Notes to First English Edition

For the following notes, to which reference numbers will be found in the text, I am indebted to the kindness of Mr. W.M. Flinders Petrie, author of "The Pyramids and Temples of Gizeh" (Field & Tuer), "Tanis" (Egypt Exploration Fund), "Naukratis" (Egypt Exploration Fund), etc., etc.

A.B.E.

More striking than these are the towns of Tell Atrib, Kom Baglieh, Kom Abû Billû, and Tell Nebesheh, the houses of which may be traced without any special excavations.

There is much skill needed in mixing the mud and sand in such proportions as to dry properly; when rightly adjusted there is no cracking in drying, and the grains of sand prevent the mud from being washed away in the rains.

In the Delta, at least, the sizes of bricks from the Twenty-first Dynasty down to Arab times decrease very regularly; under the Twenty-first Dynasty they are about 18 x 9 x 5 inches; early in the Twenty-sixth, 16-1/2 x 8-1/4 x 5; later 15 x 7- 1/2; in early Ptolemaic times, 14 x 7; in Roman times, 12 x 6, in Byzantine times, 10 x 5; and Arab bricks are 8 x 4, and continue so very generally to our times. The thickness is always least certain, as it depends on the amount placed in the mould, but the length and breadth may in most cases be accepted as a very useful chronological scale.

They are found of Ramesside age at Nebesheh and Defenneh; even there they are rare, and these are the only cases I have yet seen in Egypt earlier than about the third century A.D.

This system was sometimes used to raise a fort above the plain, as at Defenneh; or the chambers formed store-rooms, as at the fort at Naukratis.

In the fine early work at Gizeh they sawed the paving blocks of basalt, and then ground only just the edges flat, while all the inside of the joint was picked rough to hold the mortar.

A usual plan in early times was to dress the joint faces of the block in the quarry, leaving its outer face with a rough excess of a few inches; the excess still remains on the granite casing of the pyramid of Menkara, and the result of dressing it away may be seen in the corners of the granite temple at Gizeh.

Otherwise called the Granite Temple of Gizeh, or Temple of Khafra, as its connection with the Sphinx is much disputed, while it is in direct communication with the temple of the pyramid of Khafra, by a causeway in line with the entrance passage.

The casing of the open air court on the top of it was of fine limestone; only a few blocks of this remain. For full plan and measurements see Pyramids and Temples of Gizeh.

One of the air slits, or ventilators, remains complete, opening to the upper court, from the top of the niche chamber.

Below these lines, there is often a scene of offering at the bottom of the Obelisk.

Mastaba is the Arabic name for a bench or platform, and was applied by the natives to such tombs on account of the resemblance in shape.

In the few cases where the top remains perfect at Gizeh, the side ends in a parabolic curve which turns over into the top surface without any cornice or moulding; the tops of walls in the courts of mastabas are similar.

Another view is that they are derived from the cumulative mastabas, such as the so-called step pyramid of Sakkarah.

In the later pyramids; but the Gizeh pyramids are entirely built of Tûrah limestone.

Still more conclusive is the fact that in the greatest of the pyramids the passages are such that it would have been impossible to build it by successive coats of enlargement.

In only one case (that of Menkara) has a pyramid been clearly enlarged, and that was done at one step and not by many stages.

The earliest-- at Gizeh--are very accurate.

These slabs of pavement do not extend beneath the pyramid, but only around it.

Only fragments of the finest limestone casing have been found; the variety of colour was probably due to weathering.

This would be impossible with the exquisitely fine joints of the masonry; a temporary staging of stone built up over part of the finished face would easily allow of raising the stones.

There is no evidence that the facing block which covered the granite plugs was of granite; it was more probably of limestone.

The entrance to the upper passages was never forced from the entrance passage, but was accidentally found by the Arabs, after they had forced a long tunnel in the masonry, being in ignorance of the real entrance, which was probably concealed by a hinging block of stone.

Or rather it rose at an angle of 23-1/2°, like the descent of the entrance passage, thus making angles of 47° and 133° with it.

This gallery has obtained a great reputation for the fineness of its joints, perhaps because they are coarse enough to be easily seen; but some joints of the entrance passage, and the joints in the queen's chamber, are hardly visible with the closest inspection.

The only signs of portcullises are those in the vestibule or antechamber.

No traces of three of the portcullises remain, if they ever existed, and the other never could reach the floor or interrupt the passage, so its use is enigmatical.

There is some evidence that the pyramid was opened in the early days, perhaps before the middle kingdom.

Two rows of beams which rest on the side wall as corbels or cantilevers, only touching at the top, without necessarily any thrust. Such at least is the case in the queen's chamber, and in the pyramid of Pepi, where such a roof is used.

The end walls have sunk throughout a considerable amount, and the side walls have separated; thus all the beams of the upper chambers have been dragged, and every beam of the roof of the chamber is broken through. This is probably the result of earthquakes.

This only covered the lower sixteen courses; the larger part above it was of limestone.

Similar finished faces may be seen as far in as near the middle of the mass. This is not a true pyramid in form, but a cumulative mastaba, the faces of which are at the mastaba angle (75°), and the successive enlargements of which are shown by numerous finished facings now within the masonry. The step form is the result of carrying upwards the mastaba form, at the same time that it was enlarged outwards.

Not in all cases apparently, for the hieroglyphs on the passage of Pepi's pyramid are not injured, as they would be if plugs had been withdrawn.

Pepi's roof is formed by a row of large beams which rested independently on the side walls as corbels or cantilevers (see Note 29).

The mastaba angle is 75°, and the pyramid angle 50° to 55°.

Its present appearance is an accident of its demolition; it was originally, like the "step-pyramid" of Sakkarah, a cumulative mastaba, as is shown by the remains of the lower steps still in the mounds at its base, and by the mediaeval description of it.