THE
NOMES OF EGYPT.
By
W. M. FLINDERS PETRIE.
43. FROM the earliest times that we can trace, Egypt was always
divided into separate principalities or administrative districts.
The earliest divisions were about the size of the modern mudiriyehs;
but they were subdivided as the cultivation and population increased.
Thus the primitive thirteen regions, which made the corn-images
of Osiris in prehistoric times, became in later times about a
hundred.
As these divisions thus fluctuated, the developments which they
underwent should be noted historically. The nome lists which
we have for study are mostly of a late period; but the lists
of cities where ceremonies took place, or where the fourteen
or sixteen parts of Osiris were deposited, shew us what were
the principal centres et a very early date. Other indications
may be gleaned from the double use of names for contiguous nomes,
inner and outer, or south and north, which shew the larger districts
which were subdivided. Another guide is the order of the nomes
in the Delta, the basis of which is systematic, though interrupted
by insertions out of order, which are therefore later.
In following the various publications the hieroglyph text should
be used, as translators have made curious errors in well-known
names, and a later compiler has even added to such blunders.
The principal sources of lists are the following, lettered as
in the table pl. vii.
A. Corn-figures of Osiris made at 13 cities. Dendereh. (Dümichen,
Geog. Inschr. II, i-iii ; Brugsch, Zeits. Aeg.
Spr. 1881, 79
; Loret, Recueil iii, 44.)
B. Ceremonies performed at 16 cities. Dendereh. (Dum. Geog.
Ins. II, iv ; Brugsch, Z. A. S. 1881, 84; Loret, Rec. iii, 49.)
C. Feasts of agriculture at 16 cities. Dendereh. (Dum. Geog.
Ins. II, xviii ; Brugsch, Z. A. S. 1881, 97 ; Loret, Rec. v,
87.)
D. Relics of Osiris kept at 16 cities. Dendereh. (Dum. Geog.
Ins. II, xvii ; Brugsch, Z. A. S. 1881, 96; Loret, Rec. v, 85.)
E. The order of the Delta nomes consecutively along
five lines of the Nile, beginning at the west. Twelve are thus
in order,
and eight others have been inserted later out of order.
F, G. Cities with relics of Osiris. These are thirteen
in Upper Egypt, where only seven cities appear in the earlier
stages.
Nine nome cities were without actual relics, and are therefore
later. (F, Dum. Geog. Ins. III, i ; this list scarcely notices
the Delta, and G, the Delta list, in III, xliii-liii, is so
full that it belongs to a later age.)
The standard list of nomes is found from the xixth dynasty
at Abydos (Mariette, Abydos, i, II), down to Ptolemaic copies
at
Dendereh and Philae (Dum. Geog. Ins. III, iii-xxv,
xxvii-xli, lix-xcvii). It is so generally followed as a standard
that it
is used here as the first column of the table.
H, J. The increased list of nomes in the xviiith dynasty is shewn
by the ha princes, and by the lists of Upper Egypt in the xixth
dynasty, H (Mariette, Abydos, ii, 12), and of the Delta, J (Mariette, Abydos, i,
14). Another list of additional nomes is too fragmentary to
be used
as a whole (Dum. Geog. Ins. I, lxv).
K. The coinage of the reign of Hadrian shews
the recognised administrative divisions then; but, as these
coins are rare, there may have
been coinage for other nomes which has not yet been found.
(J. de Rouge, Monnaies des nomes.)
L. The writers of Roman age, Strabo, Pliny, and Ptolemy, give
lists of nomes, all of the names in which are here given.
The two lists in the Revenue Papyrus of Ptolemy Philadelphos
are entirely for specifying the rates of tax, and the amount
of oil crop ; their order is therefore artificial, and they refer
solely to taxation, so that their omissions are consequently
of no value as compared with the lists of the Roman period.
We here avoid the complex questions of the identifications
of sites, as we are only concerned with the number and general
position
of the administrative divisions. The Geographie ancienne
de la Basse-Egypte of J. de Rouge is followed as the best authority
for the Delta.
44. We shall here consider the Delta and Upper
Egypt separately, and the Delta first because there are more
clues to the successive
subdivisions of the nomes. The Roman numerals here will thus
refer only to the Delta nomes until we deal with Upper Egypt.
The normal list of the nomes according to the standard of the
xixth dynasty, probably transmitted from the xiith, and continued
for religious purposes to Ptolemaic times, is as follows :-
Egyptian
Name. |
Greek
Name. |
i
Anbu-hez |
Memphis |
ii
Khensu
|
Letopolis |
iii
Ament |
Marea
(Libya)
|
iv
Sap-qema |
Prosopis |
v
Sap-meh |
Sais |
vi
Ka-khas |
Xois |
vii
Nofer-amenti |
Metelis |
viii
Nofer-abti |
Heroopolis |
ix
Aty |
Busiris |
x
Ka-kem |
Athribis |
xi
Ka-heseb
|
Pharbaithos |
xii
Theb-aht |
Sebennytos |
xiii
Heqa-ames |
Heliopolis |
xiv
Khent-abt |
Sethroe |
xv
Tekh |
Hermopolis |
xvi
Ha-mehyt |
Mendes |
xvii
Sma-behudet |
Pakhnamunis |
xviii
Am-khent |
Bubastis |
xix
Am-pehu |
But0
(eastern) |
xx
Sepdu-kemhes |
Phakusa
(Arabia) |
The Egyptian form is the name of the nome; and the Greek is
the name of the capital, from which that of the nome was later
formed,
except in three cases. The iiird nome was known as Libya ;
the xixth is not identified as a Greek nome, but its capital
was
the eastern Buto; the xxth nome was called Arabia. After this
we shall denote the nomes by their numbers in most cases. The
table (pl. vii) should be followed in this account: in it the
nomes are numbered in the order of each list.
45. The earliest stage which we can trace (Map i, pl. viii) is
that of eight nomes in the Delta, ii, iii, v, x, xiii, xv, xvii,
xviii. This is an earlier stage than even the shortest list,
that of the Corn-Osiris in A. With four in Upper Egypt these
make twelve divisions altogether; earlier than the sites of the
fourteen parts into which Set divided Osiris.
Next comes the division of the ivth nome out of the vth, separating
the nome Sap of the goddess Neit into the south and north
halves. This is the stage of the list A, Map i, which is marked
off from
all later lists by its ignoring Memphis, and shewing therefore
an arrangement of the country older than the dynastic age.
In other words the ceremony of making the corn-figures of Osiris
comes down from the prehistoric period.
The next stage is that of including Memphis, and Busiris
in list B. The latter is given as Daddu, which might be confused
with
Mendes; but in the list of relics of Osiris (Dum. Geog.
Ins. III, xliii-liii) Daddu is given
in the order as the city of
the ixth nome, proving its position in the earlier lists.
In both
nomes the name is an abbreviation of "the city of Osiris
lord of Daddu." It is probable that this title is "lord
of the four sky-pillars," and only by abbreviation is
either town called simply Daddu. The figure of a prince,
which is the
sign of the ixth nome, is that of Osiris.
The lists C, of the Feast of Cultivation, and D, of the cities
containing the sixteen relics of Osiris, seem to be contemporary.
Both of them drop out Koptos and insert Tentyra instead ; both
bring in Lykopolis in addition to Kousai ; both drop out Letopolis,
which was ousted by Memphis. The nomes up to this stage are shewn
in Map ii.
46. The next stage is observable in the Delta nomes, where we
can trace twelve of them in regular order (see Map iii), as stated
in the lists of later times. i Memphis is at the head of the
Delta; from here the western side beyond the river was followed
first, ii Letopolis and iii Libya occupying the western border.
Then between the western and middle arms of the Nile come iv
Prosopis, v Sais, vi Xois, and vii Metelis in order. Down the
east of the middle, or Sebennyte, arm come x Athribis and xii
Sebennytos. Farther east is the line of xiii Heliopolis, xv Hermopolis,
and xvii Pakhnamunis. While along the eastern desert lie xviii
Bubastis (the sanctuary of which was the Iseum at Hat-sera) and
its subdivision xix the eastern Buto. Thus the whole Delta was
divided along five radii, like the sticks of a fan, in regular
order down each radius. The total nomes at this point were
i, ii, iii, iv, v, x, xii, xiii, xv, xvii, xviii, xix.
It should be noticed that xii Sebennytos here first appears,
and is substituted for the older ix Busiris which was close to
it.
The earliest addition to this order seems to have been xvi
Mendes, taken out of xv Hermopolis. The relics at Mendes are
duplicates
of those of older cities, the phallus of Diospolis and the
spine of Busiris, both of which occur in the fourteen great
relics
; thus marking the secondary position of Mendes by its borrowed
sanctity. xix Buto was parted from xviii Bubastis, the nome
of Am being divided into inner and outer ; and the eyebrows
of Osiris
were adopted there, as a trifle hitherto unclaimed. xi Pharbaithos
took the ear, leaving only one ear to Sais. vi Xois claimed
the fluids, vii Metelis the shoulders, viii Heroopolis the
entrails,
already allotted to nomes of Upper Egypt. All of these seem
to be claims outside of the main relics. The zerti of
Metelis is explained by
the list of parts of Sokar in Dum. Geog. Ins. II,
where zer is
stated to be pesed, a part of the back, translated "shoulder" by
Brugsch. As burdens are said to be carried on pesed, it denoted
the upper part, or shoulders in dual, as zerti.
This agrees with the relic of the shoulders appearing between
the standards
of
Sais and Letopolis (Petrie, Abydos, i, 28 d),
and with the attribution of the shoulders to the Metelite
nome, as I concluded
last year
(Memphis II, 10).
Last of the additions to the nomes seem to be xiv Tanis which
had the dad amulet, and xx Arabia which had an amulet
of turquoise,
mafkat, probably the left uza eye otherwise
attributed to it. These nomes seem to have been formed so
late that they could not well claim an
actual relic.
We thus complete the standard list of twenty nomes of the Delta
(Map iv) as given in the xixth dynasty lists at Abydos, which
continued as the religious standard till Ptolemaic times.
Probably the actual organizing of this list belonged to the
xiith dynasty.
47. Already in the xixth dynasty there was
a far closer subdivision in actual use, as seen in hall D at
Abydos (Mariette, Abydos,
i, 14), which gives thirty instead of twenty nomes in the
Delta. Such a list shews the actual condition in the xixth
dynasty,
while the religious lists of past ages with only twenty nomes,
or sixteen or fourteen nomes of the Osiris worship, were perpetuated
for ritual purposes down to the end of the kingdom. So sharp
a difference between the religious and political lists as
early as the xixth dynasty, prepares us to recognise the very
early
forms of the lists surviving in the late documents for religious
purposes.
The Delta in the xixth dynasty (Map v) is represented by the
following nomes, the names being on the nome standards in the
list of Sety I (Mariette, Abydos, i, 14). See column J in the
table pl. vii.
Nome |
|
Order |
i |
Memphis |
1 |
ii |
Letopolis |
2 |
iii |
lost (Libya) |
3 |
[iv |
omitted] |
… |
v |
Sais |
4 |
vi |
Xois |
7 |
vii |
Metelis |
5 |
viii |
Heroopolis |
6 |
ix |
Busiris |
8 |
[x |
omitted] |
… |
xi |
Kabasa |
9 |
xii |
Sebennytos |
10 |
|
iii Ament |
11 |
|
xv Tekh |
12 |
xiii |
Ati |
13 |
xiv |
Khent-abt |
14 |
|
xiii Heqa-ames |
15 |
|
vii Khebt |
16 |
|
lost |
17 |
xv |
Baht |
18 |
|
xiv Zef |
19 |
|
iv Ka |
20 |
xv |
Hu |
21 |
xvi |
Hap |
22 |
|
vii Khas |
23 |
|
xi Merti |
24 |
|
ii Kherkher |
25 |
|
iv Aq |
26 |
|
. . . . Ptah |
27 |
|
. . . of Sety |
28 |
|
i Pa-mu-ne-pa-pe |
29 |
|
lost |
30 |
This list is incomplete, as there is no entry of the xviith,
xviiith, xixth, or xxth nomes, either in, or out of, order. It
seems evident that the ordinary list has been heavily surcharged
with new divisions thrust in at random after the xiith, xiiith,
xvth, and xvith nomes.
The grounds for the attribution of some of these new names
to definite nomes should be stated here. iii Ament and
xv Tekh are
well-known nome names. xiii Ati: this is broken, and there
is only a line of fluid pouring, and two strokes beneath
it ; probably
it is Ati, the canal of the xiiith nome (de Rouge, Geographie
de la Basse-Egypte, p. 82). The two strokes of ti prevent
attributing it to deb in the iiird nome (de R.
15). vii
Khebt is a name
found in the vith nome, but it is more probably the sanctuary
of the viith (de R. 40). Baht is the town of the xvth nome
(de R. 106); it is not likely to be the canal of the ist
(de R. 4)
or the port of the vth (de R. 25). Zef is the sanctuary
of Haremakhti in the lake of Tanis, xiv (Brugsch, Dict.
Geog.
988). Ka is probably
Hat-ka-ne-Ra of the ivth nome (de R. 23), or it may be
the river of the Saite nome (Brugsch, Dict. Geog. 811).
Hu is
in the xvth
nome, according to another list at Edfu (Dum. Geog.
Ins. I, lxvi). Hap is the town in
the xvith nome (de R. 113) rather than Hap
of the south or north in the ivth or vth nome. Khas is
per khas in the viith nome (de R. 38).
Merti is in the xith nome
(de R.
72, see 67). The two fishes, Kherkher, are the canal of
the iind nome. Aq is in the ivth nome (de R. 21). Pa-mu-ne-pa-pe
. . ,
is probably “the waters of Pa-penat,” which
was the domain of Bast in the Memphite nome (de R. 5).
Pena means
a reversal,
or change of face, so Pa-penat is probably a sharp bend
in the river, and “the waters of Pa-penat” agree
to this. Such a bend may be that to west and then to east
at Dahshur.
In a supplementary list at Edfu there are four nomes more in
xiii Heliopolites, named An, Hotep-hemt, Shen-khebt, and Men-asi.
(Dum. Geog. Ins. I, lxvi.)
48. We can now proceed to compare this with the later condition
of the Delta (Map vi) as shewn by the Revenue Papyrus, Strabo,
Pliny, Ptolemy, and the coinage of the nomes. We here rearrange
the later lists so as to compare them with the ordinary nome
lists, thus seeing what subdivisions of the larger nomes were
introduced. See columns K, L in the table pl. vii. The city names
are here followed.
|
Abydos |
Rev. Pap. |
Strabo |
Pliny |
Ptolemy |
Coins |
i |
Memphis |
x |
Memphis |
Memphis |
Memphis |
C |
i |
Pa-mu-ne-pa-pe |
… |
… |
… |
… |
… |
ii |
Letopolis |
x |
Letopolis |
Letopolis |
Letouspolis |
C |
ii |
Kherkher |
|
… |
… |
… |
… |
iii |
(Amu?) lost |
x |
Momemphis |
… |
Libya |
C |
iii |
Ament |
|
… |
Mareotis |
Mareia |
C |
iii |
… |
|
… |
Naucratis |
Naukratis |
C |
iii |
… |
|
… |
… |
Alexandreia |
C |
iii |
… |
x |
Nitriotis |
… |
Nitriotai |
… |
iv |
Aq |
|
… |
Phthemphu |
Taoua |
C |
iv |
Ka |
|
Prosopis |
Prosopis |
Nikiou |
C |
v |
Sapi-meht |
|
Sais |
Sais |
Sais |
C |
v |
… |
|
… |
Cabasa |
Kabasa |
C |
vi |
… |
|
… |
Hermopolis |
Hermupolis |
… |
vi |
Ka-khas |
|
… |
Xois |
Xois |
C |
vi |
|
x |
Gynaikopolis |
Gynaecopolis |
Andronpolis |
C |
vii |
Nefer-ament |
x |
Menelaos |
Menelaus |
Menelaos |
C |
vii |
Khas |
|
… |
Metelis |
Metelis |
C |
vii |
Khebt |
|
… |
Ptenethu |
Buto |
C |
viii |
Nefer-abt |
|
… |
… |
Heroonpolis |
… |
viii |
… |
|
Phagroriopolis |
… |
… |
… |
ix |
Aty |
x |
Bousiris |
Busiris |
Bousiris |
C |
ix |
… |
|
Kynopolis |
Cynopolis |
… |
… |
x |
… |
x |
Athribis |
Athribis |
Athribis |
C |
x |
… |
x |
Leontopolis |
Leontopolis |
Leontopolis |
C |
xi |
Ka-heseb |
|
|
|
|
|
xi |
Merti |
x |
Pharbaithos |
Pharbaethis |
Pharbaithos |
C |
xii |
Theb-nuter |
x |
Sebennytos |
Sebennytus |
Sebennytos |
C |
xii |
… |
|
…
|
Onuphis |
Onouphis |
C |
xiii |
Heq-ames |
x |
Helioupolis |
Heliopolis |
Helioupolis |
C |
xiii |
Ati |
|
…
|
…
|
…
|
… |
xiv |
Zef |
x |
Sethroe |
Sethrois |
Herakleouspolis |
C |
xiv |
… |
|
… |
… |
… |
Pelousion |
xiv |
Khent-abt |
x |
Tanis |
Tanis |
Tanis |
C |
xv |
Tekh |
|
… |
… |
… |
… |
xv |
Baht |
|
… |
… |
Panephusis |
Neout |
xvi |
… |
x |
Mendesion |
Mendesium |
Thmuis |
C |
xvi |
Hap |
|
… |
… |
… |
… |
|
… |
|
… |
… |
… |
Diospolis |
xvii |
Hu |
|
… |
… |
Pakhnumunis |
C |
xviii |
… |
x |
Bubastis |
Bubastis |
Boubastos |
C |
xx |
… |
x |
… |
… |
Arabia |
C |
The reasons for some of these connexions should be noted. iii.
Of all the four later divisions of the nome of Amu, that
of Momemphis seems to be nearest to the ancient city of
Amu. Naukratis is
of course an independent foundation. Ament, the west,
agrees best to Mareotis. iv Aq is placed in the northern
part of the
nome, and so corresponds to Phthemphu or Taoua (de R.
20). vi Hermopolis Parva (Damanhur) and Gynaikopolis were
both in the Xoite nome (de R. 27). In the viith nome Khebt
was But0 (de K. 43), as was
Ptenethu (de R. 37). Khas was Metelis (de R. 38), and
therefore apparently Menelaus represents the old name Nefer-ament.
viii
Nefer-abt was Heroopolis, which does not
appear as a nome in Roman times. Phagroriopolis, the "eel
city," was near this (Strabo), and therefore in
the old Heroopolite nome. xv Baht was the civil name
of the
capital, Panephusis, the nome being named Neout (de R.
105-6).
49. The nomes of Upper Egypt are a simpler
subject than those of the Delta ; but there are some
results which follow from our
study of the development of the Delta nomes, and of the
successive periods of the lists. The list A of the corn-figures
of Osiris
was seen to be the earliest in the Delta, as it was framed
before the founding of Memphis. So also in Upper Egypt
it is the shortest
list, only giving four nomes, v Koptos, viii Abydos,
xiv Kousai, and xx Herakleopolis. Brugsch's reading of
Elephantine instead
of Abydos is very unlikely, as Elephantine is always
written as the nome Ta-kens in these lists, and not as
the town Abu.
These four nomes of Upper Egypt, with nine of the Delta,
make the primitive thirteen divisions of Egypt before
the dynasties.
(Map i.)
The list B includes Memphis, and is therefore of the earliest
dynasties; in Upper Egypt it includes Elephantine.
Lists C and D appear to be contemporary. Koptos is dropped
out and Tentyra substituted. The date of this change may be
gathered
from Khufu being stated to have founded the temple of
Tentyra, and the cemetery there beginning about the end of
the iiird dynasty,
The xth nome appears, but not in the list of Osiris relics.
The nome Atf was split into inner and outer, xiii Lykopolis
and xiv
Kousai. The Fayum was substituted for Herakleopolis. Thus
six nomes go with ten of the Delta to make the sixteen nomes
of the members
of Osiris, Map ii.
The next stage is that of the various other relics of Osiris,
later than the primitive list of sixteen, see Map iii. These
were in ii Apollinopolis, iii Eileithyiapolis, v Koptos, vii
Diospolis, xi Hypsele, xii Hierakonpolis, and xviii Hipponon.
The total of the nomes was thus thirteen in Upper Egypt.
After this came the stage of Map iv, the addition of the divisions
which had no relics of Osiris, nomes iv, ix, x, xv, xvi, xvii,
xix, xxi, and xxii, making up the full religious list of twenty-two
nomes. This was probably the condition during the Middle Kingdom
or earlier.
50. At a later date (see Map v) a much
closer subdivision of the Nile Valley took place. There
were not only three nomes above
Thebes, but three more ha princes, at Hierakonpolis,
Latopolis, and Hermonthis. In the list on the temple
of Ramessu II at Abydos
(Mariette, Abydos, ii, 12) there are thirty-six
names within the nine upper nomes. And in Ptolemaic times,
at Edfu, there
is a supplementary list of fourteen extra names within
the first eight nomes (Brugsch, Dict.
Geog. 708).
Ha Princes |
Abydos
xix dynasty |
Edfu
Supplement |
Coins |
Modern Name |
x |
i
Abu |
(nome) |
|
Elephantine |
|
Nubyt |
Nubti |
x |
Kom Ombo |
|
Khennu |
… |
|
Silsileh |
x |
ii Deb |
(nome) |
x |
Edfu |
x |
Nekhen |
Nekhen |
|
Hierakonpolis |
x |
iii … |
(nome) |
|
Nekheb, El Kab |
|
Pemer |
Mer-ut |
|
Kom
Mareh (B.D.G. 1186)
|
x |
Any |
Per-bennu |
x |
Latopolis,
Esneh |
|
Agni |
Akhnet |
|
? |
|
Hat-snofru |
… |
|
? |
|
Heft |
Hef |
|
Tuphium
? |
|
… |
Hasfin |
|
Asphynis,
Asfun |
|
Ant |
Ro-ant |
|
Gebelyn |
|
Aa-mater |
… |
|
? |
|
iv Zerti |
… |
|
Taoud |
x |
Ani |
Annu-res |
x |
Erment |
x |
Uast |
(nome) |
x |
Thebes |
|
Maad |
… |
|
Kom
Madu,
Medamot
|
|
v Qesi |
Qest |
|
Qus |
|
Nubt |
… |
|
Tukh |
x |
Qubti |
(nome) |
x |
Quft |
|
Ha-si-ast |
… |
|
? |
|
vi … |
Nuterkhet |
|
Tentyra
(part) |
x |
Ant |
(nome) |
x |
Tentyra |
|
Nebut |
… |
|
? |
|
vii Seshesht |
(nome) |
|
? |
Pe-bennu |
… |
|
Tabenna |
Pe-zaza |
… |
|
Diospolis,
Hu |
… |
Ateb |
|
? |
… |
Samhudti |
|
Samhud |
|
viii Gerg
(Ram. II) |
… |
|
Girgeh |
|
Abdu |
Hat-asar |
|
Abydos |
x |
Theni |
(nome) |
x |
Thinis |
|
Nesh |
… |
|
Menshieh |
|
ix Apu |
… |
x |
Panopolis |
These lists unfortunately break off here, and the coins only
give Antaiopolis, between the xth and xith nomes, as
supplementary to the standard nome list. We see how far
more closely the country was divided in the south,
after the early times, and probably if we had similar
lists for Middle Egypt there would be more than eighty nomes
in Upper Egypt, or about 120 nomes including the Delta.
Roman Egypt is treated (in Map vi) as it was in the
Delta map. The Thebaid, from Hermopolis up, seems to
have been regarded as a single division, in the Revenue
Papyrus and Strabo.
The towns which he names are given in
the table pl. vii as towns, where not stated by other writers
as nomes.
51. We now turn to the relics of Osiris,
separated into those belonging to the earlier and later
nomes, with the numbers of
the nomes in the Delta (D) and Upper Egypt (U). (For
sources see Dumichen, Geog. Ins. III, i, xliii-liii
; Lanzone, Dict. Mit. 697-702 ; de Rouge, Geog.
Basse-Egypte.)
Here it will be seen how the earlier nomes comprise the whole
of the body ; while the later nomes only claimed duplicate relics,
or parts which were not at first regarded as separate.
The duplication of the head in the earlier nomes
is obviously political. Abydos had the head at first,
it was "the hill
of the head." When Memphis was founded by Menes,
the greatest of relics was naturally transferred
to the new
capital. The
confusion of three or four relics of the leg is doubtless
due to the foot
and leg not being distinguished in hieroglyphs. We
should note that the relic of Koptos is called Qeb with
the
heart determinative
; as qeb means duplication, or arm, it suggests
the large arteries of the heart. The relic of Heroopolis was
called Tem (de R. 56), and was probably tem, the
skin. The beqes or beseq of Busiris is unknown, but
the other list gives
the spine.
We have now reviewed the nomes, from the simplest list which
descended from a time when Memphis was yet unknown,
down to the full development under the xixth dynasty, which
was continued
on to Roman times.
52. The maps here given are solely
to illustrate the divisions of the land. The sites
which are known are marked with circles,
but where the exact spot is unknown the name is put
across the district where it is believed to be. We
have carefully refrained here from all discussions
of precise sites, as that is a very large and intricate
subject.
The most likely sites have been adopted, in view
of de Rouge's discussion and Ptolemy's Geography,
but in some cases a doubt
still remains about them. For our purpose the precise
site is a secondary matter, as we are here only considering
the divisions
of the land. The lines of river here marked are the
present ones, so far as Ptolemy shews them to have
been in use in Roman times.
Some short necessary connexions have been made in
accordance with Ptolemy. The lines not defined by
Ptolemy are omitted. Doubtless
the courses have all changed to some extent, but
we cannot restore them by mere conjecture. The circles
of towns are inserted the
same throughout the maps, for the sake of identification
; but where no names or numbers are applied to them,
we have no evidence
that they were nome capitals at the period. For brevity
the name of the nome capital is put instead of that
of the nome. The Greek
names are retained throughout where known, in order
to enable the maps to be easily compared together,
though of course they
are anachronisms in the earlier periods.
53. Regarding the periods assigned to the different maps, they
are only approximate, but are stated in order to give a general
idea of the age when the divisions were in existence. The actual
instances of the isolated mentions of nomes shew that, while
Map iii may have been the state at the beginning of the Old Kingdom,
some of the other nomes appear during that age. We find between
the iiird and vith dynasties-
Delta |
ii |
|
(L.D.
II, 3 ; M.M.D. 3.) |
iii |
|
(L.D.
II, 3 ; 34.) |
v |
|
(L.D.
II, 3.) |
vi |
? |
(L.D.
II, 5 ; 27, Khas-ament) |
vii |
|
(L.D.
II, 3 ; Sebek was worshipped in the Delta in three nomes
; iii and iv were western ; only vii could be eastern
as stated.) |
viii |
|
(L.D.
II, 3. This nefer nome would appear more likely
to be vii, but that seems to be already specified as sebek.) |
ix |
|
(Maspero, Etudes
Egyptologiques, 248.) |
x-xii |
|
(L.D.
II, 3, 5 ; Only the bull without distinctions.
Other instances are the bull with heseb(?), xi
nome, in M.M.G. e ; and the bull with two feathers
in M.M.D. 5, which is otherwise unknown.)
|
xvi |
|
(L.D.
II, 3, 5.) |
|
iii |
|
(D.G.
3, 17 ; Gebrawi.) |
v |
?? |
(M.M.B.
14 ; this may only be Horus.) |
x |
|
(M.M.D.
II ; Brit. Mus. 1223.) |
xii |
|
(D.G.
17, 18 ; Gebrawi.) |
xiv |
|
(Ann.
Serv. II, 258 ; III, 252.) |
xv |
|
(L.D.
II, 112 b ; 113, b, c.) |
xvi |
|
(L.D.
II, 110 h.) |
xix |
|
(M.M.A.
2.) |
xx |
|
(P. Deshashch, xxix.) |
These references are collected in the 1st volume of the Studies,
M. A. Murray, Names and Titles of the Old Kingdom.
54. Other indications, which thohgh
very imperfect, yet are valuable for their early
age, are those given by the carved slate palettes.
The earliest of these with standards seems to be
that with the
towns. This shews as the attacking parties the
Hawk, Lion, Scorpion, and two Hawks. The single
hawk is probably that of the 2nd nome
of Upper Egypt (Edfu) ; the two hawks are certainly
the standard of the vth nome (Koptos) ; the lion
and scorpion tribes do not
seem to have localised their standards later. The
next slate in style is that with the bull and enemy,
on the top. The standards
are two Jackals, Ibis, Hawk, and Min sign ; these
represent, in Upper Egypt, the xiiith nome (Asyut),
the xvth (Hermopolis),
the iind (Edfu), and the ixth (Panopolis). The
latest slate is that of Nar-Mer, shewing the Hawk,
Hawk, Jackal, and piece of
flesh; these represent the iind nome (Edfu), the
xviiith (Hibeh), the xiiith (Asyut) or xviith (Kynopolis),
and the iind nome of
Lower Egypt (Letopolis). We can see thus how the
conquering league was extending its resources,
first only from Edfu to Koptos,
next down to Hermopolis, and by the time of Mena
down to Letopolis.
55. In the maps of the Delta here
there is marked on No. I B,B, for two places known
as Behut, either
of
which might
be
the Sam-behud
capital of the xviith nome; the eastern is the
more probable. Brugsch names also a town Sam-behud
which
he places at
Tell es Semut, here marked S. In the Map i of Upper
Egypt will
be seen
two sites marked S, of Sam-hudet places in the
Koptite region. All of these names are certainly
prehistoric,
as they shew
the towns which were “united to Behudet,” the
hawk god of Edfu, that is to say the allies of
the hawk worshippers in
their conquest of Egypt, as the shemsu Hor.
In Map v of the Delta it should be observed how nearly all
the new divisions (marked by names here) are in the low lands
toward
the coast. This points to the coast districts not
having been fully occupied in the earlier periods ; thus we
see that the
expansion of Egypt took effect in the draining
and reclaiming of the lower marshes. The extra names were not
so much due to a subdivision of government, as to the creation
of fresh centres
of cultivation.
A general feature is that the nome capitals are usually at the
forking of the branches of the river, often close together but
parted by the stream. Such are iv and v, ix and xii, xiv and
xv, xviii and xx, ii and xiii. This shews that the rivers were
the boundaries of nome territories, and that we should not usually
expect to find nomes extending across a river. These positions
of the river must be ancient, as two capitals would not be placed
so near together unless there lay a river between them.
In Map vi of Upper Egypt the Phaturite nome is
not placed at Thebes as usual, because Pliny (who
alone
names it)
gives also
Hermonthis, Thebes, and Koptos, leaving no room
for it in that region. It may perhaps not represent
Pa-tu-res, ‘‘the
south land,” as a name of the Thebaid, but rather Pa-ta-res, “the
fresh or green land,” now Derut where the
land is made green by the Bahr Yusaf branching
from the
Nile.