B.C. 2300]

REIGN OF AU-AB-RĂ

75

by him in the same year; it lay near the southern brick pyramid to the west of the village of Menshûyya, and formed one of a row of interesting sepulchres. The inscriptions on the objects found therein show that ÃUAB-RA adopted as his Horus name that of Ḥeru, which is written on the things dedicated to the KA in the form

,

i.e., with the hawk of Horus wearing the crowns of the South and North. Among the funeral furniture in the tomb worthy of special notice is the wooden statue of the KA or "double" of the king, which stood upright, as if in the act of walking, in a wooden shrine; this representation of the "double" of a dead man is unique. Above the head of the statue was fixed a wooden emblem of the KA, L, and the eyebrows, the nails of the hands and feet, etc., were covered with thin leaves of gold; the proportions of this fine figure prove it to be the work of a master craftsman, and merit M. de Morgan's eulogy. But interesting as this "find" may be archaeologically, it is not so important for historical considerations as the assignment to the king or prince, for whom the statue was made, of his correct place in the list of the kings of Egypt. M. de Morgan is of opinion that the tomb of Au-ȧb-Rā is contemporary with the building of the pyramid near which it was built, and as the funeral furniture found in the

"Le corps est parfait d'équilibre et de proportions et l'étude "de ses différentes parties décèle une connaissance approfondie de "la myologie dissimulée sous le jeu large du ciseau." Fouilles à Dahchour, p. 92.

tomb resembles that of many well-known tombs of the XIIth Dynasty, he hesitates not to declare that this king or prince flourished at this period. He notices the important fact that the box which contained the Canopic vases was sealed with an earthen seal, on which was, apparently, stamped the cartouche of Åmenemḥāt III., and from it concludes that Au-ab-Ra lived during the reign of this king, who himself attended the funeral, and that the seal must have been affixed by the king, and not by a priest or official who had obtained possession of the scarab or object by means of which it was made. It is well-known that the kings of the XIIth Dynasty often associated their sons with them in the government of Egypt, e.g., Åmenemḥāt I. and Usertsen I. ruled together for ten years; Amenemḥāt II. and Usertsen II. ruled together for a few years, as also did Amenemḥāt III. and Åmenemḥāt IV.; from these facts it is argued that Amenemḥāt III. associated Ãu-åb-Ra with him in the rule of the kingdom about the fortieth year of his reign, and that, his co-regent dying soon after, he was obliged to set Amenemḥāt IV. in his place. The tomb of Au-ab-Ra is not a suitable resting-place for a great king, but it is a worthy sepulchre for a younger son or brother of the royal family; and, though it is possible that this prince lived at a period subsequent to that of the XIIth Dynasty, and that he was buried in the tomb near the pyramid many years after the dynasty had come to an end, it is not likely. It will be remembered that in the groups

B.C. 2300]

SCARABS OF AU-AB-RĀ

77

of the names of the kings of the XIIIth and XIVth Dynasties, collected by Wiedemann from the fragments of the King List at Turin, are two which read Ãu-ȧbRa and Autu-ab-Ra,' but, for the reasons given above, neither of these can rightly, it seems, represent the royal personage who was buried at Dahshûr. Besides the two scarabs bearing the name of Au-ȧb-Rā, which are referred to by M. J. de Morgan, a third example is worthy of mention. It is made of green glazed steatite,

2

and is inscribed, "Au-ȧb-Rā, the stable

'one, giver of life, the stable one, giver of

"happiness." 3

This interesting object was found at Abydos; its style and work

AfAmanship prove it to belong to the Middle

O

Empire, but whether it commemorates the name of either of the two kings mentioned above, or that of the relative or friend of Amenemḥāt, cannot be said.

содво

C

cit., p. 266, No. 14, and p. 274, No. 70.

2 Op. cit., p. 126.

see Wiedemann, op.

3 See my Catalogue of the Lady Meux Collection, London, 1896,

p 196, No. 376.

CHAPTER II.

THE THIRTEENTH DYNASTY. FROM THEBES.

CONCERNING the causes which brought the XIIth Dynasty of the kings of Egypt to an end we have no information whatsoever, and although Manetho makes it to end with Skemiophris, whom we have seen to be the Sebek-neferu, or Sebek-neferu-Ra, of the hieroglyphic inscriptions, it is not absolutely certain that the dynasty ended with this queen. Manetho had, no doubt, good reasons for making the XIIth Dynasty to end with her, and it is pretty certain that his list represents in this respect the opinion which was current in the XVIIIth Dynasty among the authorities who wrote the works on which he based his King List; but it must not be forgotten that in the Tablet of Abydos the XIIth Dynasty ends with Amenemḥāt IV. It is not likely that the sovereignty of this king's house was wrested from it by force, for there is no evidence forthcoming to indicate that the first king of the XIIIth Dynasty only ascended the throne after tumult and civil war and bloodshed. It may be that Sebek-neferu

THE THIRTEENTH DYNASTY

79

herself married a member of a noble family, who thereupon arrogated to himself royal rank and position, or she may have died whilst she was the absolute ruler of the country, leaving no issue, whereupon the sceptre of Egypt passed from her to some one near of kin. It is generally admitted that the kings of the XIIIth Dynasty were of Theban origin, and the monuments which they have left behind them differ very little in style and character from those of the kings of the XIIth Dynasty, who were certainly Theban; still, the objects which can be shown with a tolerable degree of certainty to belong to the period of the successors of the kings of the XIIth Dynasty have characteristics, which once recognized, cannot be mistaken. The period of Egyptian history which begins with the XIIIth Dynasty and ends with the end of the XVIIth Dynasty is full of difficulty, and it is impossible in the present state of Egyptological knowledge to give a truly satisfactory account of it. The monuments supply the names of a considerable number of kings who ruled between the XIIth and XVIIth Dynasties, but they cannot be arranged in proper chronological order, and it is very probable that several other kings reigned whose names are unrecorded. We obtain no assistance from the Tablet of Abydos, for the prenomen of Âmenemḥāt IV., the last king of the XIIth Dynasty, is followed by that of Amasis I., the first king of the XVIIIth Dynasty; the Tablet of Karnak is useless for purposes of chronological arrangement of royal names,