or even in the Semitic group, has been going on for only a little over a quarter of a century in Egyptian. This is no reflection on the work of the first two generations of Egyptologists, for such work was impossible in their day. In this quarter-century, immense progress has been made and certain definite results have been attained. It cannot be said that these results have yet been applied to the understanding of the historical documents of Egypt as a whole. One of the main purposes of this work has been the attainment of this end. Indeed, its chief object may be indicated in this connection as: first, the attainment of copies which in correctness adequately reproduce the original document; and, second, an English version which shall embody our modern knowledge of the language. Every effort has been made to realize these two aims, and only in such degree as they may have been attained will these volumes form a contribution to knowledge.

In the selection of documents there has sometimes been difficulty in deciding what should and what should not be included by the term "historical document." All purely religious compositions, as well as all exclusively literary documents (belles-lettres), all science, like mathematics and medicine, and in most cases all business documents, have been excluded. In the Old Kingdom, however, the last have been included, in view of the limited materials surviving from that distant age. It is hoped that these other classes of documents will appear in further volumes of this series. In all cases, however, where the other classes of documents were of vital historical importance—that is, bore directly on events and conditions closely touching the career of the Egyptian state-they have been included here. These volumes, therefore, include the entire series of written documents from which we draw our knowledge

of the career of the Nile valley peoples as a nation, until the beginning of permanent foreign domination at the advent of the Persians in 525 B. C.

Besides furnishing an English version of these documents, the scope of this work also includes the proper introduction of the reader to their intelligent study; hence the versions are accompanied by notes and introductions. These are threefold in character. Firstly, in a footnote appended to the title of each document, the reader will find a brief description of it, indicating whether it is of stone or papyrus, a stela, a relief, an obelisk, or whatever it may be, with statement of its size and material whenever the data were obtainable. The state of preservation is noted, and then all the publications in which the text of the monument has appeared. In a word, this footnote contains the lower criticism of the document. No attempt has been made to add to the bibliography the various treatments and discussions of the monument which have at various times appeared. The bulk of these essays are long since obsolete, and the time has certainly come when we can detach our usable bibliography from this incumbering inheritance, without at the same time failing to recognize with gratitude the great service which it once rendered to the science. Furthermore, it has seemed a duty to indicate to the reader in this footnote, the comparative value of the more important publications of the text. If an edition of the text has proved inaccurate and untrustworthy, it is but right that it should be known as such. In a purely objective and impersonal manner, therefore, such materials have been characterized in these introductory footnotes.

Secondly, each monument is supplied with a usually short introduction, setting forth the historical significance of the document, its character, and, where necessary, a

a

résumé of its content. It therefore contains in brief compass the higher criticism of the document. Much of the historical background, and literary value of the more important documents will be found set forth more fully in the author's History of Egypt, which is based upon the documentary sources in these volumes. As a further aid in gaining a comprehensive idea of the content, the version of each document itself has been divided into logical paragraphs, each with a subtitle. It is intended that by this plan a given passage of the document may be referred to by number, thus furnishing a very brief system of reference to all the monuments, by means of the volume number (Roman) followed by the paragraph number (Arabic).

Thirdly, the version of each monument is accompanied by running footnotes explaining obscure matters in the text as far as possible. It has been impossible to make these any fuller, although the author is quite aware that many details requiring explanation have been left without comment. It has been his especial endeavor to adduce in the footnotes, or at least call attention to, all related matter, whether in this series of translations or elsewhere among the monuments of Egypt. It has often been more convenient to introduce a very brief or fragmentary inscription of a few words in a footnote attached to a related passage in some larger document, than to give such flotsam and jetsam independent heads as separate documents. It is expected to render these all easily discoverable in the index. The maps necessary to an understanding of the geography of the monuments will also appear with the index.

I have attempted to solve the unwelcome problem of the transliteration of Egyptian words and names by giving

aA History of Egypt, large 8vo, 640 pp., 200 illustrations, Charles Scribner's Sons, New York, 1905.

the proper names where necessary in two forms: first, a vocalized form for the layman; and, second, a purely consonantal transliteration placed after it in parentheses. As the layman for whom the first is intended knows nothing of Egyptian orthography, it is not important that he shall be able to recognize in the forms the consonants of the original. This vocalized form should, however, as nearly as possible reproduce the consonants upon which it is based, without introducing elements unintelligible to the layman. Hence I have ignored' and ', y becomes i or y, and w is indicated by u or w. The consonantal transliteration adopted is the most nearly satisfactory system yet evolved, viz., that of the Berlin school, with some slight modifications. It is as follows:

In the so-called "syllabic orthography" employed by the Egyptians in writing foreign words, only the first consonant of each biconsonantal sign has any significance. The second has no phonetic value in such words.

This is not the place to discuss the closer equivalences of these consonants. It is probable the ' (Eagle) diverges

"The nature of the difference between this and the following f is entirely obscure. From the Middle Kingdom on, they represent the same sound. Herein the distinction has been consistently indicated only in the Old Kingdom.

slightly from the pure aleph of the Semitic languages, while the initial y has frequently become an aleph. It has not seemed wise to burden a work of this character with such distinctions, and the y appearing in these volumes at the beginning of a word merely indicates that the initial consonant of the original word is "reed-leaf" without predicating anything as to whether its sound is or N.

To the numerous colleagues in Europe who have been so ready with assistance whenever called upon, I would here publicly express the deepest obligation. For untrammeled access to their collections, and never-failing co-operation, my sincere acknowledgments are due to the authorities of the museums at Berlin, London (British Museum, University College, Petrie Collections), Paris (Louvre, Bibliothèque Nationale, Musée Guimet), Vienna (Hofmuseum), Leyden, Munich, Rome (Vatican, and Capitoline), Florence (Museo Archæologico), Bologna, Naples, Turin, Pisa, Geneva, Lyons, Liverpool, and some others. It is with the greatest pleasure that I recall the years of work in the Berlin Museum to which these volumes have called me. It would be impossible, were I to attempt it, to enumerate the daily kindnesses or tell of the constant co-operation which I have enjoyed there. For daily access to the materials of the academic Dictionary, already mentioned, I would express to Professor Erman, and the gentlemen of the Dictionary staff, my hearty thanks. For never-failing personal counsel and aid my thanks are also due to Erman, Schaefer, and Sethe; while Steindorff, Borchardt, Spiegelberg, Gardiner, Bissing, Weigall, Newberry, Petrie, and Legrain have placed valuable copies, collations, photographs, or reports at my disposal. The unremitting labors of Maspero and Wiedemann have given us indispensable bibliographies of the historical documents, and these have been of great service to me—a service