 1904. — Epuisé.

VERNIER (É.). BIJOUX ET ORFÈVRERIES. — Tome I, 1^{er} fascicule, Caire, 1907. — Prix: P. T. 117. — 2^e fascicule, Caire, 1909. — Prix: P. T. 194.

WEIGALL (Arthur E. P.). WEIGHTS AND BALANCES, Caire, 1908. — Prix: P. T. 88.

EN VENTE:

Au MUSÉE DU CAIRE et chez les principaux libraires du Caire;

Chez ERNEST LEROUX, éditeur, 28, rue Bonaparte, Paris;

Chez BERNARD QUARITCH, 11, Grafton Street, New Bond Street, Londres, W. 1;

Chez KARL W. HIERSEMANN, 29, Königstrasse, Leipzig.

TRANSCRIBER’S NOTE

Original spelling and grammar have been generally retained, with some exceptions noted below. Original printed page numbers are shown like this: {52}. Original small caps are now uppercase. Italics look _like this_. Anchored notes (e.g. footnotes) have been relabeled 1–13, and moved from within paragraphs to nearby locations between paragraphs. Large curly brackets { } that graphically indicate combination of information on two or more lines of text have been removed. I produced the cover image and hereby assign it to the public domain. Original page images are available from archive.org—search for “aswnobeliskwiths00egyp”.

Page 2. The word ‹toune› was changed to ‹tonne›.

Page 7. The phrase ‹to slop evenly› was changed to ‹to slope evenly›.

Page 45. The phrase ‹form shewn in figure 10› was changed to ‹form shewn in figure 9›.

Page 46. The quotation mark in ‹“Thou beatest› has no mate.

Page 52. The phrase ‹to meet out summary› was changed to ‹to mete out summary›.

Page 54. The phrase ‹it is on mentioned› was changed to ‹it is one mentioned›.

Pages 55–57, INDEX. A few corrections have been made in the Index to improve the syntax and remove ambiguity. For example, the original entry

Chisels, copper, 24–27.
— stone, 26.

was changed to

Chisels,
— copper, 24–27.
— stone, 26.

End of Project Gutenberg's The Aswân Obelisk, by R. (Reginald) Engelbach