FESTIVAL-HALL OF OSORKON IL. GREAT TEMPLE OF BUBASTIS (1887-188 9)- BY EDOUARD NAVILLE. TENTH MEMOIR OF THE EGYPT EXPLORATION FUND. WITH FORTY PLATES. PUBLISHED BY ORDHR OF THE COMMITTEL. LONDON: KEGAN PAUL, TRENCH, TRUBNER & CO., Lin, PATERNOSTER HOUSE, CHARING CROSS ROAD, 1892. — ET FESTIVAL-HALL OF OSORKON IL. IN THE GREAT TEMPLE OF BUBASTIS (1887—1869)- BY EDOUARD NAVILLE. TENTH MEMOIR OF THE EGYPT EXPLORATION FUND. WITH FORTY PLATES, PUBLISHED BY ORDER OF THE COMMITTEE, LONDON: KEGAN PAUL, TRENCH, TRUBNER & CO, Lr. PATERNOSTER HOUSE, CHARING CROSS ROAD, 1892. THIS VOLUME IS DEDICATED IN GRATITUDE AND AFFECTION TO THE MEMORY OF AMELIA BLANFORD EDWARDS PRHEFACH. Wuen I published the monuments discovered in the great temple of Bubastis, I was obliged to leave aside a considerable number of inscriptions, all of which came from the same part of the temple, and are of a peculiar character. There could be no doubt about them, they all belonged to a great whole, describing a religious festival which took place under Osorkon II., the fourth king of the XXIInd Dynasty. (Bubastis, p. 50.) This was therefore a distinct subject, which had to be mentioned, as a historical event, but the development of which was out of place in the account of the edifice, and of the city. It is the description of this festival which is contained in the plates of this memoir. However numerous they may be, they are far from exhibiting a complete picture of the texts which originally stood on the walls of the building, raised and adorned specially for the festival. It is easy to judge from the general plates how numerous and large are the gaps, caused either by time or by the action of water, or, worst of all, by the destructive hands of the inhabitants. The form of the building could not be discovered at first sight. When its remains were unearthed, the hall of Osorkon II. was a mere heap of huge granite blocks (pl. xxxvi.); each stone had to be rolled and turned, and paper casts were made of the inscriptions engrayed on its sides. When the inscriptions had been copied, order could be brought into this confused mass of writing and figures; the contiguous parts could be put together ; the angles, where they had been preserved, served as clues for the measures, and by degrees the form of the edifice could be recognized. It is evident that the inscriptions were not engraved all round the hall; they only covered the walls of a large gateway which led from the first hall into the second, and which perhaps was the only part of the second hall built of granite. The plates xxxii-xxxv. give an idea of the disposition of the walls; they form an entrance, which must have had an appearance similar to that represented in the frontispiece. The discovery of the form and of the nature of the building on which the inscriptions were engraved, enables us to estimate the amount of these valuable texts which have been lost. In fact, not much more than one-third has been preserved, and certain parts, like the northern side-wall, have almost disappeared. vi PREFACE. In a restoration of this kind, much is left to conjecture in regard to the position of the blocks, particularly when all the neighbouring ones are wanting; however, I believe that there cannot be much doubt as to the general form of the edifice. It is quite similar to the gateway at Soleb, where inscriptions referring to the same festival were engraved. All the linear plates of this volume have been drawn by Madame Naville, and printed by the firm of Thévoz and Co., in Geneva, who also executed the phototypes from negatives taken by Count d’Hulst and the Rey. W. MacGregor. I have to thank my friend, the Rev. W. MacGregor, for revising the text for the press. This memoir exhausts‘all the objects discovered in the great temple of Bubastis, from which I part with regret, remembering the rich reward which it has given to the labours of its explorers. EDOUARD NAVILLE. Mataeny, April, 1892. CONTENTS. The Hall ... The Festival The First Ascent to the Pavilion The Rising of the God, and the Assembly of Divinities The Second Ascent to the Pavilion The Offerings and Shrines of the North Contents of Plates Index PAGE —eSESE———————_EEE__EE IEEE BLES WON ACE a) aN Es Gi ee TEMPLE OF BUBASTIS. THE HALL. Tue festival hall is the most interesting part of | To relate its the the great temple of Bubastis. history would be to go over again that o whole edifice, which I have told elsewhere. Let us remember that it was the second hall, entering from the east, and that judging from the heap of stones, which is all that remains of it, it feet and a ions 1ad an approximate length of 80 breadth of 120. There the exeava and it is the part of the temple which We may began, gave t sum up briefly the chief facts of its history. The It con Pepi I. tuary of the original temple. 1e richest crop of monuments. ained a doorway with an inscription of I even believe that it was the sanc- We do not know exactly the architectural plan of the temples of the Old Hmpire, as very little of them ig still extant. They had*a fate similar to that of They underwent considerable changes, which most of our places of worship. perhaps wiped out entirely all traces of the original buildings. The great cathedrals of our days are generally constructed on the site of much smal If anything of the primitive sanctuary has been preserved, it is er edifices. in the erypt, hidden under the pavement, on which rest stately columns and majestic arches. It was the same with the temples of Hgypt. Moreover, the great simplicity of the construc- tions of the O festival hall dates from the Old Empire. | d Empire, the absence of orna- ment and of inscriptions on the walls of the | i} temples, prevent us from assigning their | proper date to fragments which have been re- used in constructions of a morerecent date. It seems probable that the temple on which were inseribed the names of Cheops and Chefren con- sisted of two chambers, the eastern one being the entrance, while the western was the sanctuary, the abode of a divinity, which one we do not know. This divinity was not Bast under the fourth or the sixth dynasty, not even perhaps under the twelfth. It was only much later | that Bast became the chief goddess of the city to which she gave her name. This small temple lasted until Usertesen JII., who raised architraves of large dimensions, and who probably altered entirely the old con- struction. He added to it the colonnade which may have been an entrance to the sanctuary on the western side. We cannot say what form the great king of the twelfth dynasty gave to his renovated hall. Undoubtedly it contained a shrine, in the neighbourhood of which the kings placed their statues; for in the great number of them which were unearthed among the ruins, there were some going back to the twelfth dynasty, although they had the name of Rameses II.; for instance, the statue the head of which is in Syduey,’ and the base still on the spot, perhaps also the colossi,’ frag- ments of which only remain. After the twelfth dynasty a king of the thirteenth left his name in the sanctuary; but 1 Bubastis, pl. xxv. c. eect plaocxatinrcs B 2 THE FESTIVAL-HALL IN THE we are uncertain as to what happened after- wards. It is possible that the first Hyksos invaders destroyed partly or even ruined the temple of Bubastis, if we are to believe the tradition preserved by Manetho; but admitting that the narrative of the Sebennyte priest is true as to the first conquerors, the monuments prove just the reverse concerning their successors and especially the last foreign kings, far from treading in the steps of the invaders, the last Hyksos left at Bubastis some of their most beautiful monuments, and Apepi seems to have raised in the temple important constructions. There, they worshipped their god, who was | Set after Apepi’s reign, but who may have been another before him, A. few statues of officials go back to the eighteenth dynasty, bub nothing showing a construction or eyen repairs on a_ large seale. Probably in the time of Amenophis III. the temple was standing in good order, and was dedicated to Amon. But before the | nineteenth dynastyit was again ruined. Though | Seti I. boasts of having renewed the edifices dedicated to his father Amon, he does not seem to have done much; it was his son Rameses II. who rebuilt the sanctuary, destroyed probably by the contemporaries of Khuenaten, the implacable enemy of the worship of Amon. Rameses II. began with erasing from all the architraves the inscriptions of his predecessors ; and he did it so thoroughly that, but for a few omissions and negligences of his workmen, we should feel inclined to attribute to him the honour of the foundation of Bubastis. He Javished embellishments on the hall of the sanctuary. He collected there a great number of statues bearing his name; groups in which he was associated with one or two gods, and also what I called the architectural statues, which haye a purely ornamental purpose, and do not pretend to give us a likeness of the king, though they have his cartouche. Later on, the temple had again to suffer GREAT TEMPLE OF BUBASTIS. from the wars and the state of anarchy which the country had to endure. I suppose that it was during the struggles which preceded the accession of Rameses III. to the throne that the temple was overthrown. It remained ina state more or less of ruin, until the Bubas- tites, Osorkon I. and Osorkon II., took to raising it up again. Osorkon I. began with the entrance; Osorkon II. reconstructed the sanctuary, to which he gave the name which we shall use henceforth, “the festival hall” Woes, or more completely ‘the hall of the Sed-festival.” It is hardly possible from a heap of stones to judge of the form of a building, especially when a considerable number of blocks have disappeared, having been carried away for various purposes. Before making a close study of the sculptures, I thought that they extended all round the hall, and that they were divided into two parts, the south and the north, like Egypt itself, each side differing in character and being distin- euished by the headdress of the king. But when the blocks were put together, when each of them was measured and the angles reconsti- tuted, we obtained for the building on which the sculptures were engraved the plan of Fig. 1. This looks exactly like the section of the door of a pylon dividing two halls, such as we see at Thebes, in the temple of Khonsu,® or at Kurneb,* or at Medinet Haboo.’ The pylon would then have lad the form shown in Fig. 2. What I think more probable is that it was an entrance like that which exists at Soleb,° between the first and second hall, a long door- way, the two sides of which are broader than the enclosing wall, and project into one of the halls, so as to form with the enclosure an angle where statues or colossi were standing (Fig. 3). > Leps., Denkm. i. pl. 83. * Td. pl. 86. ° Td. pl. 92. ® Td. pl. 117. THE FESTIVAL. Fie. 1. ty WEST. | al Several circumstances show that it was an entrance. The walls A and D are not vertical, they are slightly sloping towards the west, as | may be seen from the angle between A and B. | On A and D the king wears the double diadem, and the representations are converging; on both sides they are turned towards the door Ere 25 Fic. 3. Yo EA | carried on the shoulders of six | Inscriptions were al 3 where the king is supposed to go in. The first part of the walls B and E is slightly projecting, and is evidently meant to be a doorpost; besides, on the base- ment of the same walls we see sculp- tures nearly destroyed, representing the king, whom gods hold by the hand on each side and introduce into the hall. This temples; it is al is called ‘* The Introduction of the King { Jfa? (pl. xxvi.). It is probable that on this entrance was engraved the whole of the festival, and that no part of it stood on the walls of the hall. This would show that the walls were not sufficiently well built, or that the quality of stone was not good enough to bear The may have been made of limestone, and this fact : scene is frequent in the Egyptian ways at the entrance, and Ey such sculptures. walls explains why they have disappeared, like the pavement of the temple; perhaps also part of ks; but we see no traces of hereas there are quantities the hall was in brie them in the soil, w of limestone chips. We shall have to speak again of the temple of Soleb, where the so engraved on a doorway between the first and the second hall, THE FESTIVAL. THE most important part of the inscriptions of the festival, the text from which we derive the nature of the festival celebrated by Osorkon II, is found @im JPL we clearest information as to the There we see the king sitting on a throne or litter, a true ‘sedia gestatoria,” priests belone- The horizontal inscription which runs aboye the ing to a low rank, and called am khent. | Nay., “ The Store-city of Pithom, 7 Leps., Dinkm. iii, 123, 124; Mar., Denddrah, i. pleas #7 2ndied. py dl 2D a | 4 THE FESTIVAL-HALL IN THE heads of the bearers reads as follows :—‘* The carrying of the king resting on his throne; the king is on his way towards his abode.” Below what must be drapery hanging from the bars which support the throne, we read these words :—‘ All lands, all countries, the Upper Retennu and the Lower Retennu are trodden * under the feet of this good god; all the Rekhiu are living.’ The mention of the Retennu shows tbat Osorkon claimed the dominion over the Syrian nations, but it is obvious that in his case it was mere boasting. He never ruled over the Syrians, especially if, as is possible, he is the Zerah of the Bible, who was completely routed in his war against Asa, As for the words “‘ the Rekhiu are living,” it means that mankind, namely his subjects, in opposition to his enemies, of whom the Retennu are a type, are well provided for and prosperous.” The throne on which the king is sitting is called ~ Ie sep. At Abydos we see the a SF King Seti I. carried on the same throne by the Spirits of North and South, and on this occasion a goddess says to him :* “ Thou sittest on thy throne sep at the Sed-festival (the festival of thirty years), like Ra at the begin- ning of the year.’ The analogy with the representation at Abydos would already induce us to recognize in the festival of Bubastis a solemnity having reference to the calendar, or to a definite period of years. The inscription on both sides of the king reads as follows :— “In the year 22, on the first day of the month of Khoiak, the issuing (of the king) out of the sanctuary of Amon, in the festival-hall, resting on his throne; the beginning of the Ex) 4 8 The inscription reads p i, but I suppose it must be os S&S Ses Brugsch, Dict. p. 1412. as IAAI 2 2 ® See Inser. of Canopus, 1.9: <} mum fl 4 WES Sh d translated by évexa rijs rév évOpdrwv cwrypias. 1 Mariette, Abyd. i, pl. 31. GREAT TEMPLE OF BUBASTIS. consecrating of the two lands by the king, of the consecrating of the harem of Amon, and of consecrating all the women who are in his | city, and who act as priestesses since the days of the fathers. “They are as priestesses in the house of their lord, paying tribute by their work every year, when His Majesty wishes to celebrate ereab ceremonies in honour of his father Amon-Ra. As he (the god) granted his first Sed-festival to his son resting on his throne, he will grant him many at Thebes, the queen of barbarians. Said alond in the presence of his father Amon: ‘I have consecrated Thebes in her height and in her breadth, she is holy, she is given to her lord, her soil will not be visited by the inspectors of the royal house ; her inhabitants are consecrated eternally, in the great name of the good god (the king),’” This inscription contains many obscure points, on which we can give no satisfactory explanation ; but what is most extraordinary ig that it is found identical, as much as we can judge from very fragmentary remains, at a much earlier period, and in a region where we should not expect it. In Nubia, in a place which at present is not accessible, at Soleb, between Wady Halfa and Dongola, Amenophis III. of the eighteenth dynasty built a temple, or rebuilt an old one, some ruins of which have been pre- served.’ In this temple, which he dedicated to “his living image on earth,” to himself, represented as a man with the horns of Amon, Amenophis III. is seen celebrating a festival which is in an abridged form exactly the same as at Bubastis, and the sculptures of which are engrayed at a corresponding place, on the entrance to the second hall. Amenophis is seen carried on his litter, holding the same emblems as Osorkon. The inscription is much weathered, but what remains of it is identical with that of Bubastis. * Leps., Denkm, i. 116, 117, iii. 83-87, THE FESTIVAL. 5 Several of the scenes which we shall meet | says, that for this occasion all the gods of Upper with occur also at Soleb, and especially the place where the Sed-festival was celebrated, a pavi- lion on the top of the temple called gS ip The two pavilions of Soleb and Bubastis are very much alike; at Soleb, in front of it, are | : ale Osorkon did the same, he renewed ‘the divine the remains of an inscription nearly destroyed : “The access (?) to the Sed-festival.’’ This proves that the ceremony at Bubastis was also a Sed-festival. A difference to be noted between the two temples is, that while at Soleb the king is represented wearing the crown of Lower Egypt, at Bubastis he has various head- dresses. A mention of the Sed-festival is found in the great Harris papyrus of the British Museum, what he has done at Memphis, says : 4 ““T made thee the first Sed-festival of my reign, in the great festivals of Tonen. I redoubled to thee what was done in the pavilion. I appointed to thee sacrifices of numerous offerings of bread, wine, beer, spirits, fruits, young cattle, calves, as ib were hundreds of thousands, bulls by tens of thou- | sands, without number; products of the districts of Heypt, like the sands of the shore. The gods of the north and south are assembled within it. I restored thy divine house in the halls of the my I provided for the wish of all thy gods Sed-festivals, which were ruined before reign. at the Sed-festivals,’ gold, silver, and stones, as they were before.” This sounds very like a description of what There are some Rameses says, that is represented at Bubastis. remarkable coincidences. it takes place in the pavilion which he had | He constructed or renewed for this purpose.® ° For the variants see Brugsch, Dict. p. 1552, Suppl. p. 1331. * Paps artis, ipl, xix, |) 10) and (Si, translation with slight changes, 7 e | Sm S rh 5 Pap. Harris, pl. xlv. 3. I use Birch’s There Rameses IIT., speaking of | and Lower Egypt were gathered at Memphis. The same solemn Bubastis, sculptured on its walls. Rameses had reconstructed the divine abode of Phthah, “‘in the halls of the Sed-festivals.” gathering takes place at and is abode of Amon in the hall of the Sed-festival.” Wale ical Nn III. informs us that the first Sed-festival of his mw —— [wr Lastly, Rameses (2) NN reign was to coincide with the great festivals of Tonen. This god being a form of Phthah, the god of Memphis, his being mentioned when the king describes what he has done for this city, does not scem at allextraordinary; but at Bubastis the same thing occurs. We read (pl. . oaSs> F ae : : xly.) @ lal] vow qd. “the festival of Phthah Tonen takes place,’ and the priest who is lying down on the floor ‘worships the god four times.” This mention of Phthah Tonen, which seems strange at first sight, probably that the of Osorkon celebrated at the same time as that of Tonen, which perhaps took place in a different city. Sed- thirty years, the I need king being called SS [alls or Ss [alls] ‘‘lord of the Sed-periods,” de Ak ammo DP] gh “like his father Phthah Tonen.” This god could not e forgotten at Bubastis, for it is he who indicates festiva is Tonen is, in fact, the patron of the festival, of the period of TpiakovtaeTnpis, after which it recurs. not quote instances of the causes the festival to occur at the proper time; hat is the reason why we find his name so unexpectedly; otherwise he appears only as one of the visitors at the festival, and he takes part with other gods in the kind of blessing which is conferred on the king while he is | sitting on his throne in the pavilion (pl. ii.). There is no doubt that the festival of which Osorkon left us a description, is the festival 6 : THE FESTIVAL-HALL IN THE called in Egyptian Heb Sed [eee WA es, an or [all This festival corresponds to a period which in the titles of Ptolemy Hpiphanes, quoted by the Rosetta stone, is translated tptaxovra- evypis, a period of thirty years. On this point the inscription discovered at Bubastis raises a difficulty which at present we are not able to explain. The date of the festival at Soleb is destroyed, and as we know that Amenophis IIT. reigned at least thirty-six years, he may have celebrated his festival in the thirtieth year of his reign. We can understand also Rameses IIl., who wrote his papyrus in the thirty- second year of his reign, saying that he had | celebrated at Memphis his first anniversary of thirty years. But, how can Osorkon II. celebrate it in the twenty-second year of his reign P for it is certain that the date is twenty- two. The signs are all distinct, except the n which is on the left of the column, and there is no room for inserting another M which would | make thirty-two. We are compelled to admit that it is twenty-two. it in advance? or is the period reckoned in- Does Osorkon celebrate dependently of his rcign, and does it include It would be the first example of this manner of reckoning eight years of his predecessor ? the years. division of time above | renp, the year. We constantly meet with promises of this kind: give thee millions of thirty years, thy years are eternal:’? as we should say, I give thee millions of centuries. tions of Bubastis totally disagree with the Here again the inscrip- 7 The sign occurs here in various forms, but AR is never found. See pl. ix. 9. dat ® At Soleb we find (Leps., Denkm. iii. 87, ¢) a YW? | iN GREAT TEMPLE OF BUBASTIS. meaning which seems well established. On pl. xvii. 11, we see Bast standing before the king, who offers her the clepsydra, and the text reads: He gives thee Sed periods of twelve years each. The sign 0 ten is broken on the right side, but a careful measurement shows that there is no room for another N ten, only for the sign /{ year. Later on, under the reign of Nekht- horheb,® an inscription speaks of Sed periods of fifty years each; the stone is broken in the middle of the number, which was perhaps higher than fifty. At present I see no way of reconciling these different statements, which seem to contradict each other. One thing is certain, the festival at Bubastis was connected in some way with the calendar. | It was the beginning or the end of a definite period; it was not one of the ordinary religious festivals, recurring every year on a certain day of the month, and moving through the different seasons with the vague year, which was one ourth of a day shorter than the solar year. | The festival occurred at a fixed historical date ; and the other instances we know, under previous